All regulations — filterable table
Every row from the dataset, with sector / status / jurisdiction filters and a free-text search. Click a jurisdiction or framework name to open its dedicated page.
Not legal advice. This dataset is an aggregation of public regulatory text for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for counsel. Verify against the linked primary sources before relying on any row.
Showing 57 of 57 rows.
| Jurisdiction | Framework | Sector | Status | Effective | Last verified | Summary | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | As of the most recent NAIC implementation map, Alaska has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin. The NAIC bulletin itself has no fixed effective date; state adoption triggers the obligations. The bulletin establishes expectations for insurers' use of AI / external consumer data, including governance, accountability, and documented AI system inventories. | Primary source ↗ |
| Alabama | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Alabama has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. The bulletin remains a non-binding model until a state issues its own substantially similar guidance or regulation. | Primary source ↗ |
| Arkansas | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Arkansas has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Arizona | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Arizona is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Insurers operating in Arizona should treat the bulletin as the operational floor for AI governance, third-party data, and accountability expectations, layered onto Arizona Department of Insurance guidance. | Primary source ↗ |
| California | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | California is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. California also runs additional, more granular insurance AI guidance (CDI) and participates in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). Federal/state interaction with CFPB and California Privacy Agency rulemaking continues to evolve. | Primary source ↗ |
| Colorado | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Colorado is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin, and also runs Colorado-specific insurance AI rules under the Division of Insurance that go further than the bulletin baseline. Colorado is the lead pilot state for the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Connecticut | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Connecticut is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Connecticut is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Delaware | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Delaware is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Florida | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Florida is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Florida is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). Florida Office of Insurance Regulation may layer additional consumer-protection requirements on top of the bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Georgia | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Georgia is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Hawaii | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Hawaii has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Iowa | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Iowa is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Iowa is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Idaho | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Idaho has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Illinois | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Illinois is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Indiana | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Indiana is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Kansas | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Kansas is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Kentucky | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Kentucky is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Louisiana | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Louisiana is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Louisiana is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Massachusetts | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Massachusetts is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Maryland | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Maryland is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Maryland is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Maine | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Maine has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Michigan | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Michigan is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Minnesota | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Minnesota is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Minnesota also runs its own consumer-protection framework (including a broader state AI law) that may layer additional requirements on insurance carriers operating in the state. | Primary source ↗ |
| Missouri | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Missouri has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Mississippi | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Mississippi has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Montana | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Montana has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| North Carolina | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | North Carolina is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| North Dakota | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | North Dakota has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Nebraska | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Nebraska is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| New Hampshire | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | New Hampshire is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| New Jersey | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | New Jersey is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. New Jersey also operates its own separate AI- and algorithmic-accountability framework (DOBI/DCA), and the state AG has been active on AI in insurance. | Primary source ↗ |
| New Mexico | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | New Mexico has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Nevada | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Nevada is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| New York | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | New York is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin, but New York also operates one of the most prescriptive state-specific insurance AI frameworks in the US via NYDFS Circular Letter No. 7 (2024), which goes materially further than the NAIC baseline. Insurers should treat Circular Letter 7 as the operational floor in New York. | Primary source ↗ |
| Ohio | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Ohio is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Oklahoma | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Oklahoma has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Oregon | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Oregon is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. | Primary source ↗ |
| Pennsylvania | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Pennsylvania is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Pennsylvania is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Rhode Island | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Rhode Island is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Rhode Island is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| South Carolina | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | South Carolina has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| South Dakota | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | South Dakota has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Tennessee | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Tennessee is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Tennessee also passed the ELVIS Act / Tennessee Code Title 47 updates addressing AI in music/voice — not insurance-specific, but the state's broader AI posture is in motion. | Primary source ↗ |
| Texas | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Texas is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Texas TDI has also issued its own AI-related guidance layered on top of the bulletin, particularly around underwriting and consumer-data use. | Primary source ↗ |
| Utah | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Utah is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Utah also operates an AI-specific state law (the Utah AI Policy Act) that provides a disclosure-based framework — insurers should reconcile both layers. | Primary source ↗ |
| Virginia | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Virginia is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Virginia is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| Vermont | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Vermont is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Vermont is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). Vermont also operates a broader state AI law (H.114 / Act 132) that may layer additional obligations on insurance use cases. | Primary source ↗ |
| Washington | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Washington is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Washington also operates the My Health My Data Act and has been active on algorithmic accountability via the Office of the Insurance Commissioner. | Primary source ↗ |
| Wisconsin | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Adopted | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Wisconsin is listed by NAIC as having adopted a substantially similar version of the AI Model Bulletin. Wisconsin is also participating in the 12-state NAIC AI Systems Evaluation Tool pilot (Jan–Sep 2026). | Primary source ↗ |
| West Virginia | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | West Virginia has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| Wyoming | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | Wyoming has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. | Primary source ↗ |
| District of Columbia | NAIC AI Model Bulletin | Insurance | Pending adoption | no set effective date | 2026-07-08 | The District of Columbia has not yet adopted a substantially similar version of the NAIC AI Model Bulletin per the NAIC's own implementation tracking. DC also operates a separate algorithmic accountability / AI bias law (the DC Stop Discrimination by Algorithms Act) that applies to insurance and other consumer-facing AI use. | Primary source ↗ |
| New York | NYDFS Circular Letter No. 7 (2024) — Use of AI / External Consumer Data | Insurance | Adopted | 2024-06-17 | 2026-07-08 | NYDFS Circular Letter No. 7 (2024) is the most prescriptive US state insurance-AI regime: it applies to all NY-licensed insurers using AI/ML or 'External Consumer Data & Information Sources' in underwriting and pricing, requires a formal AI governance framework, demographic testing, documented use cases, and a designated AI officer. Insurers were required to be in compliance by the issuer's deadline and to certify compliance on an annual basis. | Primary source ↗ |
| Colorado | Colorado SB 26-189 — Automated Decision-Making Technology | Lending / fintech | Adopted | 2027-01-01 | 2026-07-08 | Colorado's SB 26-189 replaced the earlier SB 24-205 and substantially narrowed scope. Effective Jan 1, 2027, it covers only 'consequential decisions' (education, employment, financial/lending, government services, healthcare, housing, insurance, legal services, essential services). The original SB 24-205 covered nearly every algorithmic decision; the rewritten statute removed most of the catch-all scope and shifted enforcement to the AG. The original SB 24-205 is repealed and should not be cited as live law. | Primary source ↗ |
| Colorado | Colorado SB 24-205 — Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence (REPEALED) | Lending / fintech | Repealed & replaced | 2026-02-01 | 2026-07-08 | Colorado's original SB 24-205 (the first state comprehensive AI law) was repealed and replaced by SB 26-189 mid-2026. Many secondary sources still cite SB 24-205 as live law — it is not. Track SB 26-189 for current Colorado AI obligations. This row is kept for historical reference. | Primary source ↗ |
| Federal | CFPB — Adverse-Action / ECOA Guidance on AI Credit Decisions | Lending / fintech | Adopted | 2023-09-19 | 2026-07-08 | CFPB's September 2023 circular (and the underlying ECOA / Regulation B) requires lenders to provide specific and accurate reasons for adverse actions even when the decision was made by a complex algorithm or 'black-box' ML model. The 'no black-box' rule survived CFPB's April 2026 narrowing of disparate-impact enforcement. Lenders using AI/ML in credit decisions must be able to identify the principal reasons for denial to applicants. | Primary source ↗ |
| Federal | OCC / Federal Reserve / FDIC — Interagency Model Risk Management Guidance (April 2026, replacing SR 11-7) | Lending / fintech | Adopted | 2026-04-01 | 2026-07-08 | In April 2026 the OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC jointly replaced the 2011 SR 11-7 model-risk guidance with updated interagency guidance that explicitly addresses AI/ML, third-party model risk, and ongoing monitoring. The new guidance is the federal floor for any bank or insured depository using AI in credit, fraud, AML, or any other model-driven decision. SR 11-7 itself was rescinded, not amended. | Primary source ↗ |
| EU | EU AI Act — Annex III (credit scoring, life/health insurance risk-pricing) | Both | Pending adoption | 2026-08-02 | 2026-07-08 | Annex III of the EU AI Act classifies AI systems used for credit scoring and life/health insurance risk-pricing as 'high-risk,' triggering the full Chapter III obligations (risk management, data governance, technical documentation, human oversight, conformity assessment, post-market monitoring). The current-law enforcement date is August 2, 2026. A proposed Digital Omnibus deferral (agreed May 7, 2026, not yet law at the time of this row) would push the date to December 2, 2027 — track both and confirm at the time of action. | Primary source ↗ |
Prefer the raw data? Download regulations.csv or regulations.json directly. Schema is documented in METHODOLOGY.md.