🔴Illinois HB 3773IN EFFECTUp to ~$70K/violation|🔴Texas TRAIGA (HB 149)IN EFFECTAG-enforced|🔴Utah AI Policy ActIN EFFECT$2,500/violation|⚠️Colorado AI Act (SB 205)Jan 1, 2027AG-enforced|⚠️California SB 942Aug 2, 2026$5K/day|⚠️EU AI Act Art. 50Aug 2, 2026€35M or 7% revenue|⚠️New York RAISE ActJan 1, 2027AG civil penalties|🔴Illinois HB 3773IN EFFECTUp to ~$70K/violation|🔴Texas TRAIGA (HB 149)IN EFFECTAG-enforced|🔴Utah AI Policy ActIN EFFECT$2,500/violation|⚠️Colorado AI Act (SB 205)Jan 1, 2027AG-enforced|⚠️California SB 942Aug 2, 2026$5K/day|⚠️EU AI Act Art. 50Aug 2, 2026€35M or 7% revenue|⚠️New York RAISE ActJan 1, 2027AG civil penalties|
Last verified · Jul 2, 2026Sourced from official primary sourcesapp.leg.wa.gov.
No LawDeadline: N/A
Flag of Washington

AI Laws in Washington (WA)

Washington has not enacted a comprehensive AI law — its high-risk AI bill (HB 2157) died in committee. Only narrow measures are law, including AI companion-chatbot safeguards (HB 2225) and AI content-provenance disclosure by large providers (HB 1170).

Map showing the location of Washington in the United States
Washington within the United States

What companies in Washington need to know about AI compliance

As of 2026-07-02, Washington has not enacted an AI-specific statute; the Washington Attorney General office defers to general consumer-protection statute (UDAP) and federal residual coverage. Operators across sectors in Washington watch federal signals first.

Washington's immediate neighbors also lack AI-specific statutes, so operators defer primarily to federal frameworks until regional precedent emerges.

Federal law still governs Cross-Sector AI in Washington primarily through FTC Section 5 (15 USC 45) and NIST AI RMF 1.0. Adjacent federal authorities include Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (15 U.S.C. § 6801-6809; NIST CSF 2.0); General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679); Section 508 / ADA Title III (Digital Accessibility) (29 U.S.C. § 794(d); 42 U.S.C. § 12181). Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (enforced by Federal Trade Commission; NIST) applies to saas platforms handling personal/financial data via ai must implement nist csf security standards: identify, protect, detect, respond, recover. Penalty exposure: ftc civil penalties up to $100,000/violation; private litigation for data breaches. FTC Operation AI Comply (Sep 2024) targeted five companies across sectors.

Washington's non-legislation on AI means the Washington Attorney General office has discretion to apply general consumer-protection statute (UDAP) and federal residual coverage to AI-driven consumer harms as they arise.

The federal and neighboring-state framework that governs your AI operations. Cross-Sector operators in Washington operate under a federal-dominant framework anchored by FTC Section 5 (15 USC 45) and NIST AI RMF 1.0, with adjacent authorities Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) / NIST Cybersecurity Framework (15 U.S.C. § 6801-6809; NIST CSF 2.0); General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679); Section 508 / ADA Title III (Digital Accessibility) (29 U.S.C. § 794(d); 42 U.S.C. § 12181). FTC Operation AI Comply (Sep 2024) targeted five companies across sectors. The practical risk they have to price in is cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure and state UDAP liability, and the bellwether signal to monitor is NIST AI RMF 1.0 (Jan 2023) is cited as the federal baseline across 30+ agency guidance documents. No regional statute applies yet. Washington legislature has not advanced substantive AI legislation. Use this as a starting point; sector pages on this site go deeper into industry-specific obligations.

With 11-50 employees you can justify a half-time compliance lead and part-time external counsel on retainer. Small-stage Cross-Sector operators should deploy a named compliance lead, formal AI inventory, quarterly bias spot-checks, and a documented escalation path, with semi-annual internal audit with annual external review and ownership resting with a designated AI compliance lead reporting to the CEO. small-business budgets ($50K-$250K) justify a compliance lead plus a GRC tool such as Credo AI, Fairly, or Holistic AI. For Cross-Sector specifically, the sharpest exposure to manage is cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure and state UDAP liability. Given Washington's concentration in its principal industries, core regulated activities deserve priority in your AI inventory.

The enforcement surface for Cross-Sector centres on FTC, CFPB, State Attorneys General, and the statute operators most often under-document is General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (for EU users) (EU Regulation 2016/679) — a gap that surfaces in cross-sector FTC Section 5 exposure disputes. Build an evidence binder covering AI inventory, risk-tier register, incident-response runbook, and board-level AI risk report. Treat NIST AI RMF 1.0 (Jan 2023) is cited as the federal baseline across 30+ agency guidance documents as your leading indicator and escalate when the signal shifts.

Verified 2026-07-02. See https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2157&Year=2025 for the Washington Attorney General public record on Washington AI policy.

Even without a Washington-specific AI law, federal enforcement from the FTC, EEOC, CFPB, and HHS applies to AI-driven decisions in your state. The in-force federal framework is set out below; the industry pages further down cover sector-specific obligations.

No state AI law — but this federal framework still applies in Washington

Washington has not enacted its own AI-specific statute. That does not mean AI is unregulated here: the U.S. federal framework below is in force in Washington exactly as it is in every other state. Each authority links to its official government source. This is the cross-sector baseline — see the federal AI tracker for bills moving through Congress, and the industry pages below for sector-specific obligations.

Last verified · Jul 5, 2026Sourced from official primary sources (linked below).
FTC Act Section 515 U.S.C. Section 45(a)
Enforced by Federal Trade Commission

Prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. AI-generated marketing content that deceives consumers — synthetic testimonials, undisclosed AI-created imagery, deceptive personalization, dark patterns amplified by AI — is actionable under Section 5.

Penalty exposure: Civil penalties up to $51,744 per violation (2024 CPI-adjusted); consumer redress; disgorgement; algorithmic model-deletion remedies as in the Rite Aid and Everalbum orders
EEOC Technical Assistance on AI and Title VII (May 18, 2023)EEOC, Assessing Adverse Impact in Software, Algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence Used in Employment Selection Procedures Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (May 18, 2023)
Enforced by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Applies the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures four-fifths rule to AI hiring tools. Employer is liable for discriminatory AI outputs even when the tool is built and operated by a third-party vendor.

Penalty exposure: Title VII remedies: back pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages up to $300K per claimant (employer-size tiered caps), injunctive relief, attorney fees
Enforced by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

AI hiring and performance monitoring systems must accommodate individuals with disabilities. Must not eliminate essential job functions or require unnecessary testing.

Penalty exposure: Compensatory and punitive damages; back pay; injunctive relief; up to $100,000 in civil penalties
Enforced by Federal Trade Commission; Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

AI credit and background check systems used in rental decisions must be transparent and non-discriminatory.

Penalty exposure: Actual damages or $100–$1,000 per violation; Class action liability
NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0NIST AI 100-1 (Jan 26, 2023)
Enforced by National Institute of Standards and Technology

Voluntary framework organizing AI risk into Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage functions. A manufacturing-focused profile is under development. Framework is referenced in federal-contractor expectations and in agency best-practice guidance.

Penalty exposure: Not directly enforceable; cited in regulatory actions, contract requirements, and standard-of-care determinations in tort litigation
This is a cross-sector summary, not an exhaustive list. Federal coverage evolves — always confirm current requirements against each official source above and the federal AI bill tracker.
✓ Free · No email · 2 minutes
Does your Washington business comply with AI laws?
Answer 4 quick questions → get your personalized risk score + action list.
Check My Risk — Free →
● Live

Recent AI law developments in Washington

Updated July 12, 2026

Recent news coverage of AI regulation and policy in Washington. Headlines are aggregated automatically; follow each link for the full story.

AI Law NewsFlag of Washington
Tech Times
July 11, 2026
Washington Wants Chinese AI Out of Corporate America: Open Weights Block the Ban

Coverage from Tech Times on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Washington.

Tech Times·
AI Law NewsFlag of Washington
KIRO 7 News Seattle
July 10, 2026
Local leaders push for regulation at AI House gathering

Coverage from KIRO 7 News Seattle on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Washington.

KIRO 7 News Seattle·
AI Law NewsFlag of Washington
Fortune
July 9, 2026
Microsoft’s Brad Smith on Washington’s AI policy: ‘Regulation without transparent or complete rules’

Coverage from Fortune on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Washington.

Fortune·
AI Law NewsFlag of Washington
The Washington Post
July 8, 2026
Pritzker signs landmark AI regulation bill that aims to mitigate risks

Coverage from The Washington Post on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Washington.

The Washington Post·
AI Law NewsFlag of Washington
Reuters
June 25, 2026
US lawmaker introduces bill to require AI companies to report critical incidents

Coverage from Reuters on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Washington.

Reuters·
Live · Legislature

AI bills moving through the Washington legislature

Updated July 12, 2026

AI-related bills currently tracked in the Washington legislature, updated automatically from Open States and the state legislature's own official record. Follow each link for the official bill text, sponsors, and status history.

HB 2225Concerning regulation of artificial intelligence companion chatbots.

Effective date 1/1/2027.

Open States·
HB 1170Informing users when content is developed or modified by artificial intelligence.

Effective date 2/1/2027.

Open States·
SB 5956Addressing artificial intelligence, student discipline, and surveillance in public schools.

By resolution, returned to Senate Rules Committee for third reading.

Open States·
HB 1833Creating an artificial intelligence grant program.

By resolution, returned to House Rules Committee for third reading.

Open States·
SB 5984Concerning regulation of artificial intelligence companion chatbots.

By resolution, returned to Senate Rules Committee for third reading.

Open States·
HB 2157Regulating high-risk artificial intelligence system development, deployment, and use.

House Rules "X" file.

Open States·
SB 6284Providing consumer protections for artificial intelligence systems.

Referred to Ways & Means.

Open States·
HB 1622Allowing bargaining over matters related to the use of artificial intelligence.

Referred to Rules 2 Review.

Open States·
HB 2503Regulating artificial intelligence training data.

Referred to Appropriations.

Open States·
HB 2667Providing consumer protections for artificial intelligence systems.

First reading, referred to Technology, Economic Development, & Veterans.

Open States·
SB 6299Concerning artificial intelligence and instructional staff.

First reading, referred to Early Learning & K-12 Education.

Open States·
SB 6254Leveraging artificial intelligence to improve Washington's regulatory climate through streamlining language in rules and regulatory guidance documents.

First reading, referred to State Government, Tribal Affairs & Elections.

Open States·
SB 6120Regulating high-risk artificial intelligence system development, deployment, and use.

First reading, referred to Environment, Energy & Technology.

Open States·
SB 5422Allowing bargaining over matters related to the use of artificial intelligence.

By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status.

Open States·
HB 1942Promoting the economic development of innovative uses of artificial intelligence.

By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status.

Open States·
HB 1168Increasing transparency in artificial intelligence.

Referred to Technology, Economic Development, & Veterans.

Open States·
SB 5469Prohibiting algorithmic rent fixing and noncompete agreements in the rental housing market.

Senate Rules "X" file.

Open States·
SB 5870Establishing civil liability for suicide linked to the use of artificial intelligence systems.

First reading, referred to Environment, Energy & Technology.

Open States·

Applicable laws

No comprehensive AI law — high-risk AI bill (HB 2157) died in committee; narrow measures only (companion chatbots, HB 2225; AI content disclosure, HB 1170)N/A

Washington AI compliance by industry

Healthcare
Finance & Banking
HR & Recruiting
Tech & SaaS
Marketing & Advertising
Insurance
Education
Legal Services
Real Estate
Retail & E-Commerce
Manufacturing
Transportation
Media & Entertainment
Nonprofit
Government Contractor

AI compliance by company size

Jump to top-risk sectors for your company size

Startups (1-10)
🏥 Healthcare
Small (11-50)
🏦 Finance
Mid-Market (51-500)
👥 HR & Recruiting
Enterprise (500+)
💻 Tech & SaaS

Quick resources for Washington

✅ Compliance checklist
💰 Fines & penalties
📋 Requirements
📖 Compliance guide
⏰ Deadlines

Industry risk levels in Washington

Risk by sector
🏥 HealthcareVery High
🏦 Finance & BankingVery High
💻 Tech & SaaSHigh
🛒 Retail & E-CommerceMedium-High
👔 HR & RecruitingVery High
⚖️ Legal ServicesHigh
📢 Marketing & AdvertisingMedium
🎓 EducationMedium-High
Risk levels based on Washington AI law requirements and industry-specific regulations

Do you also serve EU customers?

The EU AI Act applies to any company serving EU customers, even if you're based in Washington. Penalties reach €35M or 7% of global revenue. Deadline: August 2, 2026.

Check EU compliance →·GermanyFranceIreland

Other states with active AI laws

California
$5,000 per violation; each day is a discrete violation
Colorado
AG-enforced (Colorado Consumer Protection Act); up to ~$20,000 per violation
Illinois
IDHR/IHRC make-whole relief + tiered civil penalties up to ~$16,000–$70,000 per act per aggrieved party
Indiana
N/A (state-government governance)
Maine
Enforced as a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act
Minnesota
Up to $7,500 per violation
Check your state's risk →

Related resources

Free AssessmentHealthcare AI LawsHR & Hiring AI LawsEU AI Act
Editorial standards

Anchored to the primary government source (statute, bill text, or agency rule) and verified directly against it · Last verified Jul 2, 2026. See our methodology.

Primary sources · Washington