The recent union confrontation at Samsung probably unfolded quietly from the standpoint of the general public. Except for the usual observers of the technology industry and the semiconductor value chain, it has gone unnoticed that Samsung’s manufacturing lines were on the verge of shutting down. Nevertheless, this labor dispute in Seoul could, in the future, occupy a historical significance comparable to the early mobilizations during the Industrial Revolution, for the core of the conflict lies in the fair distribution of the gains generated by artificial intelligence.
Driven by the data-center investment supercycle for deploying AI, demand for logic chips and advanced memory has surged. Samsung is joining the exclusive club of firms that have surpassed a market value of one trillion dollars. According to its quarterly results briefing, the South Korean company saw its operating profit in the first three months of 2026 multiply fivefold compared with the same period of the previous year, exceeding $36 billion — about 42% of revenue. The unions, which had demonstrated for a wage increase a few days earlier, reacted with a strike call demanding that at least 15% of profits be allocated to rewarding workers’ productivity.
“Its most significant achievement has consisted of bringing onto its country’s political agenda the idea of a tax on large corporations”
The Samsung unions achieved a partial economic objective, securing that 10.5% of corporate gains are ultimately allocated to incentives for the workforce. However, their most significant victory has been to bring onto their country’s political agenda the idea of a tax on large corporations for a fair distribution of AI rents. From the President’s Office, a possible levy on the profits of companies favored by the demand for infrastructure to support this technology was announced. The redistributive nature of such a tax is evident when looking at the potential beneficiaries of the revenue: startups, basic income programs, and the creator community.
The labor demands arising at Samsung have found resonance in Taiwan, the nerve center of the global semiconductor ecosystem. TSMC’s workforce shows firm opposition to the possibility of being excluded from the share of AI profits. Reports of a reduction in performance incentives have triggered warnings of union mobilizations at the Taiwanese company. It is hard to justify a pay cut while the AI boom drives record profits.
“This weakening is most acutely felt in the pioneering industries in the integration of AI solutions”
The urgency to implement tax measures that tax AI profits is gaining traction in the United States. The expansion of this disruptive technology in the North American market has converged with a broad uptick in unemployment. Although temporal correlation does not always imply direct causation, government employment metrics reveal a deterioration in the labor market that has affected beyond administrative staff for three years (the point at which language models took off). Nevertheless, this weakening is felt most acutely in the industries at the forefront of integrating AI solutions. The volume of professionals in the tech sector — software, data processing, telecommunications, broadcasting and related industries — has fallen 11% since early 2023, placing the level below the pre-pandemic period of COVID-19.
US AI taxation proposals focus on the big techs. Tom Steyer, a candidate for Governor of California, has proposed a tax on the data processed by AI applications aimed at creating a sovereign wealth fund. Under his platform, the funds collected would support workers’ transition to the new technology, but also housing, health, and energy policies.
“Under this model, the capital gains arising from asset appreciation would be used to finance retraining or other social objectives”
The creation of levies on hardware and software developers does not exhaust proposals for an effective redistribution of the wealth generated by AI. From sectors with more of a business orientation, it is suggested that states assume direct equity stakes in leading companies. Under this model, the capital gains from asset appreciation would be used to finance retraining or other social objectives. This mechanism has the virtue of neutralizing tax-avoidance strategies that divert profits to territories with low taxation. A common success paradigm is the high profitability that Intel investments have yielded for the U.S. Treasury. It remains unclear, however, what would fund the public equity stake.
The lack of a new model for the fair distribution of the wealth generated by AI will be one of the main sources of tension until it is resolved. Samsung’s strike has been only the vanguard of conflicts to come. The Luddites’ movement in the 19th century was not a rebellion against technological progress. Workers raised their voices against the lack of political responses to precarity, mass layoffs, and wage reductions caused by the introduction of machines in the looms. Not only must we debate what guardrails are needed for the safe use of a new technology, but also how its benefits of all kinds — especially the economic ones — reach all of society and generate well-being.
