Which countries require AI transparency?
Duties to tell people they are dealing with AI, to label AI-generated content, or to disclose AI use in a decision.
21 of 108 reviewed jurisdictions address this in at least one tracked instrument. Updated 2026-11-10.
Each answer cites the instrument it rests on; open it for the provision and the full analysis. Whether a rule is binding law, a bill or guidance comes from the instrument's type and status, not from wording.
“Not found” means none of the instruments we track for that jurisdiction addresses the topic. It is not a finding that no such rule exists.
Yes — binding law in force (15)
Argentina
Yes — binding law in forceOfficials must clearly disclose substantial use of generative AI in specified public-facing or decision-related content.
- Argentina - Santa Fe - AI Adoption Protocol (2726/2025), Anexo, Artículo 9° — Decree, In Force
- Argentina - Buenos Aires - AI Guidelines (4/2025), Key Focus Areas — Regulation, In Force
- Argentina - AI Regulation Framework (2505-D-2023), Artículo 7.2 — Bill, Proposed
- and 5 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
3 of 5 regions address this
- Buenos Aires ProvinceGuidance or policy only
Citizens must be clearly told when they interact with an AI-mediated system.
- Argentina - Buenos Aires - Generative AI Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- City of Buenos AiresGuidance or policy only
Public entities must tell users when an interaction is mediated by an AI tool.
- Buenos Aires AI Guidelines for the Judiciary, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-07
- JujuyNot found in the instruments we track
- Río NegroNot found in the instruments we track
- San JuanAdopted — not yet in force
Litigants must be able to know whether AI was used in their case and understand its criteria.
- San Juan Judicial Generative AI Protocol, Key Focus Areas — Regulation, Adopted
Status verified 2026-09-09
Brazil
Yes — binding law in forceExternal users must receive clear, accessible and objective information about AI used in services provided to them.
- Brazil - AI Governance in Judiciary (615/2025), Art. 33 — Regulation, In Force
- Brazil - AI Strategy Amendment (4.979/2021), INTRODUÇÃO — Decree, In Force
- Brazil - National AI Regulation (2.338/2023), Art. 5º, I — Bill, Under Review
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
China
Yes — binding law in forceProviders must tell users they are interacting with AI rather than a natural person.
- China - Anthropomorphic AI Services Regulation, 第十八条 — Regulation, In Force
- China - Generative AI Services Management, 第十二条 — Regulation, In Force
- China - AI Content Identification (RAI-CN-NA-MIASCXX-2025), 第四条 — Regulation, In Force
- and 5 more
Status verified 2026-11-02
0 of 4 regions address this
- BeijingNot found in the instruments we track
- ShanghaiNot found in the instruments we track
- ShenzhenNot found in the instruments we track
- ZhejiangNot found in the instruments we track
Germany
Yes — binding law in forceOperators of certain high-risk systems must ensure affected persons receive the explanation required by the EU AI Act.
- Germany AI Act Implementation Law, § 15 Absatz 2 — Act, In Force
- Germany - National AI Strategy Update — Policy, Adopted
Status verified 2026-09-08
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
1 of 3 regions address this
- Baden-WürttembergNot found in the instruments we track
- BavariaNot found in the instruments we track
- North Rhine-WestphaliaGuidance or policy only
The compliance checklist directs AI system operators to implement transparency measures.
- Germany - North Rhine-Westphalia - AI Strategy 2.0, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
Greece
Yes — binding law in forceThe Act establishes an obligation to inform workers about the use of AI in employment.
- Greece - Digital Governance Framework (4961/2022), Άρθρο 9 — Act, In Force
- Greece - National AI Strategy, Appendix I — Policy, Under Review
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Kazakhstan
Yes — binding law in forceUsers must be told when goods, works or services are produced or provided using AI systems.
- Kazakhstan - AI Regulation (2025), Статья 21, пункт 1 — Act, In Force (Amended)
- Kazakhstan Digital Code — Act, Adopted (from 2026-07-01)
- Kazakhstan AI Administrative Penalties Law, Article 1(10), Article 641-1(1)(1) — Act, Adopted
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-10
Latvia
Yes — binding law in forcePaid pre-election material using specified AI-generated content must be clearly and unambiguously labelled.
- Latvia - AI Use in Campaigning (2024), 3.1 pants — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Lithuania
Yes — binding law in forceProviders must give users information on AI system capabilities, limitations and safe use.
- Lithuania - AI Act Implementation (XV-106), Key Focus Areas — Act, In Force
- Lithuania - AI Development Amendments (XV-105), (134) — Act, In Force
- Lithuania - National AI Strategy Update — Policy, Adopted (from 2026-01-01)
- and 1 more
Status verified 2026-09-10
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Peru
Yes — binding law in forceDevelopers or implementers of high-risk AI must inform users beforehand about its purpose, functions and possible decisions.
- Peru - AI Regulation Implementation (115-2025), Artículo 25.1 — Decree, In Force
- Peru - AI Digital Labeling Bill (6524/2023), Artículo 4.4 — Bill, Proposed
- Peru - AI Regulation Bill (07033/2023), Artículo 7: Transparencia — Bill, Under Review
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
Philippines
Yes — binding law in forceCampaign materials using AI must carry clear disclosures, including that content was manipulated using AI.
- Philippines - AI Campaign Content Prohibition (11064/2024), Article IV, Section 2 — Regulation, In Force
- Philippines - AI Development Regulation (HB 7396), Key Focus Areas — Ethical AI Principles and Implementation — Bill, Under Review
- Philippines - National AI Research Center (HB 7983) — Bill, Under Review
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Poland
Yes — binding law in forceAffected persons must receive transparency and disclosure about AI system use.
- Poland AI Systems Act — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-10-20
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Singapore
Yes — binding law in forceCourt users must be prepared to identify AI-used portions and explain verification when the Court asks.
- Singapore - Generative AI Use in Courts (Registrar's Circular No. 1/2024), Operationally — Regulation, In Force
- Singapore - Ethical AI Advisory Council — Guideline, In Force
- Singapore - Personal Data in AI Systems, 10.3 — Guideline, In Force
- and 4 more
Status verified 2026-09-10
South Korea
Yes — binding law in forceProviders must notify users beforehand when a product or service uses high-impact or generative AI.
- South Korea AI Trust Framework Act, 제31조제1항 — Act, In Force (Amended)
- South Korea - AI Impact Assessment, Compliance Checklist — Regulation, In Force
- South Korea - Automated Decision Rights Guide — Guideline, Adopted
- and 5 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-10-20
0 of 1 regions address this
- SeoulNot found in the instruments we track
United States
Yes — binding law in forceMA organizations must disclose how AI algorithms inform clinical decisions, including their data, methodology, and potential biases.
- CMS 2024 Medicare Advantage Policy and AI Guidance, Key Focus Areas — Regulation, In Force
- FCC Rules AI Voice Calls Illegal Under TCPA, III. DISCUSSION, para. 9 — Regulation, In Force
- US National AI Policy Framework Executive Order, Sources and References — Decree, In Force
- and 10 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
32 of 50 states address this
- AlabamaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI-generated or manipulated election media must carry prominent visual or audible disclaimers.
- United States - Alabama - Deepfake Regulation (HB 172), Key Focus Areas — Act, In Force
- Alabama AI Health Coverage Act, Section 1(c)(1) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-17
- AlaskaNot found in the instruments we track
- ArizonaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Covered synthetic media messages must clearly and conspicuously disclose that they include AI-generated content.
- United States - Arizona - Deepfake Prohibition (SB 1359), A — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- ArkansasNot found in the instruments we track
- CaliforniaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Frontier developers must publish transparency reports before or when deploying new or substantially modified frontier models.
- United States - California - AI Transparency Act (SB 53), Section 22757.12(c)(1) — Act, In Force
- California AI Transparency Amendments, Section 22757.2(a) — Act, In Force (Amended)
- United States - California - AI Disclosure in Political Ads (AB 2355), Section 84514(a)(1) — Act, In Force
- and 8 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-10
- ColoradoPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Consumers must be notified when high-risk AI makes a consequential decision about them.
- Colorado AI Act Delay — Act, In Force
- United States - Colorado - Synthetic Media Disclosure (HB 24-1147), Disclosure Requirements for Synthetic Media — Act, In Force
- United States - Colorado - AI in Insurance (SB 21-169), Colorado Insurance Regulation 10-1-1 — Act, In Force (Amended)
- and 3 more
Status verified 2026-09-08
- ConnecticutPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI companion operators must disclose when a user is communicating with an AI companion if it could seem human.
- Connecticut Online Safety and AI Law, Sec. 5(b) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-10-20
- DelawareNot found in the instruments we track
- FloridaNot found in the instruments we track
- GeorgiaProposed
Operators must clearly disclose that a user is interacting with an AI companion chatbot rather than a natural person.
- Georgia SB 540 AI Companion Chatbot Safety, 39-5-6(b)(1) — Bill, Adopted (from 2027-07-01)
- United States - Georgia - AI Governance Guidelines (2024), Implementation Framework — Guideline, In Force (Amended)
Status verified 2026-09-08
- HawaiiPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Operators must clearly notify users when a conversational AI service could be mistaken for a human.
- Hawaii AI Disclosure Safety Act, §481B-__, subsection (a) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- IdahoPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Synthetic media published in electioneering communications must carry a clear and conspicuous manipulation disclosure.
- United States - Idaho - Deepfakes Regulation (HB 664) — Act, In Force
- Idaho Conversational AI Safety Act, Key Focus Areas — Bill, Awaiting Entry (from 2027-07-01)
Status verified 2026-09-07
- IllinoisPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Clients must give explicit written consent before AI is used in therapy.
- Illinois AI in Therapy Act — Act, In Force
- United States - Illinois - AI Video Interview Regulation (2019) — Act, In Force
- United States - Illinois - AI Employment Regulation (HB 3773), Key Focus Areas — Act, In Force
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
- IndianaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Insurers must clearly disclose AI use in adverse prior-authorization decisions and claim downcoding.
- Indiana AI Health Claims Law — Act, In Force
- United States - Indiana - Deepfake Regulation (HB 1133) — Act, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
- IowaNot found in the instruments we track
- KansasNot found in the instruments we track
- KentuckyNot found in the instruments we track
- LouisianaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Licensed healthcare professionals must verbally tell patients before AI-assisted recording for transcription.
- Louisiana AI Medical Transcription Disclosure, R.S. 37:22.1 — Act, In Force
- Louisiana AI Political Call Disclosure, R.S. 18:1463.1 — Act, In Force
- Louisiana AI Campaign Disclosure Act, R.S. 18:1463(H) — Bill, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- MainePartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Businesses and individuals must clearly disclose conversational AI that may be mistaken for a human in commerce.
- United States - Maine - AI Transparency Act, Title 10, §1500-DD — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- MarylandNot found in the instruments we track
- MassachusettsNot found in the instruments we track
- MichiganPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI-generated or manipulated media must carry a clear and conspicuous disclosure to fall within the statutory exception.
- United States - Michigan - Deceptive Media Prohibition (HB 5144), Michigan Election Law §168.932f — Act, In Force
- United States - Michigan - AI in Political Advertising (PA 263-266), House Bill 5141 (Public Act 263 of 2023) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-07
- MinnesotaNot found in the instruments we track
- MississippiNot found in the instruments we track
- MontanaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
A political deepfake may avoid the prohibition only if it includes the specified AI-editing disclosure.
- United States - Montana - Deepfakes Regulation (SB 25), Section 2(1)(b) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- NebraskaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Utilization review agents must disclose their use of AI-based algorithms to regulators, providers, enrollees, and the public.
- Nebraska Prior Authorization Transparency Act — Act, In Force
- Nebraska Conversational AI Safety Act — Act, Awaiting Entry (from 2027-07-01)
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
- NevadaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Covered political communications using synthetic media must carry a conspicuous manipulation disclosure.
- United States - Nevada - Deepfakes Regulation (AB 73) — Act, In Force
- New HampshirePartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
News reporting on deepfakes must acknowledge questionable authenticity to qualify for the exemption.
- United States - New Hampshire - Deepfake Regulation (HB 1432) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- New JerseyNot found in the instruments we track
- New MexicoNot found in the instruments we track
- New YorkPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Employers and agencies must notify affected candidates and employees before using an automated employment decision tool.
- United States - New York - Employment Decision Tools (LL144), § 20-871(b) — Regulation, In Force
- United States - New York - Deepfakes Regulation (Chapter 56/2024), Election Law § 14-107-a — Act, In Force
- New York Stop Deepfakes Act, Bill summary — Bill, Adopted
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
- North CarolinaGuidance or policy only
Agencies must give accessible notice to people potentially affected by AI use.
- United States - North Carolina - Responsible AI Framework, Key Focus Areas — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-17
- North DakotaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI-created or substantially altered political communications must include a clear disclosure statement.
Status verified 2026-09-08
- OhioProposed
AI-generated products must carry a distinctive watermark identifying their AI origin.
- United States - Ohio - AI Watermark Requirements (SB 217), Compliance Checklist — Bill, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- OklahomaNot found in the instruments we track
- OregonPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Campaign communications using synthetic media must include clear and conspicuous disclosures.
- United States - Oregon - Synthetic Media Disclosure (SB 1571), ORS Chapter 260 — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- PennsylvaniaNot found in the instruments we track
- Puerto RicoProposed
Agencies must assess AI systems for compliance with transparency requirements every two years.
- United States - Puerto Rico - AI Regulation (SB 68), Monitoring and Evaluation — Bill, Proposed
Status verified 2026-09-08
- Rhode IslandPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI-generated or manipulated synthetic media must carry a clear and conspicuous disclosure to qualify for the exception.
- United States - Rhode Island - Deceptive Media in Elections (S816), Chapter 17-30 — Act, In Force
- United States - Rhode Island - Deepfakes Regulation (HB 5872), Title 17, Chapter 30 — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- South CarolinaProposed
Visual and audio synthetic media using the disclosure exception must carry a specified AI-manipulation disclosure.
- United States - South Carolina - Deepfake Media Regulation (HB 3517), Section 7-25-230(C)(1) — Bill, Under Review
Status verified 2026-09-09
- South DakotaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Sets required disclosure wording and presentation standards for deepfakes as an affirmative defense.
- United States - South Dakota - Deepfake Regulation (HB 1074), Section 6 — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- TennesseePartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Deepfake political advertisements must carry clear disclosure statements tailored to audio or video.
- Tennessee Deepfake Political Ads Law, Key Focus Areas — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- TexasNot found in the instruments we track
- UtahAdopted — not yet in force
Covered providers must include latent provenance disclosures in specified AI-generated or substantially modified content.
- Utah Deepfake Ban and AI Provenance Act, Section 13-72c-203 — Act, Awaiting Entry (from 2027-01-01)
Status verified 2026-09-07
- VermontGuidance or policy only
AIS programmes should notify affected consumers that AI systems are used and provide appropriate information.
- United States - Vermont - AI in Insurance (DFR Bulletin 229), Section 3, AIS Program Guidelines, 1.9 — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-06
- VirginiaProposed
Operators must persistently disclose that the chatbot is not human and provide periodic pop-up notices.
- Virginia AI Chatbot Minor Protection Act, § 59.1-617 — Bill, Under Review
Status verified 2026-09-08
- WashingtonPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Political communications using synthetic media must clearly disclose that the media was manipulated.
- United States - Washington - Deepfakes Regulation (SB 5152), Compliance Checklist — Act, In Force
- Washington AI Content Transparency Act, Sec. 4(2) — Act, Awaiting Entry (from 2027-02-01)
- Washington AI Companion Chatbot Act, Sec. 3(1) — Act, Awaiting Entry (from 2027-01-01)
- and 2 more
Status verified 2026-09-09
- West VirginiaNot found in the instruments we track
- WisconsinPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Covered political audio and video using synthetic media must display or state prescribed AI-generated-content notices.
- United States - Wisconsin - Deepfakes Regulation (Act 123), s. 11.1303 (2m) (b) — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- WyomingNot found in the instruments we track
Vietnam
Yes — binding law in forceUsers must be told when they are interacting with an AI system unless this is obvious.
- Vietnam - Digital Technology Law (71/2025/QH15), Điều 44 — Act, In Force
- Vietnam AI Act 2025, Điều 11 khoản 1 — Act, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
0 of 1 regions address this
- Ho Chi Minh CityNot found in the instruments we track
Partly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law (4)
Canada
Partly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) lawEmployers using AI to screen, assess or select applicants must disclose its use in public job postings.
- Canada - AI and Monitoring Provisions (Bill 149), Schedule 2, s. 8.4(1) — Act, In Force
- Canada - Algorithmic Impact Assessment (2019), Section 3.3 — Policy, In Force (Amended)
- Canada - Generative AI Guidance, FASTER principles — Guideline, In Force
- and 4 more
Status verified 2026-09-08
3 of 3 regions address this
- British ColumbiaGuidance or policy only
Users must provide clear information about an AI system’s purpose, benefits, and operation.
- Canada - British Columbia - AI Responsible Use Principles, Compliance Checklist — Policy, Draft
Status verified 2026-09-10
- OntarioPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Prescribed public-sector entities using AI must provide the public information about that use.
- Canada - Ontario - Cybersecurity and AI Act (Bill 194), Schedule 1, s. 5 (2) — Act, In Force
- Canada - Ontario - AI Governance Act (Bill 194), Key Focus Areas — AI System Requirements — Act, In Force
- Canada - Ontario - AI Hiring Disclosure (2024), Schedule 2, section 8.4(1) — Act, Awaiting Entry
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
- QuebecPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Enterprises must notify individuals when a decision about them is based exclusively on automated processing.
- Canada - Quebec - Personal Information Protection (Law 25), section 12.1 — Act, In Force (Amended)
- Canada - Quebec - Responsible AI Use Guidelines, Principe de la transparence 7 — Guideline, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
France
Partly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) lawAdministrations must notify affected persons of algorithmic decision-making and provide intelligible information about the processing on request.
- France - Algorithmic Decision Rights (2017-330), Articles R.311-3-1-1 and R.311-3-1-2 CRPA — Decree, In Force
- France - Digital Republic Law (2016-1321) — Act, In Force (Amended)
- France - Biometric Recognition Bill (n°505), Article 5, III — Bill, Under Review
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Spain
Partly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) lawParticipating AI systems must be designed so their operation is sufficiently transparent to users.
- Spain - National AI Sandbox (Royal Decree 817/2023), Artículo 11.e — Decree, In Force
- Spain AI Governance Bill, Sistemas de alto riesgo — Bill, Under Review
- Spain - Basque Country - AI Strategy — Policy, In Force
- and 1 more
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
2 of 3 regions address this
- AsturiasPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
AI systems must inform people that they communicate or interact with an AI system.
- Spain - Asturias - AI Public Administration Decree (2025), artículo 3.g — Decree, In Force
- Spain - Asturias - AI Regulation (98/2025) — Decree, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- CataloniaNot found in the instruments we track
- GaliciaPartly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) law
Individuals interacting with the regional administration's AI systems have a right to information about their logic and rationale.
- Spain - Galicia - AI Regulation (2/2025), Artículo 23.1.3.º — Act, In Force
- Spain - Galicia - AI Development Law (2/2025), Artículo 23.1.a.1.º — Act, In Force (Amended)
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
United Kingdom
Partly — regional, framework or general (non-AI) lawAutomated decisions using non-sensitive personal data require notice to affected individuals.
- United Kingdom - Data Access Reform (2025) — Act, In Force
- UK Automated Software Transparency Bill — Bill, Proposed
- UK AI Assurance Guide, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- and 6 more
Status verified 2026-09-09
Adopted — not yet in force (1)
Uruguay
Adopted — not yet in forceParties must seek to ensure notice when people interact with AI rather than a human.
- Uruguay - AI and Human Rights (CETS No. 225), Article 15(2) — Regulation, Awaiting Entry
Status verified 2026-09-09
Proposed (20)
Chile
ProposedAI systems must identify themselves as artificial agents whenever they interact with people.
- Chile AI Regulation Bill, Artículo 4, numeral 4 — Bill, Under Review
- Chile - AI Development Limits (17112-19), Artículo 4 — Bill, Under Review
- Chile - AI Systems Regulation (Boletín 16821-19), Artículo 4, letra d) — Bill, Under Review
- and 5 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
Colombia
ProposedProviders must disclose system capabilities, limitations and data provenance, and label synthetic content.
- Colombia - Ethical AI Law Proposal (PL 005/2024C), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Stalled
- Colombia - AI Regulation (154/2024), Artículo 9 — Bill, Under Review
- Colombia - AI Regulation Bill (C200/2023), Artículo 10, parágrafo — Bill, Stalled
- and 3 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-10
Costa Rica
ProposedAI systems must provide clear, understandable information on how decisions and criteria are determined.
- Costa Rica AI Regulation Bill, ARTÍCULO 4(c) — Bill, Under Review
Status verified 2026-09-08
Croatia
ProposedProviders must provide user information, warnings, and disclosures of synthetic content.
- Croatia - AI Act Transposition Process (2025) — Bill, Draft
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Czech Republic
ProposedDeployers commit an offence if they fail to give an affected person a clear and meaningful explanation as required by the EU AI Act.
- Czech Republic - AI Implementation Act, § 29 odst. 6 písm. e) — Bill, Draft
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Ecuador
ProposedAI operators using personal data or making decisions about people must proactively provide accessible and clear information.
- Ecuador - AI Regulation and Promotion (2024), Artículo 16 — Bill, Under Review
Status verified 2026-09-09
Egypt
ProposedThe draft describes mandates for transparency and explainability to people affected by AI systems.
- Egypt - AI Governance Law (2024), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Draft
Status verified 2026-09-08
Finland
ProposedDeployers must provide transparency and labelling for AI-generated content.
- Finland - AI Regulation Implementation (HE 46/2025), Compliance Checklist FI-AI-REG-05 — Bill, In Force
- Finland - Human-Centric AI Programme, Compliance Checklist — Policy, Adopted
- Finland - AI Impact on Work (21/2018), Compliance Checklist — Policy, Adopted
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-10
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
0 of 1 regions address this
- HelsinkiNot found in the instruments we track
India
ProposedDevelopers must disclose AI purposes, limitations, training data and methodologies, and reasons for impactful decisions.
- India AI Ethics and Accountability Bill, section 6(a) — Bill, Proposed
- India - AI Governance Guidelines (2025), Part 1, Understandable by Design — Guideline, In Force
- India - Responsible AI Summit — Policy, Adopted (from 2020-10-05)
Status verified 2026-09-09
0 of 4 regions address this
- KarnatakaNot found in the instruments we track
- MaharashtraNot found in the instruments we track
- Tamil NaduNot found in the instruments we track
- TelanganaNot found in the instruments we track
Indonesia
ProposedCertain AI systems require user-facing disclosures and documentation.
- Indonesia - National AI Regulation, Key Focus Areas — Decree, Draft
- Indonesia - AI Governance for Banking, Key Focus Areas — Transparency and explainability — Guideline, In Force
- Indonesia - Ethical Guidelines for AI, Implementation Framework — Guideline, Draft
- and 2 more
Status verified 2026-09-08
Mexico
ProposedEntities must notify people of AI decisions affecting them and provide explanation and contestation channels.
- Mexico - Federal AI Legislative Initiatives — Bill, Under Review
- Mexico - Protect Dubbing Actors (2025) — Bill, Proposed
- Mexico - AI Development Guidelines (2018), Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
Morocco
ProposedEntities must provide transparency about automated decisions affecting individuals.
- Morocco - National AI Governance Bill (2024), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Proposed
Status verified 2026-09-07
0 of 1 regions address this
- Casablanca-SettatNot found in the instruments we track
Nigeria
ProposedOperators must maintain model documentation and provide user-facing warnings for synthetic content and automated decisions.
- Nigeria - AI Technology Control (HB 942) — Bill, Under Review
- Nigeria - AI Code of Practice (2025), Key Focus Areas — Regulation, Draft
- Nigeria - National AI Policy — Policy, Draft
- and 2 more
Status verified 2026-09-09
Norway
ProposedLimited-risk systems must inform users when they interact with AI and disclose purpose and limitations.
- Norway - AI Regulation (2026), Compliance Checklist — Bill, Draft
- Norway - AI Regulatory Sandbox, Participation requirements (unnumbered) — Guideline, In Force
- Norway - National AI Strategy — Policy, Adopted (from 2020-01-14)
Status verified 2026-09-10
Panama
ProposedIt describes transparency requirements making AI systems understandable and their decisions explainable.
- Panama - AI Regulation (Bill No. 14), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Under Review
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Romania
ProposedBroadcasters and distributors must give visible and audible notices that deepfake content is artificially generated or manipulated.
- Romania - Responsible Technology Use (PL-x 471/2023) — Bill, Under Review
- Romania - National AI Strategy, CAPITOLUL 2, secțiunea 2.3 — Policy, Adopted
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Slovakia
ProposedIndividuals must be notified where automated decisions significantly affect them.
- Slovakia - AI Governance Bill (LP/2025/401), Penalties, Liability, and Appeals — Bill, Under Review
- Slovakia - AI State Administration Act (RAI-SK-NA-DOSAFXX-2025), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Under Review
- Slovakia - AI in Education Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-10
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Thailand
ProposedIt mandates disclosures to end-users and affected people about synthetic content and automated decisions.
- Thailand - AI Business Operations (2022), Key Focus Areas — Decree, Draft
- Thailand - AI Ethics Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, Adopted
- Thailand - AI Risk Management Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, Draft
- and 2 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
Turkey
ProposedProviders must clearly and persistently label AI-generated content.
- Turkey - AI Law Amendments (Esas No. 2/3358), Key Focus Areas — Bill, Under Review
- Turkey - AI Regulation Bill (2/2234), MADDE 3 — Bill, Under Review
- Turkey - AI in Education Policy, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
- and 4 more
Status verified 2026-09-09
Uzbekistan
ProposedUploaders must label all information resources created using AI.
- Uzbekistan - AI Regulation (2025) — Bill, Proposed
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-10
Guidance or policy only (31)
Australia
Guidance or policy onlyCovered Commonwealth entities must publish public, plain-language statements disclosing their AI use, purposes and safeguards.
- Australia - AI Transparency Standard (RAI-AU-NA-AITRSTX-2024), Implementation Framework — Standard, In Force
- Australia - AI Governance Standard, Definitions — Standard, In Force
- Australia - AI Policy Update, Practical impact — Policy, In Force
- and 6 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
3 of 7 regions address this
- Australian Capital TerritoryGuidance or policy only
It calls for transparency and disclosure so people understand when they interact with AI and its impacts.
- Australia - Australian Capital Territory - AI Policy (2025), Key Focus Areas — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- New South WalesNot found in the instruments we track
- Northern TerritoryNot found in the instruments we track
- QueenslandGuidance or policy only
Agencies must be open about their AI use, including algorithms used to inform government decisions.
- Australia - Queensland - AI Governance Policy (RAI-AU-QL-ARTINGO-2024), Transparency and Accountability — Policy, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
- TasmaniaNot found in the instruments we track
- VictoriaGuidance or policy only
Public offices must disclose AI interactions and significant AI impacts to affected individuals.
- Australia - Victoria - AI Recordkeeping Policy (RAI-AU-VI-AIATRXX-2024), Key Focus Areas — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
- Western AustraliaNot found in the instruments we track
Austria
Guidance or policy onlyProviders and platforms are instructed to use user-facing labels or notifications indicating AI involvement.
- Austria - AI Measures Package, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Belgium
Guidance or policy onlyIt encourages public administrations to adopt transparency measures for public-facing AI.
- Belgium - National AI Coalition, Implementation Framework — Policy, Adopted (from 2019-03-01)
- Belgium - AI for Common Good — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Cyprus
Guidance or policy onlyIt requires user-facing disclosures for high-risk and GPAI systems.
- Cyprus - AI Regulation Implementation (2024/1689), Key Focus Areas (4) — Policy, Adopted (from 2024-11-06)
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Denmark
Guidance or policy onlyThe cited non-binding AI ethics guidelines describe transparency as informing people they interact with an AI system.
- Denmark - AI Regulation Supplement (Law No. 467/2025), Recital (27) — Act, In Force
- Denmark - National AI Taskforce, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
- Denmark - AI Regulatory Sandbox — Guideline, In Force
- and 1 more
Status verified 2026-09-08
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Estonia
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends transparency for public bodies' automated processes and contestable AI-assisted decisions.
- Estonia - AI Expert Group Report (2019), Compliance Checklist — Policy, Adopted
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Ghana
Guidance or policy onlyOrganizations must implement disclosure and transparency mechanisms for AI systems.
- Ghana - Ethical AI Readiness Assessment (RAI-GH-NA-RAMREXX-2024), Implementation Framework — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-06
Hong Kong
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends tamper-proof identifiers for high-risk generative outputs such as deepfakes.
- Hong Kong - AI Development Guidelines (2025), Implementation Framework — Guideline, In Force
- Hong Kong - Ethical AI Framework, Section 4.1.5.2 — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
Iceland
Guidance or policy onlyThe compliance checklist requires AI systems to provide appropriate transparency to users.
- Iceland AI Action Plan, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
Ireland
Guidance or policy onlyIt states that AI must be developed and used with transparency and accountability.
- Ireland - National AI Strategy, Section 1.1, “Introduction” — Policy, Adopted (from 2021-07-08)
- Ireland - Responsible AI Use Guidelines, Chapter 8, Recommendations for GenAI End-Users — Guideline, In Force
- Ireland - AI Act Implementation Roadmap, Compliance Checklist, IE-GPAI-1 — Policy, Adopted
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Israel
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends meaningful notice when people interact with AI and documentation of system capabilities and limitations.
- Israel - AI Regulation and Ethics, Key Focus Areas — Policy, Adopted (from 2023-12-14)
- Israel - Algorithmic Processing Guidance, Overview — Guideline, In Force
- Israel - AI Policy Principles, Compliance Checklist — Policy, Draft
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
Italy
Guidance or policy onlySynthetic AI-generated content, especially deepfakes, must be clearly labelled.
- Italy - AI Adoption Guidelines, §7.1 — Guideline, Draft
- Italy - Digital Transformation Plan, Capitolo 5, Principi generali per l’utilizzo dell’intelligen — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
1 of 2 regions address this
- Emilia-RomagnaGuidance or policy only
AI solutions supported by the Hub must comply with listed transparency-focused legal requirements.
- Italy - Emilia-Romagna - AI Regional Hub — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
- LombardyNot found in the instruments we track
Japan
Guidance or policy onlyOrganizations should make disclosures about AI use meaningful, proportionate to risk, and audience-adapted.
- Japan - AI Utilization Guidelines, Key Focus Areas (8) — Guideline, Adopted (from 2019-08-09)
- Japan - Human-Centric AI Principles, 4.1(6) The Principle of Fairness, Accountability, and Transp — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-10
Kenya
Guidance or policy onlyThe Code recommends transparency measures, including model cards or summaries for stakeholders and end users.
- Kenya - AI Code of Practice (DKS 3007:2024), Compliance Checklist — Standard, Adopted (from 2024-09-30)
- Kenya - Media Reporting Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, Adopted
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
Lebanon
Guidance or policy onlyThe checklist calls for transparency in AI decisions, particularly in public-facing or critical applications.
- Lebanon - AI Initiative, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
Luxembourg
Guidance or policy onlySchools must provide student-facing guidance on transparent use of AI-generated content.
- Luxembourg - AI in Schools Guidelines, Implementation requirements — Policy, Draft
Status verified 2026-09-07
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Malaysia
Guidance or policy onlyOperators must provide transparency notices to affected people for automated decisions.
- Malaysia National AI Action Plan 2030 — Policy, In Force
- Malaysia - National AI Roadmap, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
- Malaysia - National AI Coordination, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-08
Malta
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends documentation, model cards and user notices for transparency and explicability.
- Malta - Ethical AI Framework, Compliance Checklist — Guideline, Adopted (from 2019-10-03)
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Netherlands
Guidance or policy onlyControllers must disclose profiling or automated decision-making and sometimes provide information about the algorithm’s logic and effects.
- Netherlands - AI Oversight Guidelines, 3.1 Rechtmatigheid, behoorlijkheid en transparantie — Guideline, In Force
- Netherlands - AI and Human Rights (2019), staged approach / government use of AI — Policy, Adopted
- Netherlands - Response to AI White Paper, Compliance Checklist — Policy, Adopted
- and 7 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
0 of 1 regions address this
- AmsterdamNot found in the instruments we track
New Zealand
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends publishing plain-language statements about AI use, data practices and redress.
- New Zealand - AI Privacy Guidance, Implementation Framework — Guideline, In Force
- New Zealand - Algorithm Use Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- New Zealand - AI Strategy (2025), Governance and Institutional Framework — Policy, Adopted (from 2025-07-08)
- and 3 more
Status verified 2026-09-06
Pakistan
Guidance or policy onlyIt mandates disclosure of public-sector automated decision-making and public-facing AI systems.
- Pakistan - National AI Policy (2025) — Policy, Adopted (from 2025-07-30)
Status verified 2026-09-09
Portugal
Guidance or policy onlyIt calls for explainable algorithms that provide understandable explanations of decisions.
- Portugal - Digital Human Rights (27/2021), THE USE OF TECHNOLOGIES AS A WAY OF DISCRIMINATION — Act, In Force (Amended)
- Portugal - Ethical AI in Public Administration, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
As an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Qatar
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends explainability measures, including disclosures to users and model cards.
- Qatar - AI Security Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- Qatar - AI Guidelines for Banks, Operational requirements — Guideline, In Force
1 of 1 regions address this
- DohaGuidance or policy only
Firms must notify customers of AI interactions and explain AI-driven decisions directly affecting them.
- Qatar - AI Guidelines for Finance (2024), Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
Russia
Guidance or policy onlyIt encourages informing users when they interact with AI in rights-affecting or critical life areas.
- Russia - AI Ethics Guidelines (2021), Section I, 2.5 — Guideline, Adopted (from 2021-10-26)
Status verified 2026-09-09
0 of 1 regions address this
- MoscowNot found in the instruments we track
Saudi Arabia
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends model factsheets and notices for users.
- Saudi Arabia - AI Adoption Framework, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- Saudi Arabia - Deepfakes Guidelines, 6.3.3 — Guideline, Draft
- Saudi Arabia - Generative AI Guidelines, Core elements — Guideline, In Force
- and 1 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Senegal
Guidance or policy onlyAI system operators are instructed to implement disclosure mechanisms.
- Senegal - National AI Development Strategy, Transparency — Policy, Adopted (from 2023-09-01)
Status verified 2026-09-09
Serbia
Guidance or policy onlyUsers must be told when they are interacting with an AI system and may request a human.
- Serbia - Ethical AI Guidelines, 4.4.2 Recommendations – Communication — Guideline, Adopted (from 2023-03-23)
Status verified 2026-09-09
Switzerland
Guidance or policy onlyStaff should disclose use of AI tools and document reliance on AI-generated content where appropriate.
- Switzerland - Generative AI Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- Switzerland - AI Guidelines, Anhang 2 II – Informationspflicht bei einer automatisierten — Guideline, Adopted (from 2020-11-25)
Status verified 2026-09-09
Taiwan
Guidance or policy onlyTransparency and explainability are principles advocating disclosure and labelling of AI outputs.
- Taiwan AI Basic Act — Act, In Force
- Taiwan - Smart City AI Initiative, Implementation Framework — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
1 of 1 regions address this
- KaohsiungGuidance or policy only
High-risk AI products or systems must carry clear notices or warnings.
- Taiwan - Kaohsiung - Smart Lighthouse AI Program, Penalties, Liability, and Appeals — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
Ukraine
Guidance or policy onlyAI-generated or significantly AI-modified advertising must be clearly labelled for consumers.
- Ukraine - Responsible AI in Advertising, Key Focus Areas — Transparency and Disclosure — Guideline, In Force
- Ukraine - Responsible AI Use in Media, Definitions — Transparency and Clarity — Guideline, In Force
- Ukraine - AI Regulation White Paper, Compliance Checklist — Policy, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
United Arab Emirates
Guidance or policy onlyIt recommends user notices and decision summaries for AI-informed decisions.
- United Arab Emirates - AI Ethics Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
- UAE AI Development and Use Charter, Key Focus Areas — Policy, In Force
- United Arab Emirates - Deepfake Awareness Guide — Guideline, In Force
- and 1 more
Status verified 2026-09-07
1 of 1 regions address this
- DubaiGuidance or policy only
AI-system decisions must be understandable and auditable by non-technical stakeholders.
- United Arab Emirates - Dubai - AI Certification Framework, Key Focus Areas — Policy, In Force
- United Arab Emirates - Dubai - Ethical AI Guidelines, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
Not found in the instruments we track (14)
Bahrain
Not found in the instruments we trackBangladesh
Not found in the instruments we trackBulgaria
Not found in the instruments we trackAs an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Côte d'Ivoire
Not found in the instruments we trackEthiopia
Not found in the instruments we trackHungary
Not found in the instruments we trackAs an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Iran
Not found in the instruments we trackIraq
Not found in the instruments we trackMaldives
Not found in the instruments we trackRwanda
Not found in the instruments we trackSlovenia
Not found in the instruments we trackAs an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
South Africa
Not found in the instruments we trackSweden
Not found in the instruments we trackAs an EU member state, the EU AI Act also applies here.
Tunisia
Not found in the instruments we track
International organisations (23)
African Union
Not found in the instruments we trackAPEC
Not found in the instruments we trackASEAN
Guidance or policy onlyOrganizations are advised to make AI systems transparent, explainable and understandable to stakeholders.
- ASEAN AI Governance Guide, Compliance Checklist — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-07
BRICS
Not found in the instruments we trackCouncil of Europe
Not found in the instruments we trackEuropean Union
Yes — binding law in forceProviders of pre-existing synthetic-content AI systems must take steps to comply with the referenced transparency rule.
- Digital Omnibus on AI, Article 111(4) amendment — Regulation, In Force
- EU AI Act, Article 26(11) — Regulation, In Force (Amended)
- European Union - AI Act Implementation — Policy, In Force
- and 9 more
A possible change to a cited instrument is not yet verified.
Status verified 2026-09-11
G7
Guidance or policy onlyIt encourages platforms to clearly label AI-generated content.
- G7 Hiroshima AI Process, Content Authentication, Watermarking, and Disinformation — Policy, Adopted (from 2023-12-01)
Status verified 2026-09-09
GPAI
Not found in the instruments we trackIAEA
Not found in the instruments we trackICAO
Not found in the instruments we trackIEEE
Guidance or policy onlyAutonomous systems must provide stakeholder-tailored explanations, including simplified explanations for end users.
- IEEE Transparency of Autonomous Systems Standard, Key Provisions — Standard, In Force
- IEEE CertifAIEd Ethics Certification Program, Key Focus Areas — Standard, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
ILO
Guidance or policy onlyWorkers must be informed when interacting with AI or when algorithms monitor their performance.
- ILO Work for a Brighter Future Report, Key Provisions — Policy, Adopted (from 2019-01-22)
Status verified 2026-09-09
Interpol
Not found in the instruments we trackISO
Guidance or policy onlyIt directs organizations to disclose context-level transparency information about AI systems.
- ISO AI Transparency Taxonomy — Standard, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-09
ITU
Not found in the instruments we trackNATO
Not found in the instruments we trackOAS
Not found in the instruments we trackOECD
Guidance or policy onlyAI actors should inform stakeholders when they interact with AI systems.
- OECD AI Principles, Section 1, 1.3 — Guideline, In Force (Amended)
Status verified 2026-09-07
UNESCO
Guidance or policy onlyPeople must be informed when interacting with AI and affected people must be able to understand AI decision logic.
- UNESCO AI Ethics Recommendation, Key Provisions and Principles — Guideline, In Force
Status verified 2026-09-08
United Nations
Guidance or policy onlyIt calls on companies and developers to counter AI-content harms using measures including identification, labelling and watermarking.
- UN Global Digital Compact, Objective 3, para. 36 (c) — Policy, Adopted
- UN Ethical AI Principles for the UN System, Key Focus Areas — Guideline, Adopted (from 2022-09-01)
Status verified 2026-09-09
WHO
Not found in the instruments we trackWorld Bank
Not found in the instruments we trackWorld Economic Forum
Not found in the instruments we track