U.S. AI Laws: insurance AI
As of 2026-08-12, AI Laws USA tracks 49 U.S. AI rules on insurance AI across federal, state, county, and city government. Each entry links to its official source.
Federal insurance AI rules (3)
-
Blocked / in litigation
Huskey v. State Farm
N.D. Ill. · Effective 2022-12-14 · Huskey v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., No. 1:22-cv-07014 (N.D. Ill.)
Black homeowners sued State Farm in 2022, alleging the insurer's claims-handling AI subjected them to greater scrutiny — more documentation requests, more delays, and higher denial rates — than white homeowners. One of the leading insurance-AI disparate-treatment cases.
-
Proposed / pending
NAIC AI Evaluation Tool Pilot (12 states, 2026)
United States · Effective 2026-03-02 · NAIC Big Data and AI (H) Working Group — AI Systems Evaluation Tool Pilot (launched March 2, 2026)
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners launched a 12-state pilot program in March 2026 to test a new 'AI Systems Evaluation Tool' — a standardized framework giving insurance examiners a structured method to assess how insurance companies govern their AI systems during market conduct and financial examinations. The 12 participating states are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. The tool requires insurers to complete four exhibits: one quantifying AI usage, one assessing governance risk, one detailing high-risk AI systems, and one documenting AI data practices. The pilot runs through September 2026, with tool updates through October 2026 and formal NAIC adoption expected at the Fall National Meeting in November 2026.
-
In effect
NAIC AI Model Bulletin (Insurance)
United States · Effective 2023-12-04 · NAIC Model Bulletin: Use of AI Systems (Dec. 4, 2023); NAIC Impl. Map (Apr. 2025)
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners adopted a Model Bulletin in December 2023 directing insurers to govern their AI responsibly — documenting AI systems, testing for bias, and overseeing third-party AI vendors. As of early 2026, over half of U.S. states and D.C. have adopted the bulletin through their own state insurance departments, making it the broadest AI governance standard in the insurance sector. It is not a federal law and has no penalties on its own, but state commissioners use it as a market-conduct examination standard.
State insurance AI rules (45)
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Illinois SB 3114 — Transparency in Downcoding Act
Illinois · Effective 2028-01-01 · Illinois PA 104-0568 (SB 3114), signed July 10, 2026; effective January 1, 2028 (Transparency in Downcoding Act)
Illinois Senate Bill 3114, the Transparency in Downcoding Act (Public Act 104-0568), signed by Governor Pritzker on July 10, 2026, prohibits health insurers from using any automated process, system, or tool — including artificial intelligence — as the sole basis for downcoding a medical claim based on medical necessity, unless a human employee or contractor has first reviewed the covered individual's medical record. The law also imposes a parallel obligation on health care providers, prohibiting providers from using AI to submit a health benefits claim without review by a provider or other person involved in developing the claim. Insurers must provide a clear explanation when downcoding, including the rationale and the coding changes applied. Downcoding cannot be based solely on diagnosis codes or targeted at providers who treat complex patients. The Act is effective January 1, 2028.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Georgia SB 544 (health insurer AI)
Georgia · Effective 2027-01-01 · Ga. SB 544 (2026), signed May 5, 2026, eff. Jan. 1, 2027
Georgia's SB 544, signed May 5, 2026 and effective January 1, 2027, lets health insurers use AI in the prior-authorization process to automate tasks and assist decision-making, but bars them from issuing an adverse determination (a denial) without the review and approval of a licensed health care provider. In short: AI can help, but a licensed human has to sign off before your care is denied.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Utah SB 319 (health insurer AI)
Utah · Effective 2027-01-01 · Utah SB 319 (2026), enacted March 19, 2026, eff. Jan. 1, 2027
Utah's SB 319, enacted March 19, 2026 and effective January 1, 2027, requires health insurers to disclose to the Utah Insurance Department, to providers, and to enrollees whether AI is used to review prior-authorization requests. It also requires that a health professional's adverse determination be based on their own independent medical judgment — not dictated by an AI recommendation.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Iowa HF 2635 (no AI-only prior-auth denials)
Iowa · Effective 2027-01-01 · Iowa H.F. 2635, 91st Gen. Assemb. (2026), Sec. 514F.8(2A), eff. Jan. 1, 2027
Iowa lets a utilization review organization use an AI-based algorithm or system to conduct an initial review of a prior-authorization request, but forbids relying on AI as the sole basis to deny, delay, or downgrade a medical-necessity prior-authorization request. A qualified human reviewer — a clinical peer or qualified reviewer — must make the binding determination.
-
In effect
Indiana HB 1271 (AI claims downcoding)
Indiana · Effective 2026-07-01 · Ind. HB 1271 (2026), enacted March 4, 2026, eff. July 1, 2026
Indiana's HB 1271, enacted March 4, 2026 and effective July 1, 2026, bars health insurers from using AI tools as the sole basis to 'downcode' a claim (reduce it to a cheaper billing code) without a health professional reviewing the patient's medical record. It also bars health care providers from using AI to submit claims without a review by the provider or a billing professional. Unlike most 2026 health-AI laws, it is not limited to prior authorization.
-
In effect
AZ HB 2175 (AI Insurance Denial — Physician Review)
Arizona · Effective 2026-07-01 · Ariz. HB 2175 (57th Leg., 1st R.S. 2025), signed May 12, 2025, eff. July 1, 2026
Arizona HB 2175 requires health insurers and managed-care organizations to have a licensed physician or medical director individually review each case before denying a health insurance claim or prior-authorization request based on medical necessity or experimental status. Insurers may not rely solely on AI algorithms, automated decision-support tools, or algorithmic recommendations to deny coverage. The law directly targets automated prior-authorization systems that issue denials without physician involvement. Signed May 12, 2025, effective July 1, 2026. Arizona is among the first states to specifically prohibit AI-only health insurance denials by statute.
-
In effect
TX TDI Bulletin B-0003-26 (AI in insurance)
Texas · Effective 2026-06-12 · 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
Maryland HB 820 (AI in insurance utilization review)
Maryland · Effective 2025-10-01 · 2025 Md. Laws ch. 747 (HB 820); Md. Code, Ins. 15-10A-06, 15-10B-05.1
When a Maryland carrier, pharmacy benefits manager, or private review agent uses artificial intelligence or an algorithm in utilization review, the tool's determinations must be based on the individual patient's clinical history, not solely on a group dataset. The AI may not replace the role of the reviewing provider, must not result in unfair discrimination, must remain open to audit, and may not deny, delay, or modify care in a way that harms enrollees. Carriers must report to the Insurance Commissioner quarterly on adverse decisions, including whether AI was used.
-
In effect
SB 1120 (CA Physicians Make Decisions Act)
California · Effective 2025-01-01 · Cal. Health & Safety Code § 1367.01; Cal. Insurance Code § 10123.135 (SB 1120, Stats. 2024, ch. 1020)
California was the first U.S. state to directly prohibit health insurance plans from using AI to deny, delay, or modify care. Under SB 1120, when a plan uses AI or algorithms in utilization review, a licensed physician or other qualified clinician — not an AI system — must make every medical-necessity determination. AI tools can assist in data analysis, but the final coverage decision must come from a licensed human. Insurers must disclose AI use and make their algorithms available for regulatory audits. Signed September 28, 2024; effective January 1, 2025.
-
In effect
NYDFS CL 7 (2024) — Insurance AI Anti-Discrimination
New York · Effective 2024-07-11 · NYDFS Insurance Circular Letter No. 7 (2024) (July 11, 2024)
New York's Department of Financial Services issued Insurance Circular Letter No. 7 on July 11, 2024, establishing the most substantive state insurance AI rule in the country. Going beyond the NAIC Model Bulletin adopted by 24+ states, NYDFS CL No. 7 requires insurers to conduct a comprehensive 'proxy assessment' before using any AI system (AIS) or external consumer data source (ECDIS) in underwriting or pricing — and prohibits any such use unless the insurer can demonstrate the system does not produce unfair or unlawful discrimination against protected classes. When an AI-influenced adverse underwriting decision is made, the insurer must provide written notice within 15 days of the decision. Governance, documentation, and DFS market-conduct examination requirements apply immediately.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Utah SB 319 (insurers must disclose AI use in prior authorization)
Utah · Effective 2027-01-01 · Utah Code 31A-22-650(2)(d), (3) (S.B. 319, 2026)
Utah requires health insurers that use AI in reviewing prior-authorization requests to be transparent about it. If applicable, an insurer must post a conspicuous notice on its public website that it uses AI in authorization review, and disclose that AI use to the state Insurance Department, each in-network provider, and each enrollee. The rules sit within a broader prior-authorization overhaul.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
SB 26-189 (Colorado ADMT Law)
Colorado · Effective 2027-01-01 · SB 26-189 (Colo. 2026)
Colorado's replacement AI law focuses on transparency rather than broad anti-discrimination duties. Starting January 1, 2027, companies using automated decision-making technology to materially influence consequential decisions (employment, housing, lending, insurance, healthcare) must notify consumers before use and provide post-decision disclosures; developers must give deployers technical documentation.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
SB 444 (GA AI Insurance Review)
Georgia · Effective 2027-01-01 · Ga. SB 444 (2026), sponsored by Sen. Kay Kirkpatrick
Health insurers in Georgia can't let AI alone decide your coverage. Decisions about insurance coverage for healthcare services cannot be based solely on AI systems or software tools — a qualified human reviewer must be part of every coverage determination, especially before denying treatment. Effective January 1, 2027.
-
In effect
Indiana HB 1271 (no AI-only claim downcoding)
Indiana · Effective 2026-07-01 · Ind. House Enrolled Act 1271 (2026 Reg. Sess.), eff. July 1, 2026
Indiana bars health insurers from relying on an automated process or artificial intelligence as the only reason for downcoding a claim on medical-necessity grounds; a qualified health professional must review the patient's medical record before such a downcode is applied. Health care providers likewise may not use AI to submit a claim without a human reviewing the record. Insurers must also tell providers when AI played a role in an adverse prior-authorization decision or a downcode, and providers keep appeal rights.
-
In effect
Washington SB 5395 (limits AI in health-insurance prior-auth denials)
Washington · Effective 2026-06-11 · Engrossed Second Substitute S.B. 5395, 2025-26 Reg. Sess. (Wash.)
Washington bars health carriers from using AI to deny, delay, or modify health care services on its own; a denial based on medical necessity must be made by a licensed health professional. Where AI is used in prior authorization, it must be applied fairly, comply with anti-discrimination law, and base determinations on the individual enrollee's medical history, clinical circumstances, and relevant demographic data rather than broad group data. AI tools must be reviewed for accuracy, AI policies are subject to audit by the Insurance Commissioner, and carriers must report the share of denials aided by AI.
-
In effect
Maryland HB 1563 (AI-denial reporting)
Maryland · Effective 2026-06-01 · 2026 Md. Laws ch. 165 (HB 1563); Md. Code, Ins. 15-10A-06
Among other emergency-room and post-acute care provisions, this law expands the quarterly report that carriers must submit to the Maryland Insurance Commissioner. The report must include the number of adverse decisions and whether an artificial intelligence, algorithm, or other software tool was used in making them. The Commissioner may use this information as a basis for examining the carrier.
-
In effect
HI DOI AI Bulletin
HI · Effective 2025-12-10 · Hawaii Insurance Commissioner Memorandum 2025-13A (2025-12-10)
The HI Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in HI must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
TX SB 815 (No AI-Only Insurance Denials)
Texas · Effective 2025-09-01 · Tex. S.B. 815, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025); Tex. Ins. Code Sec. 4201.156
Texas bars a utilization review agent from using an automated decision system — including certain artificial intelligence — to make an adverse determination, in whole or in part, about whether health care is medically necessary or appropriate. Such coverage denials must involve human clinical judgment, though the law still allows algorithms and AI for administrative support and fraud detection. The Texas Department of Insurance may audit and inspect how utilization review agents use these systems. Violations are subject to the sanctions, cease-and-desist orders, and administrative penalties already available under the Insurance Code.
-
In effect
WI DOI AI Bulletin
WI · Effective 2025-03-18 · Wisconsin OCI AI Bulletin (2025-03-18) (2025-03-18)
The WI Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in WI must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
NJ DOI AI Bulletin
NJ · Effective 2025-02-11 · New Jersey DOBI Insurance Bulletin 25-03 (2025-02-11)
The NJ Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NJ must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
DE DOI AI Bulletin
DE · Effective 2025-02-05 · Delaware Domestic and Foreign Insurers Bulletin No. 148 (2025-02-05)
The DE Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in DE must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
Texas v. Allstate / Arity
TX · Effective 2025-01-13 · Texas v. Allstate / Arity — Driving Data Collection Suit (TDPSA + Data Broker Law) (2025-01-13)
First-ever TDPSA and Data Broker Law suit. Alleges SDK-based collection of geolocation and driving-behavior data from 45M+ Americans via Life360, GasBuddy, etc., used to score drivers and set premiums. Active in 2026.
-
In effect
NC DOI AI Bulletin
NC · Effective 2024-12-18 · North Carolina DOI Bulletin 24-B-19 (2024-12-18)
The NC Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NC must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
MA DOI AI Bulletin
MA · Effective 2024-12-09 · Massachusetts Division of Insurance Bulletin 2024-10 (2024-12-09)
The MA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in MA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
OK DOI AI Bulletin
OK · Effective 2024-11-14 · Oklahoma ID Bulletin 2024-11 (2024-11-14)
The OK Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in OK must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
IA DOI AI Bulletin
IA · Effective 2024-11-07 · Iowa Insurance Division Bulletin 24-04 (2024-11-07)
The IA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in IA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
WV DOI AI Bulletin
WV · Effective 2024-08-09 · West Virginia OIC Insurance Bulletin 24-06 (2024-08-09)
The WV Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in WV must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
MI DOI AI Bulletin
MI · Effective 2024-08-07 · Michigan DIFS Bulletin 2024-20-INS (2024-08-07)
The MI Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in MI must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
AR DOI AI Bulletin
AR · Effective 2024-07-31 · Arkansas Insurance Department Bulletin 13-2024 (2024-07-31)
The AR Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in AR must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
VA DOI AI Bulletin
VA · Effective 2024-07-22 · Virginia SCC Bureau of Insurance Administrative Letter 2024-01 (2024-07-22)
The VA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in VA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
NE DOI AI Bulletin
NE · Effective 2024-06-11 · Nebraska Insurance Guidance Document IGD-H1 (2024-06-11)
The NE Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NE must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
DC DOI AI Bulletin
DC · Effective 2024-05-21 · DC DISB Bulletin 24-IB-002-05/21 (2024-05-21)
The DC Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in DC must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
MD DOI AI Bulletin
MD · Effective 2024-04-22 · Maryland Insurance Administration Bulletin 24-11 (2024-04-22)
The MD Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in MD must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
WA DOI AI Bulletin
WA · Effective 2024-04-22 · Washington OIC Technical Assistance Advisory 2024-02 (2024-04-22)
The WA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in WA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
KY DOI AI Bulletin
KY · Effective 2024-04-16 · Kentucky DOI Bulletin 2024-02 (2024-04-16)
The KY Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in KY must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
PA DOI AI Bulletin
PA · Effective 2024-04-06 · Pennsylvania ID Insurance Notice 2024-04 (54 Pa.B. 1910) (2024-04-06)
The PA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in PA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
RI DOI AI Bulletin
RI · Effective 2024-03-15 · Rhode Island DBR Insurance Bulletin 2024-03 (2024-03-15)
The RI Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in RI must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
IL DOI AI Bulletin
IL · Effective 2024-03-13 · Illinois DOI Company Bulletin 2024-08 (2024-03-13)
The IL Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in IL must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
VT DOI AI Bulletin
VT · Effective 2024-03-12 · Vermont DFR Insurance Bulletin 229 (2024-03-12)
The VT Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in VT must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
CT DOI AI Bulletin
CT · Effective 2024-02-26 · Connecticut Insurance Department Bulletin MC-25 (2024-02-26)
The CT Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in CT must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
NV DOI AI Bulletin
NV · Effective 2024-02-23 · Nevada DOI Bulletin 24-001 (2024-02-23)
The NV Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NV must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
NH DOI AI Bulletin
NH · Effective 2024-02-20 · New Hampshire ID Docket INS 24-011-AB (2024-02-20)
The NH Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in NH must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
AK DOI AI Bulletin
AK · Effective 2024-02-01 · Alaska Division of Insurance Bulletin B 24-01 (2024-02-01)
The AK Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in AK must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect
CO Insurance Algorithmic Discrimination Law
Colorado · Effective 2021-07-06 · Colo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 10-3-1104.9 (SB 21-169)
Colorado prohibits insurers from using outside consumer data, algorithms, or predictive models in ways that unfairly discriminate against people based on protected characteristics such as race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or gender identity. The law directs the state Insurance Commissioner to write rules that require insurers to test their data and models and show they do not produce discriminatory outcomes. Insurers must also maintain a risk-management framework to monitor for unfair discrimination. Coverage was later expanded to additional lines such as private passenger auto and health benefit plans.
-
Repealed / replaced
Colorado AI Act (repealed)
Colorado · SB 24-205, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-1-1701 et seq. (repealed/replaced 2026)
The first comprehensive US state AI law would have required developers and deployers of 'high-risk' AI systems to use reasonable care to prevent algorithmic discrimination in decisions about jobs, housing, lending, insurance, education, and healthcare. After repeated delays, it was repealed and replaced in May 2026 by a narrower transparency-focused law (SB 26-189) before it ever took effect.
City / local insurance AI rules (1)
-
Expired
DC Algorithm Bill (not enacted)
Washington, DC · D.C. Council B24-0558 (2021); B25-0114 (2023) (not enacted)
A proposed DC law that would ban businesses from using algorithms that discriminate based on protected traits in decisions about jobs, housing, credit, insurance, and education, and would require annual bias audits and consumer disclosures. Despite multiple introductions since 2021, it has never been enacted — DC residents rely on federal protections.