Anything that increases productivity per person creates a
potential for increasing wealth inequality, because the more each person can create, the more can be taken away from them by someone else. Pre-agricultural societies generally tend to be very egalitarian with no clear economic elites, but you start to see the wealthy elite class manifest in those of them where even without agriculture per-person yield is so high (e.g. PNW Salish) that it's possible for a few people to live off the surplus generated by the rest. Agriculture gives a massive boost to yields, and all societies that went down that route quickly lost their original egalitarianism. AI is just another step down the same road.
But note that this is a potential, not an inevitable outcome. This outcome is more likely because there is a positive feedback loop at play here: if you can somehow force people who generate wealth with their labor to surrender part of that wealth to you, you can use those resources to improve your ability to forcibly exploit others (e.g. by hiring more armed goons in a primitive society, or by bribing politicians who pass laws that are ultimately enforced by "public servant" goons in a more advanced society like ours). Simply put, wealth can buy power, and the resulting increase in power disparity can be used to extract more wealth from the people producing it. Thus the natural trend of technological advancement is towards income inequality ... but a society can still go against the current, it just takes a lot more effort on behalf of the citizenry.