Legislation and taxes for robots

2021: Draft "On the turnover of robots, their components (modules)"

Kazan Innovation University on March 23, 2021 announced that its employee, Honored Lawyer of the Republic of Tatarstan, candidate of legal sciences Ildar Begishev developed a draft federal law "On the turnover of robots, their components (modules)."

To obtain a comprehensive assessment, the text of the bill was sent to the Government of the Russian Federation Parliament,, RUSSIAN FEDERATION,, Mintsifra of Russia Ministry of Economic Development Russia other state departments, as well as to leading universities and scientific organizations of the country, representatives of the business community.

The bill was prepared in accordance with the goals of the Concept for the Development of Regulation of Relations in the Field of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Technologies until 2024, approved by Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 19, 2020 No. 2129-r and aimed at regulating relations arising in the field of use (applications), acquisitions, sale, development, production, test, installation, installation, maintenance, repair, utilization, account, storage, transportation, transportation, withdrawal, extermination of robots, their components (modules), import of robots, their components (modules) into the Russian Federation and their export from the Russian Federation.

The bill formed the legal basis and principles of legal regulation of relations in the field of turnover of robots, their components (modules), types, types and hazard classes of robots are described, the restrictions set on a turn of office robots, their components are recorded (modules), defined general and special requirements for them, established the basis of state registration and accounting of entities engaged in the field of robots turnover, their components (modules), introduced criteria for acquiring the status of a subject engaged in activities in the field of turnover of robots, their components (modules), the procedure for publishing and maintaining the state cadastre of robot models, their components (modules), established guarantees provided to legal entities and individual entrepreneurs - entities engaged in certain types of activities in the field of robots turnover, their components (modules), developed measures of their state support.

The bill is based on a systematic and integrated approach to the legal regulation of robotics and is aimed at creating a regulatory environment that provides a favorable legal regime for the development of robotics, as well as for the implementation of economic activities related to its use.

In other words, the adoption of the bill will allow the Russian Federation to become attractive as a territory of advanced development and innovation in the field of robotics and ensure the technological sovereignty of our country. In addition, the law will create conditions for the turnover of robots, their components (modules) on the basis of domestic developments and will give impetus to the development of the digital economy.

2019 Robot tax is inevitable

At the end of August 2019, economists came to the conclusion that a tax on robots is inevitable. Corporations are investing more and more in advanced technology and equipment to save costs, and the Treasury, meanwhile, is spending millions dollars to evaluate bots.

Of course, the government is already taxing robots simply because almost everything that goes to the development and production of these robots is taxed, said economist and popularizer of science Mark Thornton. In some cases there are subsidies for the development of new technologies, but even they are given at the expense of taxpayers. However, it is expected that in the coming decades, new taxes on robots will only grow.

Economists have concluded that a robot tax is inevitable

Robot taxation is a proposal first put forward by the founder Microsoft Bill Gates as a way in which the government can tame the inexorable automation of the workforce and finance new social programs, such as care for the elderly and education. A robot that replaces a factory worker should be taxed at the same level to offset income losses states for the rest of the population, Gates said. Manufacturers using robots do not agree - they are sure that they already pay enough taxes.

But lawmakers are ready to support taxes on robots. They are worried about a possible decline in government revenues, because a study by Oxford Economics predicts that 8.5% of the global workforce will be automated within 10 years. Another study by the Center for the Urban Future in New York showed that 4.4 million city jobs (that is, 39%) could potentially be automated. An automated economy will create serious problems for the most vulnerable groups of workers, and politicians should already talk about this, economists say.^[1]

2017

South Korea plans to introduce a robot tax

In August 2017, it became known about the plans of South Korea to be the first in the world to introduce a robot tax. The authorities thought about this initiative in connection with the increase in unemployment.

According to The Korea Times, citing a statement by the administration of South Korean Prime Minister Moon Jae-in, it is planned to reduce the benefits of tax deductions that were previously provided to enterprises for investments in increasing infrastructure productivity.

The robot tax is designed to demotivate companies to invest in automated manufacturing, thus freeing up jobs for South Koreans.

South Korea is going to introduce a robot tax

By 2017, about 1.17 million South Koreans are listed as unemployed. At the same time, South Korea is one of the most robotic countries: 531 smart machines account for 10 thousand production employees.

According to the current (as of August 2017) legislation, companies investing in robotic industrial equipment have preferential taxation. Depending on the size of the project and the company, the reduction in project tax can be from 3% to 7%.

The bill being prepared proposes to repeal this rule from January 1, 2020. In the future, the benefit will remain, but it will be no more than 2% of the investment amount.

It is noted that before the adoption of the law, it is necessary to give a clear definition of the concept of a robot and determine the types of robots. Probably, different amounts of tax will be charged for using different robots, depending on how many people a particular automated mechanism replaces.

The law has opponents - companies that already use robots for delivery, packaging, waste collection, as well as robot manufacturers. They believe that the tax will harm business and hinder the development of innovation.^[2]

Bill Gates proposed taxing robot labor

The founder of Microsoft, billionaire Bill Gates proposed taxing the labor of robots replacing humans in production. He said this in an interview with Quartz^[3].

"Now, if a human worker receives $50 thousand while working in a factory, then his income is taxed, and you receive income tax, social taxes and other payments. If the robot does the same work, then we could think about taxing his work at the same level, "Gates believes.

According to Gates, governments should be prepared to replace many jobs in many areas of the business with robots almost simultaneously. The billionaire believes that tax policy is the best way to regulate this process.

Gates believes that the funds received from taxing robots should be spent on helping poor people who have lost their jobs and children with disabilities. In addition, taxes collected from robots will go to health care, the development of infrastructure and law enforcement agencies, as well as the re-qualification of employees who have lost their jobs.

EU Resolution "Civil Law on Robotics"

In February 2017, the European Parliament adopted the resolution "Civil Law Norms on Robotics." The document, consisting of more than a hundred points, is devoted to a variety of aspects and problems of robotics and artificial intelligence. In particular, it is proposed to introduce a pan-European system for registering smart machines^[4].

According to the plan of parliamentarians, individual categories of robots should be assigned an individual registration number, which will be entered in a special register. Here, those wishing to find detailed information about the robot, including data on the manufacturer, owner and conditions for compensation in case of harm. The system should be maintained and controlled by a specialized agency for robotics and artificial intelligence, which could take up other aspects of regulation in this area.

In addition, the European Parliament quite rightly noted that one of the fastest growing areas remains the robotization of the human body, which leads to an increase in our dependence on gadgets. But what should a person do if the implant manufacturer for some reason ceases to support it - for example, goes bankrupt?

It is proposed to solve the problem by creating independent trusted organizations that will preserve the operability of vital wearable medical devices - from maintenance to repair and upgrade. For such firms, manufacturers will be required to store and provide all technical information about their devices, including a copy of the source code of the programs.

Insurance for robot

Parliamentarians also advocate the introduction of liability insurance for damage caused by the robot - by analogy with OSAGO. In fact, the higher the automation level of the machine, the more difficult it is to identify the person responsible for the damage caused by it. Therefore, compulsory insurance of risks associated with the actions of robots will allow the victim to be guaranteed compensation, and a reserve compensation fund can be used for cases that are not covered by insurance.

However, the European Parliament looked further - into the era of completely independent machines that will be able to find employer counterparties themselves, discuss the terms of the contracts and decide how to fulfill them. So far, officials have not been able to agree on exactly what rules will be responsible for the damage caused by such a completely autonomous machine. This issue is left for the near future.

Charter of roboliberties

The European Parliament is concerned about the moral side of the development of robotics. Therefore, as an annex to the resolution, parliamentarians presented a "code of ethics," which robotics developers are invited to be guided voluntarily. Perhaps everyone will easily agree with the key principles of the code: "do good" and "do no harm" borrowed from the famous "laws of robotics" by Isaac Asimov. The principle of autonomy implies the voluntary informed consent of a person to interact with the robot, and the principle of fairness means the correct distribution of the benefits created at the same time.

An interesting point of this document is the "right to undo," the possibility of canceling the action, which should become a mandatory function of the robot control system. In addition, parliamentarians set the framework for the future comprehensive "Robotics Charter." It is suggested to even think about whether, in the future, the most advanced autonomous robots should receive a special legal status for electronic persons - "with their special rights and obligations, including the obligation to compensate for any harm caused by them."

Legal results

It is worth saying that the legislative process in the EU is very specific. The adopted resolution is technically not yet a law: only the European Commission has the right of legislative initiative here. Therefore, the resolution of the European Parliament should be considered as a formal appeal to it with a request to take certain specific measures. The ball is on the side of lawmakers - and although the European Commission is not obliged to respond to such documents, there is little doubt that a clear law regulating robotics will be adopted in the near future. Perhaps it will form the basis of the legislation of other countries - and of our whole future.

State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin: laws on robots will be adopted by 2022

By 2022, according to forecasts, bills will be adopted "regulating the relationship between the robot and man," said Speaker of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Volodin during a working trip to Tatarstan. He announced the appearance at the lower house of the council for the development of the digital economy^[5].

2016

Bill on robots in Russia from Dmitry Grishin

In December 2016, the founder of Grishin Robotics, chairman of the board of directors and co-founder of Mail.Ru Group developed a law on robotics. Prepared by Dmitry Grishin, the concept of the world's first full-fledged law on robots was sent for evaluation to leading scientific and expert centers in Russia and the world. It is intended to be the beginning of a discussion on legislative regulation in the field of robotics. If adopted, Russia may become the first state in the world in which relations with robots are regulated by law.

"The practice and distribution of robots raises a huge number of questions: what to do in the event of an unmanned vehicle accident? Who will be responsible for randomly shooting a drone? And this is only the beginning of the real penetration of robots into all spheres of life. Since I am sure that this process of adaptation of robots will be fast, I think it is right now to propose to provide in advance how the relationship of people and robots will be regulated in the laws. Responsibility for the actions of robots is the main and most pressing issue. For example, who is responsible for the actions of the robot is its owner or manufacturer. Many countries are now at the very beginning, and are trying to concentrate on regulating certain aspects of the use of robotics (for example, unmanned vehicles). But I am sure that it is important to use a systematic approach that will help determine common approaches in this area. It is important for the industry to formulate possible answers to them and offer them correct regulation until they have been developed without us, "commented Dmitry Grishin, founder of Grishin Robotics, co-founder and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Mail.Ru Group.

The materials of the first concept of the law on robots will be sent to the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow State University, Moscow State Law Academy named after O.E. Kutafin, National Research University "Higher School of Economics" (in Moscow and St. Petersburg), St. Petersburg State University, Ural State Law Academy, International Association of Philosophy of Law (IVR), Russian School of Private Law.

Certain legal rules regarding the use of robots are already being implemented in various countries of the world, including the USA (Michigan, California, Nevada and other states), the UK, etc. The ISO 13482:2014 standard on robotic personal assistants was developed from technical norms. However, these provisions are aimed at regulating fairly narrow aspects and certain categories of robots.

In Russia, legal regulation can be based on several new provisions of the Civil Code, as well as special federal legislation in the field of robotics, which would determine the most fundamental points.

At the same time, several approaches to legal regulation can be distinguished:

• equate robots with animals (apply the same principles and approaches, for example, in case of liability of the owner of a source of increased danger);
• Use a concept close to legal entities;
• to solve the issue by analogy with individuals.

The most promising concept is based on the analogy of a legal entity. Using such an artificial design, on the one hand, will avoid questions about whether the robot can be considered as a person, and on the other, will solve a number of practical problems.

The general approach can be reflected in the new special norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. More detailed rules are supposed to be brought to the level of the federal law "On robotics." In addition to these exceptions, the law may provide for the definition of robots as a whole.

For robots, a special register should be created, similar to a single state register of legal entities. The same measures can be applied to the creators of robots as to the owners of sources of increased danger, because the machine is capable of causing harm in one form or another. Depending on the type of robot and the degree of danger it poses to others, the responsibility will lie with either the owner or the manufacturer: if the robot initially carries danger and the owner is warned about this, then the owner will be responsible, and the manufacturer will have to pay for the injuries caused by a non-dangerous robot vacuum cleaner, says Grishin in an interview with Republic^[6][7].

Grishin proposes four scenarios when the actions of a robot fall under criminal law:

• creating a robot for committing offenses
• disabling functions that block the possibility of causing harm to a person
• creating a robot that does not have such a unit from the very beginning
• designing a robot without realizing that it can be used to harm a person

Working Group in the European Parliament

In 2016, there is no separate legislation on robotics and responsibility for the behavior of autonomous robots in any country in the world. However, in the European Parliament at this time there is a working group that deals with this issue. Its work began very recently, there are no final proposals yet, but on the website of the European Parliament you can find the interim document^[8]), which refers to legislation for^[9].

It says that the creators of robots should be guided by the same laws of Asimov's robotics. The "smart robot" is described in the document as a mechanism capable of autonomy by analyzing data from sensors or exchanging information with the environment, and having the ability to self-study. Such robots should be registered with the European Agency for Robotics and Artificial Intelligence. Robots include self-driving cars, the document emphasizes that legislative norms in relation to them should be developed and approved as soon as possible.

One of the most serious issues of any robotics legislation is the responsibility for what the robot will do. The document separately emphasizes that it is necessary to take into account the autonomy of robots in decision-making. The higher it is, the less responsibility for its actions should be borne by the owner. The longer the robot was trained by a person, the more responsibility should lie with the teacher, while it is necessary to distinguish the abilities acquired from a person with those that the robot learned itself.

The question of who will be responsible for the damage caused by the most autonomous robot is proposed to be resolved through compulsory insurance; that is, in the end, the manufacturer is still responsible for the consequences, albeit in the form of insurance. Experts also propose the creation of a fund or several funds (one for each category of robots), which will be replenished by contributions from manufacturers and spent on compensation for damage from the actions of robots.

It is proposed to create a special charter of robotics, which will describe the ethical principles of the development of autonomous vehicles. They are as follows:

• robots must act in the interests of humans;
• robots should not harm humans;
• the benefits that robots bring should be accessible to everyone, especially medical robots.

The principles are similar to the laws of Asimov's robotics; it is assumed that any robot developer should keep them in mind when creating new devices. The source code of the robots must be open for incident investigation. For the same reasons, an action history should be available. robot

Switch

The European Parliament wonders what will happen if robots gain more knowledge and skills than we plan to provide them, and ultimately become a danger to people. This proposal is that at the legislative level it is established that all robots should have a switch off button in case of a dangerous situation.

They can't hurt people

It would seem, directly according to Asimov: this measure, proposed by the European Parliament, will prohibit companies from producing any robots that are designed to harm human beings. From the point of view of common sense - yes, such a measure is simply necessary. If approved, it may extend to "killer robots" developed for warfare.

Lack of emotions

This is not just a concrete measure, but also a serious reminder. The European Parliament wants all people to clearly understand that robots do not have feelings (at least at this stage of development), therefore, they should not allow themselves to show fake feelings, which are not really there. Insurance

The manufacturer and owner of the robot will be responsible for causing any harm that the robot can do. Therefore, the owners of large (and highly dangerous) robots must draw up an insurance policy (for example, as is done with respect to motor vehicles - a type of analogue of our CTP).

Duties and rights of machines

The report of the European Parliament, to the surprise of many, defines robots as "electronic people" and gives them rights and obligations (just as people have them), but their content has not yet been determined. Lawmakers are even considering that robots should be held accountable for their actions before the law along with their manufacturer and owner.

All of us are taxpayers (Even robots)

One of the controversial measures that has been included in robot proposals - in order to reduce the social consequences of rising unemployment, robots can be obliged to make contributions to social insurance funds and pay taxes as if they were real workers. Thus, they will contribute to the replenishment of the treasury of pension and medical funds.

Basic single income

Since many people may be unemployed, the European Parliament report also suggests the possibility of creating a basic income system that will guarantee people a minimum level of income. This will facilitate the transition from an economic model based on human labor to almost complete automation of work.

It is planned that this legislative initiative will be discussed by the European Commission, which will decide whether it is necessary to regulate the integration of robots into society in order to minimize the adverse consequences that they can cause^[10][11].

UN consideration of banning combat robots

In 2016, the issue of regulating the use of robots is dealt with in, UN but from a different point of view. The issue of robots is under consideration by^[12] of^[13] UN Conference on Disarmament - many human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, believe that the use of autonomous military robots should be prohibited by conventions on the rules of war. So far, such are robots not used (operators control widespread drones), but the creation robot of a system capable of independently deciding to kill an enemy is quite possible.

U.S. Robot Enforcement Research

In the absence of special legislation, in 2016, existing laws are applied to robots. University of Washington lecturer Ryan Keilo detailed^[14], how robots and legislation coexist in the United States. According to him, American law has been trying for six decades to understand exactly how to interpret situations involving various mechanisms of different degrees of autonomy.

American courts, as Keilo found out, have repeatedly encountered extremely unusual questions regarding robots: for example, they decided whether it is possible to say that robots perform music in the same sense as people. The scientist believes that the robot is a device that is able to collect data on what is happening around it, evaluate this data and act on its conclusions; these three qualities, according to Keilo, distinguish robots from a laptop or any other high-tech device.

The question of whether a robot can be considered the same performer of music as a person was raised in the United States in 1987. A restaurant in Maryland for entertainment put in the hall several humanoid mechanisms that, according to the program previously laid down in them, played musical instruments. From the point of view of the law, for any performance of live music in restaurants you need to pay a separate tax, and the restaurant had to prove in court that these robots are nothing more than a mechanical musical machine.

After a long trial, the court nevertheless decided that such robots cannot be considered performers in the usual sense of the word - they act according to the program, cannot make mistakes or improvise, and, in fact, are no different from the factory toy-monkey that knocks on the drum. Then there were no robots capable of performing music without a given program, now their creation is quite possible, but exactly how to interpret them as performers or just an advanced musical machine is unclear.

Another interesting matter concerned the discovery of a sunken ship. According to the law of the sea, whoever first finds the wreckage of a long-sunken ship has the exclusive right to everything on board, including gold and other valuables. In the late 1980s, researchers discovered the Central America steamer, which sank in 1857 with a load of gold. It was possible to detect it using an unmanned submarine, and a reasonable question arose: does not she own the rights to treasure. The court sided with the treasurers: he decided that the submarine was controlled by people who saw the wreckage of the ship through its cameras, so there was no need to send divers to the crash site and additionally declare their rights. But this is how to be, if the submarine is not only unmanned, but also autonomous (that is, not controlled by a person), it is not known - there have been no such cases in history.

Ryan Keilo concludes that in American law now the robot is interpreted as a programmable machine that performs the will of a person, and there were no cases when autonomous behavior would be understood. And at the moment, the situation is such that the creator or owner of the robot is responsible for its actions, although in fact there are many machines that are programmed to make independent decisions depending on what is happening around.

Robotics

Notes