AIP’s primary long-term funding mechanism is investment growth in individually owned Stability Accounts, seeded early in life. GRT supports initial capitalization, the transition and remaining public responsibilities.
Updated November 1, 2026 · Proposed framework, not an operating program
Stability Accounts are the central long-term mechanism: capital invested early in individually owned accounts is intended to grow to fund healthcare, education and retirement. The goal is to progressively replace dependence on government programs, including Social Security, with individual financial independence.
The Gross Receipts Tax supports initial capitalization, services and existing commitments while accounts mature, and continuing public responsibilities. This regional proposal follows that same model. It does not define a different national tax rate or replace Stability Accounts with speculative technology income.
Healthcare is intended to be financed through Stability Accounts and directed by individuals and their communities. Communities determine care priorities, spending and revenue needs, with state oversight. Universal access does not imply centralized federal management.
AIP uses capitalism to meet social needs and strengthen economic participation. Personal ownership, clear responsibilities and accountable public funding connect the regional proposal to the national framework.
Reducing the need for ongoing government funding is intended to create a path toward eliminating federal debt. Debt repayment requires actual surpluses after obligations and transition costs. Reduced debt-related fiscal pressure is intended to help make inflation easier to manage; it does not by itself guarantee stable prices.
AIP’s intended destination is local domestic decision-making, state oversight and a federal government focused primarily on international responsibilities. Its Western Hemisphere Alliance concerns international cooperation and is distinct from this six-state regional proposal.
The long-term target is a 2.5% Gross Receipts Tax as individual capital replaces dependence on government support and federal debt is eliminated. This is a conditional policy goal, not a validated rate schedule.
Read direct answers about funding, healthcare and government roles →
The current illustration starts with a $25,000 investment at birth. The design models healthcare, education and system repayments at retirement, leaving the remaining capital to the individual. Returns, timing, shortfall protection and transition rules need validation.
Account assumptions and arithmetic →The proposed entity-level tax supports the early investment and public funding during the transition. The tax base, final rates, collection rules and any credits remain design questions. Neither zero evasion nor near-zero compliance costs is established.
Tax mechanism and open decisions →Healthcare and education are needed before investment accounts mature. Existing retirees and people without mature accounts need funded protection. Future account growth is not money available to pay today’s bills.
The national first-year arithmetic reference shows a $301.6 billion gap. Regional technology income is not assumed to close it. Account balances, public-service repayments and tax revenue must not be counted twice.
California, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Nevada and New Mexico form the proposed regional scope. Shared water and energy challenges provide a possible setting for cooperation and infrastructure pilots. This is a proposed alliance, not a claim that these states have joined or approved the program.
Water infrastructure, desalination and energy research would each require independent engineering, environmental, legal and financial review. Any revenues would belong in a separately costed regional model. They are not established funding for the entire AIP framework.
The earlier regional draft used a 0.15% starting tax rate and projected technology breakeven around years 18–20, followed by eliminating the regional tax. Those were scenario assumptions, not adopted rates, demonstrated returns or promised dates. They must not be presented as the national AIP funding model.
A credible rollout would first define project costs, tax authority, financing, performance thresholds and downside funding. Expansion should follow demonstrated results rather than an assumed research breakthrough.
The historical scenario paired $26.8 billion in annual surplus with a program list totaling $41.25 billion. Its own listed figures therefore leave a $14.45 billion annual gap, approximately $14.5 billion. These are historical scenario inputs, not current forecasts or funded commitments.
Neither full self-funding nor a date for eliminating the tax has been established. A revised regional model must reconcile costs and revenues, quantify research risk and show how services remain funded if returns fall short.
Capital invested early in life is the long-term foundation. The Gross Receipts Tax supports it. Individual ownership and independence are the goals.
Read how AIP is funded