Proposal: The ASINEXUS International Sovereign ASI Wealth Fund — a treaty-based framework to fund universal economic security from AI profits. Read the brief →
ASINEXUS
● Policy Proposal Read the Plan
International Sovereign ASI Wealth Fund

The automation dividend
belongs to everyone it displaced.

ASINEXUS proposes a treaty-based international sovereign wealth fund — funded by mandatory corporate and government contributions — that invests in broad market equities and pays UBI scaled to how severely AI automation has harmed your future earnings. No ESG screens. No loopholes. No opt-out.

Treaty structure — above national lawfare
No ESG — pure return mandate
UBI scaled to automation harm
$8–12T
projected fund corpus
at year 10
300M
jobs facing AI
displacement by 2030
10.4%
S&P 500 avg annual
return since 1957
The ASINEXUS Fund Framework
Six pillars — from treaty structure to benefit delivery
Pillar 01

What Is the ASINEXUS Fund?

ASINEXUS is a proposed International Sovereign ASI Wealth Fund — a permanent, treaty-governed pool of capital funded by mandatory contributions from AI-profiting corporations and member-state governments. It invests exclusively for maximum risk-adjusted return and distributes proceeds as Universal Basic Income, weighted by each recipient's documented automation harm. Think of it as the Alaska Permanent Fund — but global, AI-funded, and scaled to the magnitude of disruption actually caused.

Treaty-Based Authority
Established through international treaty, placing it above domestic litigation, regulatory capture, or single-nation political reversal.
Permanent Capital Pool
The principal is never spent — only investment returns are distributed. Contributions compound indefinitely, ensuring multigenerational solvency.
Market-Return Engine
Capital anchored to VOO and global broad-market indices — pure return maximization, zero ESG constraints, no political tilts.
Harm-Weighted UBI
Payments scale with documented automation harm to your career — not a flat check, but displacement-proportional restitution above a universal floor.
Pillar 02

Who Is Required to Contribute?

Under the treaty, contribution is mandatory and non-negotiable for all signatory-state entities. The framework closes every traditional escape route — no jurisdiction-shopping, no shell-company exemption, no lobbying off-ramp. Treaty membership is a condition of market access for AI products in participating economies.

Contributor Class Contribution Basis Rate
AI Foundation Model Companies — any entity training or commercializing general-purpose AI models % of gross AI-related revenue in member states 2.5%
Enterprise AI Deployers — corporations above a threshold that deploy AI to reduce headcount Per FTE displaced, annualized $8,000 / FTE
Member-State Governments — nations ratifying the treaty % of national AI-sector GDP growth 0.5%
AI Infrastructure Providers — cloud, compute, and semiconductor suppliers above $5B AI revenue % of AI infrastructure revenue 1.0%

Market access conditionality: AI products from non-compliant entities are ineligible for sale or operation in signatory nations. Contribution is the price of operating in the world's largest consumer markets — making non-compliance commercially untenable for any serious AI business.

Pillar 03

Investment Mandate — Pure Return, No ESG

The fund operates a strict fiduciary mandate: maximize long-run risk-adjusted returns for beneficiaries. No political screening. No ESG overlays. No thematic investment tilts. The sole obligation is to grow the fund so it pays the maximum possible dividend to displaced workers, indefinitely.

1
Core Anchor: Vanguard S&P 500 (VOO) + VTI
The core allocation tracks VOO and the Vanguard Total Market ETF. Decades of evidence confirm broad-market passive indexing outperforms active management at the scale this fund would operate. No stock-picking. No sector bets. No exclusions beyond the index itself.
2
Global Diversification Layer
A secondary allocation covers total international market index funds — developed and emerging markets — to reduce U.S. concentration risk. Portfolio construction mirrors Norway's GPFG in asset-class breadth, without its ESG exclusions, which have historically cost 40–90 basis points of annual return.
3
Fixed Income Stability Buffer
A conservative allocation to global sovereign bonds provides liquidity for distribution obligations and dampens volatility during equity drawdowns. Payout rates are set against a 10-year rolling average return — recipients receive stable, predictable payments regardless of annual market swings.
4
Why No ESG — By Design
ESG mandates reduce returns and introduce political risk into what must be a purely fiduciary institution. The fund's obligation is to displaced workers — not to corporate governance scores or climate targets pursued through investment vehicles. Any legally operating company within the index is eligible. The fund imposes no moral screen beyond the law.

Norway's Government Pension Fund Global — the closest existing model — returned 9.7% annualized over the decade to 2023 despite ESG exclusions. A pure-index mandate at comparable scale is projected to outperform it by 40–90 basis points annually — compounding substantially over decades into meaningfully larger beneficiary payments.

Pillar 04

Benefit Structure — Scaled to Automation Harm

Every adult in a signatory nation receives a universal base payment. Above that floor, supplements scale proportionally to documented automation harm — how much AI has compressed your earning capacity, eliminated your role, or structurally altered your field. This is not charity. It is restitution, calibrated to actual damage caused.

T0
Universal Floor — All Adult Residents
Every person in a signatory nation receives the base dividend, proportional to each country's fund allocation. Unconditional — like the Alaska Permanent Fund, but global in scale.
T1
Moderate Displacement — Field-Level Exposure
Workers in fields where AI has automated 20–60% of core tasks receive a displacement supplement. Calculated using occupation-level task-automation scoring from McKinsey, IMF, and MIT research data.
T2
Severe Displacement — Role Structurally Altered or Eliminated
Individuals whose job title or profession has been 60–85% automated or structurally eliminated receive elevated benefits. Documentation includes wage compression data, sector employment statistics, and unemployment filings.
T3
Critical — Direct, Quantifiable AI Income Loss
Recipients who document direct, quantified income loss from AI — lost contracts, rate collapse, demonetization, or full role elimination — receive the maximum supplement. An independent Claims Tribunal reviews documentation. Benefits capped at 80% of prior earnings to preserve retraining incentives.

Equity adjustment: Workers without advanced degrees or with limited retraining resources receive an upward modifier — reflecting the empirical reality that educational and financial capital determine one's ability to absorb disruption and pivot. This is a structural correction, not a preference.

Pillar 05

Why a Treaty? Closing the Lawfare Loop

Every prior attempt to tax or regulate AI at the national level has been defeated, delayed, or diluted by lobbying, jurisdictional arbitrage, and legislative gridlock. ASINEXUS closes this loop by operating at the treaty level — where the alternative to compliance is exclusion from the world's largest economies, which no commercially viable AI company can afford.

1
Market Access Conditionality
Nations ratifying the ASINEXUS Treaty commit to barring non-compliant AI products and services from their markets. With the EU, US, UK, Japan, and South Korea as initial signatories, this covers the majority of profitable AI deployment globally. No compliant access = no viable commercial AI business.
2
Independent Treaty Body — Not a UN Agency
Administered by an independent treaty body — structured like the IMF or WTO with binding arbitration — not a UN agency subject to Security Council veto. Governance is technical, not political. The fund's operations cannot be blocked by a single nation's veto.
3
Contribution Schedules Locked in Treaty Text
Rates are fixed in treaty text — not subject to annual appropriations, budget cycles, or corporate tax negotiations. They're enforced through the same mechanisms as WTO tariff schedules: trade consequences, asset sequestration, and market exclusion. Lobbying a single legislature accomplishes nothing.
4
Transparent, Auditable, Capture-Resistant
Full public disclosure of all contributions, investments, and distributions. An independent actuarial board certifies solvency annually. Board composition rotates to prevent capture by either contributing corporations or recipient governments. Neither funder nor beneficiary controls the fund.
Pillar 06

Governance Structure

The fund is built to be durable across political cycles, resistant to corporate capture, and accountable to beneficiaries. It borrows architecture from the most successful sovereign wealth funds — Norway's GPFG, Singapore's GIC, Abu Dhabi's ADIA — while adding transparency and independence requirements none of them carry.

⚖️
Treaty Council
Ratifying nations set contribution schedules via supermajority vote. No single nation holds a veto.
📊
Investment Board
Independent professional managers. Pure return mandate. Members barred from AI industry roles for 5 years post-tenure.
🏛️
Claims Tribunal
Adjudicates displacement claims. Tiered documentation requirements. Appeals modeled on WTO dispute settlement.
🔍
Actuarial Oversight
Annual independent actuarial review. Payout rates set against 10-year rolling returns — not annual performance.
📢
Public Audit
Real-time disclosure of all contributions received, portfolio holdings, and distributions made. Full open-data mandate.
🌐
Enforcement Arm
Treaty-level authority to impose market access restrictions on non-compliant entities, enforced jointly by signatory trade bodies.
Fund at Scale Projected
Treaty Progress
Building Toward Ratification
Framework draft phase · Signatory outreach in progress
Year 1 target corpus $400B
10-year projected corpus $8–12T
Annual distribution (Year 10) $600–900B
Universal base payment / adult ~$1,200 / mo
Max T3 monthly supplement +$1,800 / mo
Investment Allocation (Target)
U.S. Broad Market (VOO / VTI) 55%
Global ex-US Equities (VXUS) 25%
Global Sovereign Bonds 18%
Cash & Liquidity Reserve 2%

Rebalanced annually. Payout rate set at 70% of 10-year rolling real return to ensure permanent solvency.

Zero ESG screening — pure fiduciary mandate
Existing Sovereign Fund Models
Norway GPFG
$1.7T
China CIC
$1.2T
Abu Dhabi ADIA
$1.0T
Singapore GIC
$770B
Alaska PFD
$77B

ASINEXUS targets a Year 10 corpus of $8–12T — larger than any existing sovereign fund — with a broader beneficiary base and binding international enforcement.

Key Research Figures
300M
Jobs at AI displacement risk globally
Goldman Sachs, 2023
40%
of all work tasks exposed to AI automation
IMF, 2024
1982
Alaska dividend began — proof of concept for resource-funded UBI
Alaska Permanent Fund
$0
Paid to AI-displaced workers globally to date
No legal framework exists
ASINEXUS Research Position

AI profits must fund
AI displacement.

Every prior technological revolution — the steam engine, electrification, factory automation — restructured industries over decades. Workers had time. They had warning. Communities faced transitions together. Generative AI compressed that timeline to eighteen months.

Entire professions didn't gradually shrink. They collapsed. Writers, illustrators, translators, paralegals, junior programmers — people who built careers on hard-won skills — were not warned, not compensated, given no transition fund and no soft landing. The algorithm simply arrived.

The technology was developed on public research infrastructure. It was trained on the uncredited labor of millions of creators. The companies profiting from it paid no severance to the workers it replaced. The dividend is owed.

National legislation has been tried and lobbied into irrelevance. Jurisdictional arbitrage defeats it. Political cycles reverse it. The only structure that cannot be outmaneuvered is one where the cost of non-compliance is exclusion from the world economy. That is a treaty. That is ASINEXUS.

300M
jobs facing material AI displacement risk globally by 2030
Goldman Sachs GIR, 2023
18mo
median timeline for AI to structurally alter a white-collar profession
MIT Work of the Future, 2024
$0
compensation paid to displaced workers by AI companies to date
No existing legal framework
10.4%
S&P 500 avg annualized return since 1957 — the fund's return engine
1957–2024 historical average
Common Questions

About the ASINEXUS proposal

Why a treaty instead of national legislation? +

National legislation is vulnerable to three failure modes: corporate lobbying to weaken or delay it, jurisdictional arbitrage (companies relocating to avoid it), and political reversal every election cycle. A ratified international treaty operates above all three. It establishes binding market access conditionality — the only lever that AI companies cannot lobby away, because the alternative is exclusion from the EU, US, UK, and allied markets simultaneously. No commercially viable AI business can absorb that consequence.

Why invest in VOO and broad indices? Why not direct the capital politically? +

The fund's obligation is to its beneficiaries — displaced workers — not to secondary policy goals. ESG mandates, thematic restrictions, and politically directed investments consistently reduce returns relative to broad passive indexing. Every basis point of underperformance is a dollar not paid to a displaced worker. The fund focuses on compounding capital at maximum efficiency; climate and housing policy have their own instruments. Mixing those mandates with this fund's fiduciary duty would compromise both.

How is "automation harm" measured to determine a person's benefit tier? +

Displacement scoring uses task-composition research from McKinsey Global Institute, the IMF, and MIT's Work of the Future initiative, combined with actual wage and employment data by occupation. Tier 0–2 benefits are assigned algorithmically based on your occupation's documented displacement score. Tier 3 requires documentation of specific income loss attributable to AI — contracts lost, wage compression records, platform demonetization data, employer filings. An independent Claims Tribunal adjudicates Tier 3 applications with a formal appeals process.

Can corporations or governments refuse to participate? +

Nations can withdraw from the treaty — but withdrawal triggers immediate market access consequences: AI products from that nation's entities become ineligible in all remaining signatory markets. This makes withdrawal prohibitively costly for any nation whose technology sector depends on export to allied economies. Individual corporations cannot opt out — contribution is a condition of market access enforced by signatory customs authorities, not contingent on the corporation's consent or agreement.

How does this prevent political capture of the fund? +

Three structural safeguards: The Investment Board is fully independent — members are barred from AI industry roles for five years post-tenure, and no single nation holds a controlling vote. Contribution schedules are locked in treaty text — they cannot be altered by lobbying a single legislature. And full public disclosure of all holdings and distributions means any deviation from the mandate is immediately visible. The model is closer to the IMF than to a government agency — designed for durability across political cycles.

Has anything like this worked at scale before? +

The components all have proven precedents. Sovereign wealth funds — Norway's GPFG, Singapore's GIC, Alaska's Permanent Fund — demonstrate that large pools of compounding capital can be governed durably and distributed equitably. Treaty-based market access conditionality is the mechanism that makes the WTO function — it has successfully enforced trade rules across adversarial nations for decades. UBI pilots (Stockton SEED, Finland, Kenya GiveDirectly) demonstrate measurable positive outcomes on employment, health, and economic mobility. ASINEXUS combines these three proven structures at a scale commensurate with the disruption it addresses.