A Boardroom Battle: AI Governance at Berkshire Hathaway
Is it time for corporate boards to take a leading role in the age of artificial intelligence? This is the question facing Berkshire Hathaway and its shareholders as they consider a proposal for an AI committee within the company. PwC research estimates that AI could boost global GDP by nearly 15% by 2030, generating trillions in economic growth. This makes AI a major focus of investor interest.
But does this technological shift warrant a fundamental change in corporate governance? Should companies like Berkshire Hathaway, led by Warren Buffett, refresh their boardroom expertise to address this issue?
Tulipshare Capital LLC, a Berkshire investor, believes so. They’ve proposed the creation of an AI committee on Berkshire’s board to address the risks and opportunities associated with AI development and deployment across the company’s operations, portfolio companies, and investments. This proposal is on the ballot for the upcoming Berkshire shareholder meeting in Omaha on May 3.
Tulipshare’s reasoning is straightforward. They assert that shareholders support responsible AI use to foster growth, enhance efficiency, and maintain competitiveness. However, they also acknowledge the potential risks related to AI, including regulatory, societal, and human rights issues that need proactive management.
Shareholders request that Berkshire charter a new committee of independent directors on Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) to address risks associated with the development and deployment of AI systems across its own operations, portfolio companies, and new investments. The committee charter shall authorize the committee to meet with employees, customers, suppliers, and other relevant stakeholders at the discretion of the committee, and to retain independent consultants and experts as needed.
They note the ethical guidelines from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, which stress safety, transparency, and human oversight. Moreover, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has created a risk management framework to address AI-related risks.
Tulipshare points to real-world examples where AI systems, if not governed responsibly, have caused harm. They cite Amazon, a Berkshire portfolio company, scrapping a biased hiring tool, and Alexa spreading false information about the 2020 U.S. election. In 2024, Glass Lewis and ISS supported a shareholder proposal to Apple, another Berkshire portfolio company, that better transparency would allow shareholders to better evaluate the risks associated with the use of AI.
Berkshire’s investments in AI-driven companies amplify the need for strong governance, as Warren Buffett has warned about the risks of AI misuse without robust oversight. Institutional investors such as Norges Bank and Legal & General Investment Management are already setting expectations for AI governance.
Companies that fail to implement ethical AI governance face legal challenges. According to Tulipshare, an independent AI committee would:
- Anticipate risks;
- Ensure regulatory compliance;
- Avoid legal battles;
- Protect the company’s reputation.
It would also establish clear ethical AI guidelines.
The Broader Challenge for Boardrooms
AI presents unique challenges for boardrooms globally, but it’s not the first information technology challenge they’ve faced. Cybersecurity, social media, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things have all presented governance issues. Despite these experiences, boardrooms have been slow to adapt, leaving investors to bear additional risks. Boards are responsible for managing value-creating opportunities and negative consequences. However, according to some, many U.S. public company boards haven’t strengthened their ability to govern these issues.
The mistakes in cybersecurity oversight range from viewing it as a general risk to believing outdated governance models are sufficient. Independent Board Director and Former Fortune 50 CISO Joanna Burkey believes audit committees shouldn’t be solely responsible for technology risk conversations. She explains the need for a dedicated governance structure to oversee the impact of these issues.
Deloitte’s Audit Committee 2025 report reveals that AI governance is a top boardroom challenge. With many companies assigning primary responsibility for cybersecurity oversight to their audit committees, these complex issues may be marginalized. This outdated mindset, imposed after the 2002 financial crisis, undermines investors and America’s path to a digital future.
Berkshire’s Response and the Path Forward
The Berkshire board, chaired by Warren Buffett, is recommending shareholders vote against the AI committee proposal. They believe the existing governance structure is sufficient and that a new committee would be inconsistent with the company’s decentralized culture.
The board’s statement:
The Board does not believe that chartering a new committee of independent directors on Artificial Intelligence is necessary or in the best interests of shareholders.
Berkshire assigns risk management to its subsidiaries, requiring them to assess risks and document them in an annual risk assessment. Risks related to AI are included in the scope of external risks examined by the subsidiaries. The board believes its current governance structure provides adequate oversight. (Source: BRK Def 14A 2025)
With no U.S. regulatory requirements governing AI, a compliance-driven risk assessment may not be enough to understand and manage these risks. The proposal from Tulipshare is intended to ensure the Berkshire boardroom stays ahead by setting the AI tone at the top for its portfolio companies. Investors are encouraged to vote in favor of the proposed AI committee.
