. We need to translate the text within.
Let's go paragraph by paragraph.
First paragraph: "Andrew Yang, the 2020 presidential candidate who now runs Noble Mobile, renewed his call for an AI tax on CNBC's Power Lunch this week. He argued the government should tax artificial intelligence rather than payroll, saying firms skip payroll taxes and healthcare costs by choosing AI over new hires."
Translation: "アンドリュー・ヤン氏は、2020年大統領候補で現在Noble Mobileを経営する人物だが、今週CNBCの「パワー・ランチ」でAI税の提案を再び行った。彼は政府が給与税ではなく人工知能に課税すべきだと主張し、企業が新規採用ではなくAIを選ぶことで給与税と医療費を回避していると述べた。"
We need to keep "Noble Mobile" as is. "Power Lunch" is a show name, we can keep as "パワー・ランチ" but maybe keep "Power Lunch" in English? Since it's a proper noun, we can keep it. I'll keep "CNBCのPower Lunch" as is. Also "AI" is used as is. "Payroll taxes" -> "給与税". "Healthcare costs" -> "医療費". "New hires" -> "新規採用". "Rather than labor" -> "労働ではなく" or "給与税ではなく" but the original says "tax artificial intelligence rather than payroll" - so "給与税ではなくAIに課税" but "payroll" here refers to the tax on payroll, so "給与税". So I'll say "給与税ではなく人工知能に課税すべき". Also "renewed his call" -> "再び呼びかけた" or "再提唱". I'll use "再び呼びかけた".
Second paragraph: "Yang built his political brand on automation warnings during his 2020 campaign, and he's sticking with that message. The government currently taxes labor through payroll taxes, but Yang says that's backwards. If companies can replace workers with AI and avoid those costs, the tax code should catch up."
Translation: "ヤン氏は2020年の選挙運動で自動化への警告を政治ブランドにし、そのメッセージを今も貫いている。政府は現在、給与税を通じて労働に課税しているが、ヤン氏はそれが逆だと述べている。企業がAIで労働者を置き換え、その費用を回避できるなら、税法も追いつくべきだ。"
But "tax code should catch up" - "税法は追いつくべき" or "税法もそれに合わせるべき". I'll use "税法も対応すべきだ".
Third paragraph: "He pointed to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who floated a 3% AI revenue tax in 2025. Amodei said the levy would apply each time a model generates revenue. Yang said the same logic should apply broadly, but argued it would force firms to weigh AI costs against payroll costs."
Translation: "彼はAnthropicのCEOであるDario Amodei氏を指摘し、同氏は2025年にAI収入の3%税を提案した。Amodei氏は、モデルが収益を生み出すたびに課税が適用されると述べた。ヤン氏は同じ論理が広く適用されるべきだと述べたが、それは企業にAIコストと給与コストを比較させることになると主張した。"
Note: "floated" means "提案した" or "示唆した". "Levy" is "課税". "Weigh" -> "比較検討させる". So we'll do: "企業にAIコストと給与コストを比較検討させることになる" but the original says "force firms to weigh AI costs against payroll costs" so "企業にAIコストと給与コストを比較検討させる" is fine.
Fourth paragraph: "Yang isn't alone. Bridgewater Associates executives Greg Jensen and Nir Bar Dea wrote a New York Times opinion piece estimating AI could displace 18% of current US jobs within five years. They used that estimate to back their own AI token tax proposal, echoing Amodei's idea."
Translation: "ヤン氏だけではない。Bridgewater Associatesの幹部であるグレッグ・ジェンセン氏とニール・バー・デア氏は、ニューヨーク・タイムズのオピニオン記事で、AIが今後5年以内に米国の現在の雇用の18%を置き換える可能性
