For more than a year, the White House and OpenAI, the artificial intelligence powerhouse valued at over $850 billion, have been quietly negotiating a deal that could see the U.S. government take a direct stake in the company. The idea, first floated by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman in 2025, is gaining momentum and could reshape the relationship between government, technology, and the American people in ways not seen since the dawn of the internet age.
According to CNBC, the core proposal on the table is for OpenAI to hand over equity to the federal government, seeding a so-called "Public Wealth Fund." This fund would invest in a diversified basket of long-term assets, with the potential for returns to flow directly to American citizens. In Altman’s own words, as posted on X, "The U.S. should lead on AI by continuing to develop the very best models, making sure they're safe, and getting cyber tools into the hands of trusted defenders. The new EO gets the balance right."
President Donald Trump has been unusually vocal about the idea. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on June 5, 2026, Trump said, "There are concepts where pieces could be given to the American public, where the American public essentially becomes a partner." He added that talks with AI companies should move forward "in the very short, very near future." The president is reportedly planning to meet with top AI executives as soon as next week to hash out the details.
The negotiations come as the Trump administration has already broken with decades of economic tradition by taking stakes in major technology firms, including Intel, IBM, and several quantum and critical mineral companies. As Reuters reported, this approach marks a significant departure from the longstanding American principle of shielding private companies from direct government intervention.
Senator Bernie Sanders, a longtime critic of concentrated tech wealth, has also entered the fray. Sanders confirmed to CNBC that he has discussed the sovereign wealth fund idea with Altman. He plans to introduce the "American A.I. Sovereign Wealth Fund Act" in Congress, which would impose a one-time 50% tax on shares of the largest AI companies. The bill would grant the government voting rights and board seats in these firms, with any returns flowing to citizens as direct payments. In a recent New York Times op-ed, Sanders argued that "AI is built on humanity's collective knowledge, and the wealth it creates shouldn't only benefit a handful of tech billionaires."
OpenAI is not alone in considering these bold proposals. Anthropic, another leading AI company, has floated similar ideas for sovereign or public wealth funds. Both companies see a close tie to government as a potential political shield—especially with OpenAI’s highly anticipated IPO on the horizon. By offering shares to the government, OpenAI could potentially blunt future regulatory threats and secure a more stable operating environment as it transitions into the public markets.
But the prospect of a government stake in OpenAI and other AI giants raises thorny questions. As THE DECODER points out, critics warn that such arrangements could recreate the "too big to fail" dynamic seen during the 2008 financial crisis. Back then, the government’s deep ties to major banks led to massive taxpayer-funded bailouts. If the government becomes a shareholder in AI companies, it could have a direct incentive to intervene with public money if these firms stumble.
OpenAI and Anthropic, while boasting fast-growing revenues and a surge in usage, are still burning through significant amounts of cash. The long-term profitability of advanced AI remains uncertain. In late 2025, OpenAI’s CFO Sarah Friar floated the idea of government rescue funds, but quickly walked it back after public scrutiny. Altman himself has stressed that "the market, not the government, will deal with it" if OpenAI’s bets don’t pay off. Yet, in parallel, OpenAI has lobbied the White House for grants, cost-sharing agreements, loans, or loan guarantees to help expand the industrial base and build resilience in the sector.
Adding to the complexity, the Trump administration’s stance on AI regulation has been anything but steady. A planned signing ceremony for a major AI executive order was abruptly canceled in May 2026 after pushback from the tech industry. Trump later admitted he was uncomfortable with certain aspects of the order and didn’t want to jeopardize America’s edge in the global AI race, especially against China. Eventually, a revised order was signed, asking leading AI developers to voluntarily submit their most advanced models for government cybersecurity testing before public release.
Meanwhile, fears about the misuse of AI are mounting. The release of Anthropic’s powerful Mythos tool has stoked concerns that, in the wrong hands, such technology could turbocharge sophisticated cyberattacks—particularly in sectors like banking that rely on complex, sometimes outdated, digital infrastructure. In response, Trump recently signed a directive instructing federal national security organizations to "accelerate AI adoption to meet surging demand" and to rapidly onboard the "most advanced AI models from multiple vendors." He also issued an executive order calling for AI companies to provide the government access to their models for up to 30 days before public release—a move that has drawn both praise and skepticism from industry leaders.
Not everyone is convinced that government intervention is the answer. Some critics argue that the administration’s increasing involvement in the private tech sector could stifle innovation or create new forms of dependency. Others see the proposed sovereign wealth fund as a way to share AI’s enormous potential more equitably, ensuring that ordinary Americans—not just venture capitalists and tech founders—reap the rewards of the coming AI revolution.
One thing is clear: the stakes could hardly be higher. With OpenAI valued at over $850 billion and preparing for an IPO, and with the U.S. government already holding stakes in some of the country’s most important technology companies, the outcome of these negotiations could set a precedent for how America manages its most powerful and transformative technologies.
As the talks move forward, all eyes will be on Washington and Silicon Valley. The decisions made in the coming months may well determine whether the benefits of artificial intelligence are widely shared—or concentrated in the hands of a few.