The increasing use of artificial intelligence within the workplace is likely to cause significant disruption to the labour market and in turn, to the economy, due to a reduction in the number of taxable workers. In this innovative book, Xavier Oberson proposes taxing robots as a possible solution to the anticipated problem of declining tax revenues.

""The increasing use of artificial intelligence within the workplace is likely to cause significant disruption to the labour market and in turn, to the economy, due to a reduction in the number of taxable workers. In this innovative book, Xavier Oberson proposes taxing robots as a possible solution to the anticipated problem of declining tax revenues. In accordance with guiding legal and economic principles, the book explores the various tax models that could be applied to both the use of robots, such as a usage or automation tax, and to robots directly. Numerous associated issues are discussed, such as the definition of robots for tax purposes, the difficulty of granting a tax capacity to robots, as well as the compatibility of robot taxes with international tax rules. The author concludes by putting forward a possible system for the taxation of robots, taking all of these issues into consideration. Being the first work of its kind to explore the potential for taxing robots in detail, this book will be a unique resource for researchers in the fields of law and economics who have an interest in the impact of artificial intelligence. Lawyers and tax professionals can also benefit from Oberson's insights on what future models of taxation may look like and what the legal consequences may be"-- Page four of cover.

Praise be to Allah SWT because of His almightiness, finally, this book can be published for the public. I completed this research paper in order to fulfill the assessment component of the Artificial Intelligence and the Law course when I was finishing my studies at Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne, Australia. The purpose of publishing this book is not an ambition in introducing and encouraging the creation of new types of taxes, but merely describing a situation about what we will face in the future and what strategies we need to prepare based on the findings of previous researchers and which one can be considered by the policymakers to be implemented in Indonesia. This book is certainly far from perfect, and any criticism and suggestions are highly expected for my future works.

It is generally assumed that already in the next decade, the use of labour-saving robots with implemented artificial intelligence will lead to a dramatic transition of the workforce in almost all sectors of production and services. The ensuing loss of jobs that have traditionally been performed by a human employees is likely to result at least temporarily in reduced wage tax and payroll tax revenues, increasing income inequality and a disruption of the labour market. Against this backdrop, the idea of taxing the use of robots that replace human workforce, or even taxing the robots themselves, has emerged in politics and scholarly writings. Several justifications have been brought forward by its proponents: the robot tax has been regarded, respectively, as a corollary to a soon-to-be-expected concession of civil law personhood to robots, as a tax on imputed income earned by means of the robot, as an equalisation levy to restore the level playing field regarding the taxation of robots and of human workers, as an instrument for economically efficient wage compression between winners and losers of automation among the human workforce, or as a corrective tax to slow down the disruption of the labour market.This paper argues that upon a closer look, the case for taxing robots or their use is relatively weak, though, except when specific conditions are met. There is currently no compelling argument to make robots themselves taxable persons, neither for the purposes of income taxation nor for the purposes of indirect taxes on consumption expenditure. Moreover, significant objections can also be raised regarding suggestions to tax the use of robots. Some of the concepts advanced in literature rely on presumptions that are either conceptually flawed or lack credible empirical support. Other proposals have their merits, but when weighing in on their potential benefits, policymakers will also have to take into account that any tax on robots is liable to result in distortions, complexities, and reduced growth. Besides, proponents of a robot tax tend to underestimate how capital mobility and international tax competition could easily undermine the respective objective of such a tax. As a Pigouvian tax, a robot tax will therefore likely have a very limited field of reasonable application. Regarding income redistribution and revenue raising objectives, the taxation of robots should only be considered as a measure of last resort, and in any event a provisional one. Where politically feasible, priority should instead be given to intensified efforts to tax the return on capital investments and on profits in general, including an adequate taxation of ultimate shareholders. In any event, increasing automation should have implications for the international allocation of taxing rights.

Argues that treating people and artificial intelligence differently under the law results in unexpected and harmful outcomes for social welfare.

We are standing on the threshold of the robotic era, the fourth industrial revolution. The undeniable impact and consequences of robotics are already raising economic concerns, such as the loss of income tax revenue as robots gradually replace human workers, as well as legal doubts regarding the possible taxation of robots or their owners. Financial law must adapt to this new reality by answering several crucial questions. Should robots pay taxes? Can they? Do they have the ability to pay? Can they be considered entrepreneurs for VAT purposes? These are just some of the many issues that Dr. Álvaro Falcón Pulido lucidly and insightfully addresses in this fascinating new monographic work, which includes an exhaustive bibliography on the subject.

Robot taxes embody the more futuristic challenges of managing automation and legacy workers. As machines and artificial intelligence take on more roles that used to be performed by humans, policymakers and technologists are assessing the costs this transition imposes and what parts of society will pay them. A robot tax on companies that replace employees with automated systems is easy to dismiss in its most simplistic forms but should be considered in the context of managing the next industrial revolution. A robot tax is a political construction, a way to shape democratic debate around technological shifts and societal needs. It is a construct of the public debate, and as such can contribute to broader discussions about how to make sure profitable companies pay their way in the economy. The political capital of 'replacement robot' imagery may be useful in designing a tax framework for legacy firms making the most of new economic opportunities. It is best to consider a 'robot tax' as a rallying concept for targeted levies. These policies should target finance and other data-driven sectors as well as traditional manufacturing and mining automation. Policymakers should consider overall employment, specific job losses and how to assess firms that make layoffs in specific areas of their workforces. This last will be especially difficult in cases where total headcount rises, even though some generations of employees may be put out of work. Tax policy can compensate for distortions due to shifts from human-driven to capital-intensive production in specific sectors. On the revenue side, there should be appropriate expectations of what a tech tax can raise and over what period, on the scale of targeted retirement assistance or retraining programmes with measurable outcomes, not long-running cash cows. Smaller and more innovative firms should not be asked to contribute disproportionately, particularly in legacy markets that are hard to break into, and they should be eligible for waivers and exemptions. Policymakers should stress that asking producers to help pay the costs of societal change is not immediately equivalent to stifling innovation, and they should make every effort to design policies in ways that protect against this type of side effect. Finally, any new tax on employers needs to fit with broader discussions of the corporate fair share, and with taxing the most profitable parts of the economy instead of relying on workers and consumers to foot society's bills.