AI Chatbot Disclosure Laws by State: Which States Make a Bot Say It Is Not Human

Repeat reminders are a companion bot rule, not a customer service rule. Washington is the strictest from January 1, 2027: minors must be told every hour during a continuous session.

The Texas figure looks scary, but its disclosure duty covers government agencies and health care providers. For an ordinary consumer business, Maine is the more realistic exposure. New York and Washington only reach companion bots, and New York's cap stacks up by the day.

Texas separates mistakes you can fix from ones you can't. A curable violation tops out at $12,000, while an uncurable one can reach $200,000, so fixing a problem fast once you are notified matters a lot.

Confirmed state AI chatbot and AI-interaction disclosure laws

Source: FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17941, Bot disclosure; FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22602 (companion chatbots, SB 243); FindLaw (Colorado Revised Statutes), C.R.S. § 6-1-1704, Disclosure of an artificial intelligence system to consumer; Colorado General Assembly, SB25B-004 Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems; Maine Legislature, Public Law 2025, chapter 294 (L.D. 1727), An Act to Ensure Transparency in Consumer Transactions Involving Artificial Intelligence; New York State Senate (Consolidated Laws), N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 1702, Notifications; Texas Legislature, HB 149 (89th Legislature), Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, enrolled text; Texas Legislature Online, HB 149 (89R) bill history; Washington State Legislature, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2225, Chapter 168, Laws of 2026 (Artificial Intelligence Companion Chatbots). Download as image

AI chatbot disclosure law by state

• 3Companion chatbot disclosure law
• 2General consumer AI-interaction disclosure
• 1Limited to government or health care

Do chatbots have to tell you they are AI?

In a growing number of states, yes. We confirmed 6 states with a statute that requires some kind of AI disclosure: California, Colorado, Maine, New York, Texas and Washington. That number is a floor, not a ceiling. Utah has its own AI disclosure law, but we could not confirm its current text from the official code site, so we left it out.

The laws fall into three groups. General consumer rules in Maine and Colorado reach almost any business whose bot talks to the public. Companion chatbot rules in California, New York and Washington target bots designed to build an ongoing relationship with the user. Texas sits apart, with a duty that applies to government agencies and to health care providers who use AI in service or treatment.

California also has an older bot law. It makes it unlawful to use a bot online to mislead someone about its artificial identity in order to sell something or sway a vote. The law mentions large online platforms, defined as sites with 10,000,000 or more monthly US visitors, but it puts no duty on those platforms. The duty falls on whoever uses the bot to mislead.

Does a customer service chatbot need a disclosure?

This is the question most small businesses actually have, and the honest answer is: it depends on the state and on how human your bot sounds.

Maine is the clearest example. If you use a chatbot in trade with consumers and a reasonable consumer could think it is a person, you need a clear and conspicuous notice. A violation is treated as an unfair trade practice, with civil penalties up to $10,000 per intentional violation. Colorado's AI Act takes a similar approach for AI systems meant to interact with consumers, unless it would be obvious to a reasonable person. Colorado pushed its start date from February 1, 2026 to June 30, 2026, and the date could move again, so check the current date before you rely on it.

California's companion chatbot law, SB 243, excludes bots used only for customer service. That does not mean a support bot is off the hook in California. If it pretends to be a person to close a sale, the older bot law can still apply.

The practical move is simple. Put a plain line at the top of every chat window, something like "You're chatting with an automated assistant. Ask for a person any time." It costs almost nothing and goes a long way toward the general consumer rules in Maine and Colorado. Companion bots need more, as the next section shows.

What counts as a companion chatbot, and why it matters

Companion bots are the ones built to hold an ongoing, personal conversation: virtual friends, coaches, romantic partners and similar apps. These laws are much stricter because lawmakers were worried about vulnerable users, especially minors and people in crisis.

New York requires a notice at the start of any AI companion interaction and at least every 3 hours in a continuing one. The Attorney General enforces it, and penalties run up to $15,000 per day, paid into the state's suicide prevention fund. California requires a clear notice that the bot is AI when a reasonable person could be misled, and a reminder at least every 3 hours for users the operator knows are minors. Anyone harmed can sue for actual damages or $1,000 per violation, whichever is greater.

Washington's law takes effect January 1, 2027. Adults get the notice at the start and at least every 3 hours. Minors get it every hour during a continuous session. Violations run through the state Consumer Protection Act, where the Attorney General can seek up to $7,500 per violation.

If you build or resell anything that chats with users about their lives, moods or relationships, assume these rules may apply and get advice on the definitions before launch.

What these laws mean if you build chatbots for clients

Freelance developers and agencies are in an awkward spot. The statutes put the duty on the operator or the business deploying the bot, but when something goes wrong, the client will look at your contract first.

Say you build a lead-capture bot for a home services company in Maine, and the client asks you to give it a human name and a friendly backstory. If a customer later complains, the client may point to an indemnity clause that makes you responsible for any claim arising from the deliverable. You wrote the persona, so you are now in the middle of an unfair trade practice dispute you never agreed to carry.

Protect yourself in writing. Make the client responsible for deciding where the bot is deployed and for legal compliance in those states. Spell out that the disclosure text is the client's call, and that you will build in a notice if asked. Cap your liability at the fees paid, and carve regulatory fines out of any indemnity you give.

What to check before you sign with a chatbot vendor

Most businesses don't build their own bot. They buy one as part of a help desk, CRM or website tool, then switch it on. That means your compliance depends on settings you may not control and terms you probably skimmed.

A few points deserve a close read:

• Who controls the disclosure. Can you edit the opening message, or does the vendor fix it? You need to be able to add a clear notice.
• Whether the vendor promises legal compliance. Many terms say the customer is solely responsible for how the tool is used. Ask for a promise that the product supports the disclosures the law requires.
• Liability caps. A cap equal to a month of fees will not go far against a penalty of $15,000 per day. Ask for regulatory fines caused by the vendor's product to sit outside the cap.
• Changes to the product. If the vendor can change features on short notice, a disclosure you rely on could disappear in an update. Ask for advance notice of changes that affect compliance.
• Minors. If your audience might include young users, find out whether the tool can flag or age-gate them, since California and Washington set stricter rules for minors.
• Exit rights. If a new state law makes the tool unusable for you, you want the right to terminate without paying out the rest of the term.

Sources and method

Every number on this page comes from the sources below, each opened and read on or before October 18, 2026. A second, independent review checked every figure against its source and corrected anything that did not match. 6 of 51 state entries were confirmed; any that could not be are marked "Not yet confirmed" and left out of every count and chart.

1. New York State Senate (Consolidated Laws), New York General Business Law Article 47, Artificial Intelligence Companion Models (§§ 1700-1704) (Most recent revision 2025-11-07)
2. New York State Senate (Consolidated Laws), N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 1702, Notifications (As read 2026-10-18)
3. New York State Senate (Consolidated Laws), N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 1703, Enforcement (As read 2026-10-18)
4. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22602 (companion chatbots, SB 243) (Current as of January 1, 2026)
5. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22601, Definitions (companion chatbots) (Current as of January 1, 2026)
6. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22603, Annual reports (Current as of January 1, 2026)
7. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22605, Civil action (Current as of January 1, 2026)
8. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17940, Definitions (bot disclosure, SB 1001) (As read 2026-10-18)
9. FindLaw (California Business and Professions Code), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17941, Bot disclosure (As read 2026-10-18)
10. Office of the Governor of California, Governor Newsom signs bills to further strengthen California's leadership in protecting children online (October 13, 2025)
11. Washington State Legislature, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2225, Chapter 168, Laws of 2026 (Artificial Intelligence Companion Chatbots) (Approved March 24, 2026)
12. Washington State Legislature, HB 2225 (2025-26) bill summary and history (As read 2026-10-18)
13. Washington State Legislature, RCW 19.86.140, Civil penalties (Consumer Protection Act) (As read 2026-10-18)
14. Maine Legislature, Public Law 2025, chapter 294 (L.D. 1727), An Act to Ensure Transparency in Consumer Transactions Involving Artificial Intelligence (Approved June 12, 2025)
15. Maine Legislature (Maine Revised Statutes), 5 M.R.S. § 209, Unfair Trade Practices Act civil penalty (As read 2026-10-18)
16. Texas Legislature, HB 149 (89th Legislature), Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, enrolled text (Enrolled version, 2025)
17. Texas Legislature Online, HB 149 (89R) bill history (Signed June 22, 2025)
18. Colorado General Assembly, SB24-205 Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence (Effective May 17, 2024)
19. Colorado General Assembly, SB25B-004 Increase Transparency for Algorithmic Systems (Approved August 28, 2025)
20. FindLaw (Colorado Revised Statutes), C.R.S. § 6-1-1704, Disclosure of an artificial intelligence system to consumer (As read 2026-10-18 (may not show the SB25B-004 date change))
21. FindLaw (Colorado Revised Statutes), C.R.S. § 6-1-1706, Enforcement by attorney general (As read 2026-10-18)