Kim Yongbeom: "We Must Discuss the Principle of a National Dividend for AI Excess Profits" ... "Korea Moving Toward a Technology Monopoly Economy"

"Beyond the Semiconductor Boom: Possibility of Restructuring Industry and National Framework"
"AI Infrastructure Gains Must Be Structurally Returned to All Citizens"
Proposal for a 'National Redesign in the AI Era' Covering Startups, Culture, and Im

Kim Yongbeom, policy chief at the Blue House, has proposed the concept of a so-called “national dividend,” which would return a portion of the structural excess profits generated in the era of artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure to the public. As competition in AI semiconductors, power grids, and data centers has the potential to fundamentally transform the structure of the Korean economy, Kim argues that there is a need for a new social contract to ensure that the benefits are distributed throughout society, rather than being concentrated among certain companies or asset-holding groups.

Kim Yongbeom, policy chief, is briefing at the Blue House Chunuchukan on the 27th regarding the meeting held that day between President Lee Jae-myung and Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google DeepMind. 2026.4.27 Yonhap News Agency

On May 12, Kim wrote on Facebook under the title “A Country at a Different Level: Korea’s Long-Term Strategy for the AI Era,” stating, “The fruits of the AI infrastructure era are not the exclusive result of specific companies,” and emphasized, “They are derived from an industrial foundation built collectively by the entire population over the past half-century.”

He continued, “If that is the case, then a portion of these fruits should be structurally returned to all citizens,” adding, “This is the legitimacy and principle of the design.” Kim provisionally named this principle the “national dividend.”

However, Kim did not immediately define the national dividend as a specific cash payment policy. He said, “The key is not individual programs but the principle itself,” and explained, “Whether it will become an asset for youth entrepreneurship, a basic income for rural and fishing communities, support for artists, strengthened pensions for the elderly, or an educational account for the transition to the AI era remains an open question.”

Kim’s latest message is rooted in the view that the recent semiconductor boom and the rise of the KOSPI should be understood not merely as part of an economic cycle, but as a restructuring of the industrial landscape in the AI era. He noted, “If you try to interpret what is happening in Korea from the perspective of the traditional economic cycle, the analysis often misses the mark,” and added, “It is true that exports are strong, semiconductors are booming, and the KOSPI is rising, but that alone is not sufficient.”

He highlighted, “AI is not just a software industry, but a new kind of industrial infrastructure,” and evaluated, “Korea is at the center of this infrastructural transformation.” Kim stated that if this hypothesis is correct, the Korean economy could shift beyond its traditional cyclical export structure toward a technology monopoly economy based on structural scarcity and sustained excess profits.

Kim particularly pointed out that demand for AI semiconductors differs from past memory cycles. He explained, “Early AI investments began with the expansion of data centers focused on training, but demand has already moved to the next phase,” mentioning inference infrastructure, AI agents, sovereign AI, physical AI, and robotics.

Kim noted, “Each layer now demands a higher degree of memory intensity compared to the past,” and, “As more layers are added, demand does not simply substitute but accumulates in a nonlinear fashion.” He explained that AI infrastructure does not involve one-time facility investments, but rather creates a structure of continuous upgrade demand.

He identified Korea’s “full-stack manufacturing capability”—combining strengths in memory semiconductors, batteries, displays, precision manufacturing, power equipment, and industrial automation—as a key advantage. Kim remarked, “The United States is dominant in design and platforms but has limited manufacturing foundations, while China possesses massive manufacturing capabilities but faces issues of geopolitical trust,” adding, “Korea, on the other hand, is a rare country with an integrated supply chain.”

He said, “In an era where supply chain sovereignty is a core variable in national strategy, such manufacturing capability is close to geopolitical leverage,” and analyzed, “As AI infrastructure spreads globally, the strategic importance of Korea’s industrial ecosystem grows in tandem.”

Kim observed that the AI infrastructure industry is characterized by high technological barriers, a structure centered around a very small number of companies, national security supply chains, and ongoing demand for upgrades, all at once. He stated, “Memory is shifting from a simple commodity to a strategic infrastructure layer,” and added, “If long-term changes in memory and infrastructure demand in the AI era are structural, Korea could for the first time become a country capable of generating sustained excess profits.”

However, Kim warned that such changes could exacerbate internal social disparities. He said, “By its nature, excess profits in the AI era are concentrated,” and explained, “Those who already have access to productive assets—such as shareholders of memory companies, key engineers, and asset holders in the Seoul metropolitan area—are likely to receive significant benefits through market mechanisms.”

In contrast, “A considerable segment of the middle class may only experience indirect effects such as improved purchasing power from a stronger won, limited fiscal transfers, or modest asset appreciation,” he pointed out, adding, “Even if the country becomes wealthier, the distribution of that wealth will not automatically become more equitable.”

Entrepreneurship, Culture, and Immigration: “Need for National Redesign”

Kim presented entrepreneurship, culture, and immigration policy as directions for the national redesign in the AI era. He argued, “In an era when AI rapidly replaces routine work, it is difficult to generate long-term vitality with policies focused solely on maintaining simple employment,” and discussed guarantees of a one-time entrepreneurial opportunity in a lifetime, safety nets for recovery after failure, AI-based entrepreneurship education, and building local entrepreneurship infrastructure.

He also viewed cultural policy as a core strategy for the AI era. Kim stated, “As AI replaces production and execution, what remains for humans are areas such as relationships, senses, expression, and meaning,” and argued, “Culture is not a peripheral industry in the AI era but is becoming closer to a uniquely human domain.” He suggested that support for the arts and content industry, local communities, and creative ecosystems should be regarded not simply as leisure policies, but as distribution policies and strategic industries.

Regarding low birth rates and the aging population, he proposed immigration policy as a strategic variable. Kim said, “Immigration is not a choice but a strategic variable,” explaining, “At the top level, Korea must attract global technical talent in AI, semiconductors, and robotics, while at the grassroots, it needs to ensure a stable supply of essential caregiving labor in an aging society.”

Kim also mentioned Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which is based on oil profits. He said, “Although Korea’s situation is different, the question is the same: how can structural excess profits be institutionalized in society?”

He continued, “If there is no excess tax revenue, the national dividend is a hollow idea,” but added, “If the argument is correct, then letting excess profits dissipate without any guiding principle could be an even more irresponsible choice.”

Kim concluded, “An extraordinary historical opportunity is now before Korea,” and stated, “There is a chance for Korea to become not just a country that supplies AI infrastructure, but the first nation to return AI-era excess profits to improve human lives.”

He added, “That possibility will not be realized automatically,” and warned, “The choices we make from now on could either return Korea to an ordinary cyclical export economy or propel it into a completely new kind of industrial nation.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.