California Political Ad AI Disclaimer (AB 2355)
Effective date
Penalty
Existing Political Reform Act penalties.
Obligations mapped
Tracked
Overview
Requires disclaimers on AI-generated political advertisements created by political committees. Unlike AB 2839 (struck down), this narrower bill limited to political committee ads has not been challenged.
This is an AI-specific state law.
See if this regulation applies to your company with the free exposure scan.
Who this applies to
This regulation applies to the following roles:
- Developers of covered AI systems
- Deployers and users of covered AI systems
- Organizations operating in California
This regulation applies to both companies that build AI products and companies that use AI tools from other vendors.
AB 2355
AI categories covered
- Consumer-facing AI
- General purpose AI
Specific AI use cases:
- Content generation
- synthetic media manipulation
- voice likeness synthesis
- political synthetic media
What this requires you to do
Detailed obligation packs are not yet mapped for this entry in XIRA. Obligation areas from the catalog are listed below.
What this requires you to do
Disclosure to users required
Disclose AI use. Make it clear to users when they are interacting with AI-generated content or AI-driven systems.
Transparency notice required
Provide transparency notices. Inform affected individuals that AI is being used and how it influences decisions.
Regulation summaries are simplified for readability and may not capture every nuance of the underlying statute. Verify important details against primary sources linked on this page.
Enforcement and penalties
Existing Political Reform Act penalties.
Penalty amounts are based on statutory text and may be subject to adjustment, judicial interpretation, or enforcement discretion.
Legislative history
effective
Takes effect
Related regulations
- Struck DownAI-Specific
California Election Deepfake Prohibition (AB 2839)
Prohibited distribution of materially deceptive AI-generated content in election advertising within specified timeframes. Struck down by federal court on First Amendment grounds in August 2025. Appeal pending in 9th Circuit.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
Washington Election Deepfake Disclosure (SB 6280)
Requires clear and conspicuous disclosure when AI-generated or AI-manipulated media is used in political advertising or communications. One of the first state laws specifically targeting deepfakes in elections.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
Indiana Election Deepfake Disclosure (HB 1133)
Requires disclosure when AI-generated synthetic media is used in political campaign communications in Indiana.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
Oregon Election Deepfake Disclosure (SB 1571)
Requires disclosure statement on political communications containing synthetic media in Oregon elections.
Effective
- UpcomingAI-Specific
California AI Transparency Act (SB 942)
The California AI Transparency Act requires creators of large generative AI systems to provide free AI detection tools, embed provenance metadata in AI-generated content, and offer visible disclosure options. Large platforms must detect and preserve provenance data.
Effective
- UpcomingPrivacy ADM
CCPA/CPRA Automated Decision-Making Technology Regulations
California's ADMT regulations require businesses using automated decisionmaking technology for significant decisions (employment, finance, housing, education, healthcare) to provide pre-use notices, offer opt-out rights, respond to access requests, and conduct risk assessments with annual CPPA filing under penalty of perjury.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California Transparency in Frontier AI Act (SB 53)
Requires developers of frontier AI models trained above the statutory compute threshold (10^26 FLOPs) to publish safety frameworks, report critical safety incidents to the Office of Emergency Services, and implement whistleblower protections. Also reaches large frontier developers with annual revenues over $500 million. Replaces the vetoed SB 1047 with a narrower transparency approach. Currently applies to approximately five to eight companies worldwide given the FLOP threshold. Includes a federal deference provision: compliance with comparable federal standards, including the EU AI Act, is accepted where the statute allows.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California AI Training Data Transparency Act (AB 2013)
Requires developers of generative AI systems or services available to Californians to publish high-level documentation on training data, including sources, types, and curation. Applies retroactively to systems released on or after January 1, 2022. No trade secret exemption. Internal development or material modification of third-party GenAI can be in scope. xAI challenged the law in federal court; on March 4, 2026 the court denied a preliminary injunction, so AB 2013 remains in full effect while litigation continues. Major providers published required documentation by January 1, 2026.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California Healthcare Provider Generative AI Disclosure (AB 3030)
Requires healthcare providers to disclose when generative AI is used in patient interactions and to document that use in the patient record. Focuses on licensed providers and clinical settings. AB 489 (2025) later extended parallel transparency duties to developers and deployers of healthcare AI, not only providers.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California Healthcare AI Deceptive Terms Act (AB 489)
AB 3030 (2024) requires healthcare providers to disclose generative AI use to patients and in records. AB 489 (2025) extends similar duties to technology developers and deployers whose healthcare AI communicates with patients or presents as credentialed care. It bars false claims of professional licenses or credentials and requires clear disclosures in healthcare settings.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California FEHA regulations on automated decision systems (Civil Rights Council)
California Civil Rights Council regulations apply FEHA's anti-discrimination framework to automated decision systems (ADS) in employment. Defines ADS broadly to include AI, ML, and algorithmic tools. Makes anti-bias testing evidence relevant to discrimination claims and defenses. Requires reasonable accommodation when ADS disadvantages disabled or religious individuals. Prohibits pre-offer medical inquiries via ADS. Employers with 5+ employees are covered. 4-year record retention required.
Effective
- In EffectAI-Specific
California Companion Chatbots Act (SB 243)
California's Companion Chatbot Act may apply to operators of AI chatbots designed for ongoing social interaction. Where applicable, operators may need to disclose the AI nature of the chatbot, maintain safety protocols for self-harm and suicide content, provide crisis referrals, and implement special protections for minors including break reminders and content restrictions. Operators may need to publish safety protocols and file annual reports with the Office of Suicide Prevention starting July 2027.
Effective
California AI regulation guide lists every tracked rule for this jurisdiction with timelines and obligation tallies.
Regulation summaries are simplified for readability and may not capture every nuance of the underlying statute. Verify important details against primary sources linked on this page.