AI Laws in Plano, Texas
AI Laws USA tracks 42 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Plano, Texas: 10+ federal rules, 32 Texas state-level rules (no Plano-specific ordinances are indexed yet). Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, automated decision-making, AI disclosure and transparency, and government use of AI. 31 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Plano local AI rules (and Collin County)
No city- or county-specific AI ordinances are currently indexed for Plano, Texas.
- No local entries yet: we don't currently index any Plano-specific AI ordinances. Federal and Texas state rules still apply throughout the city. Have we missed something? Email feedback@ailawsusa.com.
Texas-level AI rules most relevant to Plano
32 Texas state rules apply to residents and businesses in Plano. Showing the 8 most relevant to Plano's local picture; 24 more are on the Texas jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: limited
TRAIGA
Texas · Effective January 1, 2026 · Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ch. 552; Tex. HB 149 (89th Leg., R.S., 2025), TRAIGA
Texas's AI law bans specific harmful uses of AI — intentional discrimination, behavioral manipulation encouraging self-harm or crime, social scoring by government, and certain biometric identification without consent — and requires government agencies to disclose AI interactions to consumers. It includes a regulatory sandbox and preempts local AI ordinances.
-
In effect Strength: limited
TX SB 2205 (2017 AV statute)
Texas · Effective September 1, 2017 · Tex. Transp. Code §§ 545.451–545.456
Texas's main autonomous-vehicle law explicitly authorizes AVs to operate on Texas roads without a human driver, defines the 'owner' of an automated driving system as the legal operator for liability and traffic enforcement, and preempts local AV bans. It set the framework that later allowed Waymo, Cruise, and Aurora freight to operate in Texas.
-
In effect Strength: limited
TDPSA
Texas · Effective July 1, 2024 · Tex. Bus. & Com. Code ch. 541 (HB 4, 2023)
Texans can access, correct, delete, and obtain copies of personal data held by covered businesses, and can opt out of targeted advertising, data sales, and profiling used for decisions with significant effects (like jobs, housing, or credit). Businesses must get consent for sensitive data, including biometrics.
-
In effect Strength: limited
AI Systems Code of Ethics and Minimum Risk Management and Go
Texas · Effective March 1, 2026 · AI Systems Code of Ethics and Minimum Risk Management and Governance Standards (1 TAC Chapter 219)
Under Government Code 2054.702 and SB 1964, the Texas Department of Information Resources adopted a statewide AI code of ethics built on seven principles (human oversight, fairness, accuracy, redress, transparency, privacy, security) plus minimum risk-management standards for heightened-scrutiny AI systems.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Texas A&M System Regulation 29.01.05, Artificial Intelligenc
Texas A&M University System · Effective December 10, 2024 · Texas A&M System Regulation 29.01.05, Artificial Intelligence
The Texas A&M University System's AI regulation governs all AI activities system-wide, requiring AI inventories, data classification, bias audits, safeguards against algorithmic discrimination, and academic-integrity citation rules.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
TX TDI Bulletin B-0003-26 (AI in insurance)
Texas · Effective June 12, 2026 · Texas Department of Insurance, Commissioner's Bulletin B-0003-26 (June 12, 2026)
The Texas Department of Insurance issued Commissioner's Bulletin B-0003-26 on June 12, 2026, telling insurers that decisions made with artificial intelligence must comply with Texas insurance law: AI-driven decisions may not be inaccurate, arbitrary, capricious, or unfairly discriminatory. Insurers must have a human review and approve consequential AI decisions before they take effect, maintain governance, risk-management, and audit programs for their AI systems, and keep documentation they can produce to TDI on request. TDI will police compliance through examinations and complaint monitoring.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Texas HB 3512 government AI training mandate (2025)
Texas · Effective September 1, 2025 · Tex. H.B. 3512, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025); Texas Gov't Code (Ch. 2054 or adjacent section, eff. Sept. 1, 2025)
Texas HB 3512 requires state and local government employees who use a computer as at least 25 percent of their job duties to complete annual AI awareness training, beginning in FY2026 (which starts September 1, 2025 in Texas). The Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) certifies at least five training programs. Each program must meet seven statutory standards: it must be designed for adults, cover practical use cases and examples of AI use in the workplace, define AI, be self-paced and online, take two hours or less, have no licensure requirement, and be offered at no cost. The 25 percent threshold is meaningful: it applies broadly across state agencies and political subdivisions, reaching not only IT workers but any employee whose job substantially involves a computer — administrators, case workers, clerks. The training mandate is a companion to Texas Government Code Chapter 2054 Subchapter S, already indexed as tx-ch-2054-ai-gov, which established the broader AI governance framework for state agencies requiring agency AI use inventories, responsible-use policies, and bias-risk assessments. HB 3512 adds the workforce-facing layer to that framework.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Texas v. Pieces Technologies
TX · Effective September 18, 2024 · Texas v. Pieces Technologies — Healthcare Generative AI Settlement (2024-09-18)
First state AG settlement targeting deceptive GenAI clinical marketing. Alleged Pieces misrepresented hallucination rates of a hospital summarization tool at four TX hospitals; settlement mandates accurate disclosures and monitoring. This action is an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance (AVC), not a monetary settlement; no penalty was assessed and Pieces Technologies denies wrongdoing.
Federal AI rules that apply in Plano, Texas
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Plano, Texas. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TVA data center capacity commitment charge (2026)
Tennessee Valley Authority · Effective October 1, 2026 · Tenn. Valley Auth. Bd. of Dirs. — Data Center Capacity Commitment Charge (approved Aug. 20, 2026; eff. Oct. 1, 2026)
The Tennessee Valley Authority's Board of Directors approved a separate, higher wholesale rate for data centers on August 20, 2026, effective October 1. New or expanding data center loads above 5 megawatts now fall under a Capacity Commitment Charge attached to TVA's data center rate schedules, designed to recover the incremental capacity costs those customers impose on the system. The headline figures are substantial: upfront capacity commitment charges of roughly $1.5 million per megawatt, payable over three to five years, and an all-in average billing increase for data center customers of about 10%, phased in across three consecutive fiscal years. The stated purpose is to keep residential rates low while still serving growing data center demand. TVA matters here out of proportion to a single utility. It is a federal corporate agency supplying power across seven states, so this is not a state rate case but a regional cost-allocation decision reaching a large share of the Southeast — and TVA is among the first large US utilities to adopt a tariff aimed specifically at AI-driven load. Where most 2026 measures in this dataset restrict where data centers may be built, this one changes what they pay to run.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Bartz v. Anthropic
N.D. Cal. · Effective September 5, 2025 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)
Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup ruled that training on lawfully purchased books was fair use. The piracy claims (LibGen ingestion) proceeded toward settlement; in September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement covering ~500,000 works. Judge Alsup granted preliminary approval September 25, 2025 and final approval July 20, 2026. The appeal period runs through August 19, 2026; class members will not receive payments until at least end of 2026.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)
United States · Effective June 23, 2025 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312
COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TAKE IT DOWN Act
United States · Effective May 19, 2025 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)
Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.
-
Blocked / in litigation
NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)
S.D. Ohio · Effective April 16, 2025 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 16, 2025)
Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was preliminarily enjoined on February 12, 2024, then permanently enjoined on April 16, 2025 when the district court granted summary judgment for NetChoice. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which vacated the district court's injunction in 2026.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)
D.C. Cir. · Effective March 18, 2025 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)
The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Louis v. SafeRent
D. Mass. · Effective November 20, 2024 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)
SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)
United States · Effective April 1, 2024 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017
The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC v. Rite Aid
FTC · Effective February 26, 2024 · FTC v. Rite Aid Corp., No. 2:23-cv-05023 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 19, 2023)
The FTC banned Rite Aid from using facial-recognition technology in its stores for five years after finding the pharmacy chain's FRT system falsely tagged customers — disproportionately women and people of color — as shoplifters, leading to wrongful detentions and humiliations.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TCPA (AI voice calls)
United States · Effective February 8, 2024 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17
Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.
Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Plano, Texas
Are there AI laws in Plano, Texas?
What federal AI rules apply in Plano?
Does Texas have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Texas?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Plano?
How do I report an AI law violation in Plano?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Plano?
Is Plano regulated by Texas's consumer privacy act?
Compliance guides for Texas businesses
Plain-English guides to the Texas AI and data laws companies most often need to comply with:
Texas AI law (TRAIGA) · Texas data-privacy profiling opt-out
Have we missed an AI rule in Plano?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Plano ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email feedback@ailawsusa.com or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.