Loading…
Loading…
Super Intelligence definition proposal due (60 days) · Nov 28, 2026 · See what changes
AI Regulation Reference
31 laws tracked across the EU, US federal government, US states, UK, and international bodies — filtered and explained for small teams.
Showing 9 of 31 laws
A voluntary framework from the National Institute of Standards and Technology helping organizations manage AI risks. Organized around four functions: Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage. Widely used as a reference framework in the US, and written into state law as a benchmark: Texas TRAIGA gives an affirmative defense to organizations that substantially comply with the NIST AI RMF (including its Generative AI Profile) or another recognized framework.
Effective: January 26, 2023
Revoked the Biden AI Executive Order (EO 14110) and directed federal agencies to prioritize AI development, emphasizing US competitiveness. Directed development of a national AI action plan within 180 days. A follow-on order signed December 11, 2025, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence, directs federal agencies to challenge or deter state AI laws, including through an AI Litigation Task Force.
Effective: January 23, 2025
A presidential order signed September 29, 2026 that directs federal executive departments and agencies to use the terms Super Intelligence and SI instead of artificial intelligence and AI in official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports and policy documents. For now the new term is defined by reference to the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). Within 60 days the assistant to the president for science and technology must submit proposed legislative language for a federal definition of Super Intelligence, including whether it should modify or supersede the current legal definition of AI. Previously issued regulations, contracts and grants do not have to be rewritten. The order creates no enforceable rights.
Effective: September 29, 2026
A non-binding White House document, released March 20, 2026, that sets out legislative recommendations for Congress on federal AI policy. Its priorities include protecting children and empowering parents, preempting unduly burdensome state AI regulation, channeling oversight through existing sector-specific agencies and industry-led standards, community protections, free speech, innovation and workforce readiness. It does not create legal obligations.
The Federal Trade Commission applies existing consumer protection law — the FTC Act's prohibition on unfair or deceptive acts — to AI products and services. Operation AI Comply (September 2024) brought simultaneous actions against five companies for deceptive AI product claims, fake AI-generated reviews, and AI-enabled fraud. The FTC has made clear that 'AI washing' — overstating AI capabilities — is an enforcement priority.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued technical assistance on May 18, 2023 explaining how Title VII disparate impact analysis applies to software, algorithms and AI used in hiring, promotion and performance management. The EEOC removed its AI guidance documents from its website on January 27, 2025. Technical assistance was never law: Title VII itself still applies, and the EEOC's 2024-2028 Strategic Enforcement Plan still lists technology-related employment discrimination as a priority.
In 2022 the CFPB issued Circular 2022-03, saying lenders must give specific, accurate reasons for adverse action even when a complex algorithm made the decision. The CFPB withdrew that circular on May 12, 2025 with 66 other guidance documents. The underlying rule still applies: ECOA and Regulation B require specific reasons in an adverse action notice, so 'the model said no' is not enough. Separately, a final rule published April 22, 2026 and effective July 21, 2026 amended Regulation B so that ECOA no longer supports disparate-impact liability.
The FDA regulates AI and machine learning software that meets the definition of a medical device (Software as a Medical Device, or SaMD). Its January 2021 AI/ML action plan led to guidance on pre-market review and on predetermined change control plans (PCCPs). The FDA finalized its PCCP guidance for AI-enabled device software functions on December 4, 2024, letting manufacturers pre-authorize planned modifications as part of a 510(k), De Novo or PMA submission instead of filing a new one for each change.
Effective: January 13, 2021
The SEC has no AI-specific disclosure rule. It applies existing antifraud, disclosure and marketing rules to AI claims and has brought 'AI washing' cases: in March 2024 it charged two investment advisers, Delphia (USA) Inc. (a $225,000 penalty) and Global Predictions Inc. ($175,000), for false statements about their use of AI, and in January 2025 it charged Presto Automation Inc., its first AI-washing case against a public company. Public companies must accurately disclose material AI risks and capabilities under existing rules.
Status guide
Unfamiliar terms?
Conformity assessment, GPAI model, high-risk AI — all defined in plain English.
Browse the glossary →