post work society

Instruments

Basic income, job guarantees, shorter working hours, basic services, new taxes on AI: much of this has already been tried somewhere in the world, or at least costed. This page shows what came out of it and where the evidence is still thin. Sources checked as of October 2026.

Basic income – pilot projects

Most basic income trials pay a randomly selected group money with no conditions for a set period and compare them with a control group. The big worry that people would simply stop working is not borne out by the checked studies from rich countries: effects on employment range from zero to slightly negative, and in some cases slightly positive.

Another result is clearer and more consistent: mental health and life satisfaction improve in almost every trial. In poorer countries the money goes mainly into small businesses, food and basic needs.

Each card shows the design, the result for work and the result for wellbeing.

Finland: 2,000 unemployed people, 2017–2018

Design: 2,000 randomly selected unemployed people received €560 a month for two years, tax-free and with no obligation to look for work. Work: no effect in the first year, and about six more days of employment over the measurement period; the second year is hard to interpret because of a labour-market reform at the same time. Wellbeing: higher life satisfaction, less mental strain, depression and loneliness, more trust in other people and in institutions. Limitation: only just under a quarter responded to the survey.

Source: Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (STM), 2020

Germany: Basic Income Pilot Project, 2021–2024

Design: 107 people aged 21 to 40 received €1,200 a month with no conditions for three years, compared with a control group of 1,580; the study was preregistered. Work: in both groups around 90 per cent kept working about 40 hours a week, and no withdrawal from the labour market was measurable; about a third of the money was saved. Wellbeing: markedly better mental health, a stronger sense of meaning, higher life satisfaction and more time with family and friends – with no fading of the effect across the survey waves.

Source: DIW Weekly Report 15/2025

USA: OpenResearch study, results 2024

Design: US$1,000 a month for three years, with the control group receiving $50 a month; co-funded by Sam Altman, among others. Work: employment was about 2 percentage points lower in years two and three, and working time about 1.3 hours a week lower; recipients were more selective in their job search, especially younger people and single parents. Wellbeing: not reported on the checked employment findings page; according to the AEI review (see next card), this largest pilot found few significant health effects.

Source: OpenResearch, Key Findings: Employment, 2024

USA: 122 pilot projects at a glance

Design: a review by the US think tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI) (February 2026) covers 122 guaranteed-income pilots from 2017–2025, 35 of them randomised trials. Work: on average the employment effect is close to zero; the four largest projects show around 3 percentage points less employment on average. Wellbeing: few significant health effects are reported for the largest pilot. The authors note that many participants dropped out and that most projects ran during or after the pandemic.

Source: Corinth & Mayhew, AEI, 2026

Kenya: basic income for whole villages, since 2018

Design: in 295 villages with around 14,500 households, the organisation GiveDirectly is testing several variants: about US$0.75 per adult per day for twelve years, the same amount for two years, a one-off lump sum of about $500, plus control villages. Wellbeing: during the 2020 pandemic phase, the groups receiving money saw less hunger and less illness, and the monthly-payment groups also saw less depression.

Source: J-PAL, evaluation summary

Kenya: what the money did to work

Work: according to a 2023 research paper, total labour supply stayed the same but shifted from wage work towards self-employment. The long-term basic income led to more businesses and higher revenues, especially in retail. The lump sum had similar or larger economic effects, while the two-year monthly payment had clearly smaller ones.

Source: Banerjee et al., NBER conference paper, 2023

Alaska: a permanent dividend since 1982

Design: since 1982 Alaska has paid every resident an annual dividend from a state fund – universal and permanent, unlike a time-limited pilot. Work: one study finds no effect on overall employment but around 17 per cent more part-time work; the authors explain this with additional local demand. Wellbeing: not examined in this study.

Source: Jones & Marinescu, NBER Working Paper 24312

Iran: nationwide cash payments since 2010/2011

Design: as part of a reform of energy subsidies, Iran paid all households money every month with no conditions worth around 29 per cent of median household income. Work: a 2017 study finds no evidence of less work, except among young people; service-sector workers even worked more. Wellbeing: not examined in this study.

Source: Salehi-Isfahani & Mostafavi-Dehzooei, ERF, 2017

Barcelona: B-MINCOME, 2017–2019

Design: 1,000 households in poorer neighbourhoods had their income topped up, some with and some without conditions, combined with offers such as training; 383 households served as a control group. Work: after the first year the probability of working was about 8.6 per cent lower, especially in the groups with conditions. Wellbeing: less severe material deprivation, fewer people going to bed hungry, lower risk of mental illness, and life satisfaction up from 5.0 to 6.5. The results are preliminary.

Source: Ajuntament de Barcelona, results report

Wales: basic income for care leavers, since 2022

Design: young people leaving state care at 18 in 2022/23 receive £1,600 gross a month for two years; 644 people are taking part. Work: mixed – some invested in training, others felt less pressure to work. Wellbeing: more security and autonomy while payments lasted; after they ended, many found the transition hard and savings ran out quickly. Figures and a cost-benefit analysis are not due until 2027.

Source: Welsh Government, Annual Report 2025–2026

Ireland: basic income for artists

Design: the ‘Basic Income for the Arts’ pilot ended in February 2026. According to Budget 2026, the government plans a successor scheme intended to embed a permanent basic income for artists, with applications from the first half of 2026, subject to government approval. Work and wellbeing: the official evaluation was not checked for this page.

Source: Government of Ireland, Budget 2026

Job guarantee: Marienthal/Gramatneusiedl

Instead of money without work, there is also the opposite approach: a guaranteed, meaningful job for everyone who cannot find one. This was trialled from October 2020 in the Lower Austrian municipality of Gramatneusiedl, with research support from the University of Oxford.

The result is considered one of the clearest in the whole debate – but in a small place. Whether it can be scaled up to a whole city or country remains open.

Long-term unemployment almost eliminated

Everyone who had been unemployed for at least a year could take part voluntarily: first a two-month preparation course, then a job paid at least the minimum wage, for example in childcare, gardening or renovation. Long-term unemployment in the municipality was almost eliminated, income and economic security rose, and participants reported more daily structure, social contact and recognition. Spending per person rose by 28 per cent; thanks to returns from tax and social insurance the net cost is lower and roughly matches participants' gain in income.

Source: University of Oxford, Department of Economics, 2025

Shorter working hours and the four-day week

If machines take on more work, the remaining work could be spread across more people and fewer hours. Four-day-week trials mostly report stable business figures and better wellbeing.

Caution is still needed: firms usually take part in such trials voluntarily and are often already convinced of the model. Some cities go a step further and rethink how time is organised altogether.

Germany: 45 organisations, from 2024

According to the organiser, 4 Day Week Global, financial indicators stayed stable in 2024, and employees' life satisfaction, sleep and exercise improved. Many organisations adapted the model, and around 40 per cent introduced it only in some teams. In a follow-up in February 2026, 70 per cent were still working with some form of reduced hours.

Source: 4 Day Week Global, Germany results, 2026

Spain: a support programme for small firms

At the end of 2022 Spain's Ministry of Industry announced a budget of €10 million for small and medium-sized enterprises, up to €150,000 per firm. The condition: at least 10 per cent fewer working hours on the same pay, for at least two years. Results of this programme were not found in the research.

Source: The Local Spain, 2022

Barcelona: a pact about time

With its ‘Time Agreement’, the city of Barcelona, trade unions, employers' associations and cooperatives have committed to a healthier, fairer and more sustainable organisation of time. Goals include sharing care work more fairly, creating more time for participation and reorganising daily schedules by 2025. Measurable results were not checked for this page.

Source: Ajuntament de Barcelona, Time Agreement

Basic services instead of cash (Universal Basic Services)

An alternative to basic income: instead of paying everyone money, key services could become free or very cheap for all – not only education and healthcare, but also childcare, care, public transport and internet access.

So far the idea has been costed, but not tested in a controlled trial.

Costed for the UK

A 2019 report by the Institute for Global Prosperity at University College London proposes extending free basic services to childcare, adult social care, transport and digital access. It estimates the cost at around £42 billion, or about 2.3 per cent of economic output – less than a tenth of typical basic income schemes.

Source: UCL News, 2019

Who pays? AI taxes, funds, digital taxes

Every one of these instruments costs money. If AI and automation replace work, it seems natural to ask whether they should help pay for it. So far no country has a true ‘robot tax’.

In 2026 the first concrete bills aimed specifically at AI companies were introduced in the USA. Both are drafts, not law. Digital taxes, by contrast, are already in force in several European countries, including Austria.

South Korea: a smaller tax break for automation

In 2018 South Korea cut the tax credit for automation investment by large firms from 7 to 3 per cent – a kind of indirect robot tax. According to an analysis by the technology-oriented think tank ITIF (2026), affected industries then installed around 28 per cent fewer industrial robots. The analysis found no measurable effect on overall employment.

Source: ITIF, 2026

USA (draft): an AI sovereign wealth fund with a dividend

A bill presented by Senator Bernie Sanders in June 2026 proposes a one-off levy on large AI firms, paid in shares, which would give the state a 50 per cent stake. The fund would pay out an estimated $1,000 or so per person each year, plus money for education, health and housing. It is a draft that is given little chance of winning a majority.

Source: Roll Call, 2026

USA (draft): a tax on AI tokens or AI revenue

In August 2026 several members of the House of Representatives introduced a bill that would tax AI tokens or AI revenue. The rate starts at 2 or 3 per cent and rises with the unemployment rate. The revenue would create jobs in housing construction, infrastructure, and childcare and elder care. So far the bill has only been introduced.

Source: Fortune, 2026

Austria: a 5 per cent digital tax

Since 2020 Austria has levied a 5 per cent digital tax on online advertising. According to an overview by the tech industry association CCIA, it raised €137.1 million in 2025, 10.5 per cent more than the year before. Similar taxes exist in France, Italy, Spain and the UK, among others.

Source: CCIA, Status of Key Digital Services Taxes, 2026

Retraining at scale

Another path assumes there will still be enough work – just different work. Then the task is to retrain people in the middle of their careers. Singapore invests particularly heavily in this. Demand is rising sharply, but the published evidence on outcomes is still thin.

Singapore: SkillsFuture

Since 2024 people in mid-career have received a training credit of 4,000 Singapore dollars; since May 2025 there has also been an allowance of half their previous income, capped at 3,000 Singapore dollars a month, during longer courses. According to the Ministry of Education (2025), around 55 per cent of previously unemployed graduates of career-transition programmes found a job within six months. Data on subsequent wages have not been published.

Source: Singapore Ministry of Education (MOE), 2025

What the pilots do not answer

However encouraging many results are, no trial has yet tested a society in which AI and robotics have actually taken over a large share of work. All pilots run in economies that still have plenty of work; they are time-limited and reach only a small part of the population.

That leaves the central question open: how would a permanent scheme for everyone be financed, and what would it do to prices, wages and public budgets? On top of this comes the selection of participants – those who volunteer or stay in a study are not necessarily typical.

What even good studies do not measure

The researchers behind the German pilot name the limits themselves: a small, non-representative sample and no measurement of effects on the wider economy, prices or the public budget. Yet these are exactly the effects that would matter for a basic income for everyone.

Source: DIW Weekly Report 15/2025

Drop-outs distort the picture

In the US guaranteed-income pilots, more than a third of participants dropped out over the course of a study on average, and most projects ran during or after the pandemic. Both make it harder to apply the results to normal times and to whole populations.

Source: Corinth & Mayhew, AEI, 2026