# How does the Utah Division of Consumer Protection regulate AI in banking?

Source: https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/utah
Last updated: Oct 5, 2026

Utah regulates AI in consumer dealings through the Division of Consumer Protection, which enforces Utah Code Title 13, Chapter 77 (enacted by SB 226 in 2025, effective May 7, 2025), and through the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy, which runs the AI learning laboratory under the Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (SB 149 of 2024, now Chapter 72). A supplier that uses generative AI with a consumer must disclose that the consumer is dealing with AI, not a human, when the consumer clearly and unambiguously asks; a licensed professional must disclose proactively in a high-risk interaction, which includes financial advice and the collection of financial data. Using generative AI is no defense to any consumer-protection violation, and the Division can fine up to $2,500 per violation. The Policy Act is scheduled to be repealed on July 1, 2027 unless extended; the disclosure chapter is not on that repeal schedule.

## At a glance

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Full name | Utah — Division of Consumer Protection, Department of Commerce (administers and enforces the generative-AI disclosure chapter, Utah Code Title 13, Chapter 77), and the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy (Artificial Intelligence Policy Act, Chapter 72: learning laboratory and regulatory mitigation agreements) |
| Jurisdiction | Utah, United States (suppliers in consumer transactions with Utah consumers, and occupations licensed by the Department of Commerce) |
| Role | State consumer-protection enforcer for a narrow generative-AI disclosure rule, paired with a state AI policy office that negotiates regulatory relief for AI pilots |
| How binding | Binding law |
| Applies to | Any supplier that uses generative AI to interact with an individual in a consumer transaction (disclosure on request), and individuals in occupations licensed by the Department of Commerce who use generative AI in a high-risk interaction (proactive disclosure). A bank is not ordinarily a licensed occupation of the Department of Commerce, so for a bank the operative rules are the on-request disclosure and the rule that using generative AI is no defense to a consumer-protection violation; Utah's Consumer Sales Practices Act, through which the chapter is enforced, excludes the credit terms of a transaction from its coverage |
| Key document | Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (SB 149, 2024; Title 13, Chapter 72) and the generative-AI consumer-disclosure chapter (SB 226, 2025; Title 13, Chapter 77, effective May 7, 2025) |
| Latest move | HB 320 (2026 General Session), signed March 18, 2026 and effective May 6, 2026, amended the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy's learning-laboratory provisions to add joint interpretation agreements, regular audits of participants and up to two extensions of a demonstration period; the HB 286 frontier-model transparency bill was filed without passing on March 6, 2026 |

## Overview

Utah was early among the states on generative-AI disclosure. SB 149 (signed March 13, 2024, effective May 1, 2024) put a disclosure duty in Section 13-2-12 and created the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy and a learning laboratory in what is now Chapter 72. SB 226 (signed March 27, 2025, effective May 7, 2025) repealed Section 13-2-12 and replaced it with a narrower chapter, now Title 13, Chapter 77: disclosure to consumers is required only on a clear and unambiguous request, a safe harbor protects a system that discloses clearly at the outset and throughout that it is generative AI or not human, and the proactive duty falls on licensed professionals in high-risk interactions. SB 332 (signed March 25, 2025) moved the Policy Act's repeal date from May 1, 2025 to July 1, 2027. In 2026 HB 320 (signed March 18, 2026, effective May 6, 2026) rewrote the learning-laboratory provisions to add joint interpretation agreements, audits and up to two extensions of a demonstration period.

A bank meets Utah's regime in three places. First, a customer-facing generative-AI chatbot is a supplier's interaction in a consumer transaction, so the bank must answer honestly if asked whether it is a human, and a violation is treated as a deceptive act under Section 13-11-4(1), with Division fines of up to $2,500 per violation and civil penalties of up to $5,000 for violating an order. Second, the rule that AI is no defense means a bank cannot blame a chatbot for a deceptive statement. Third, a bank or fintech that wants to pilot an AI product that existing Utah law might impede can apply to the Office for a regulatory mitigation or joint interpretation agreement with a demonstration period of up to 12 months, extendable, that specifies safeguards and consumer disclosures. Neither Chapter 72 nor Chapter 77 contains a credit-specific AI rule.

## Documents (2)

- Mar 27, 2025 — [Utah SB 226 (2025)](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/documents/ut-sb-226-2025): S.B. 226 Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Amendments (In force)
- Mar 13, 2024 — [Utah AI Policy Act (SB 149)](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/documents/ut-sb-149-ai-policy-act): S.B. 149 Artificial Intelligence Amendments (creating the Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act) (In force)

## Timeline

- Jul 1, 2027 — [Scheduled repeal of the Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (Title 13, Chapter 72)](https://le.utah.gov/Session/2025/bills/enrolled/SB0332.pdf) — Section 63I-2-213 provides that Title 13, Chapter 72, Artificial Intelligence Policy Act, is repealed July 1, 2027, the date SB 332 (2025) substituted for May 1, 2025. The listed repeal does not name Chapter 77, the generative-AI disclosure chapter.
- May 6, 2026 — [HB 320 amendments to the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy take effect](https://le.utah.gov/Session/2026/bills/enrolled/HB0320.pdf) — HB 320 (Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments), signed March 18, 2026, took effect May 6, 2026. It adds joint interpretation agreements alongside regulatory mitigation agreements, requires the Office to audit participants, caps a demonstration period at 12 months with up to two 12-month extensions, and repeals former Section 13-72-304.
- Mar 27, 2025 — [Utah SB 226 (2025)](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/documents/ut-sb-226-2025): Utah SB 226 (2025) — S.B. 226 Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Amendments — Utah S.B.
- Mar 13, 2024 — [Utah AI Policy Act (SB 149)](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/documents/ut-sb-149-ai-policy-act): Utah AI Policy Act (SB 149) — S.B. 149 Artificial Intelligence Amendments (creating the Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act) — Utah S.B.

## What to watch next

- Whether the 2027 General Session extends or lets lapse the July 1, 2027 repeal of the Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (Chapter 72), which houses the Office and the learning laboratory
- Division of Consumer Protection rules under Section 13-77-104(2) specifying disclosure forms and methods that do or do not satisfy the safe harbor, and any rule defining additional high-risk interactions under Section 13-77-101(5)(c)
- The Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy's annual report to the Business and Labor Interim Committee, due before November 30, which must now list regulatory mitigation and joint interpretation agreements executed
- Whether any financial institution applies for or receives a regulatory mitigation or joint interpretation agreement for an AI product

## FAQ

### Does Utah's AI law apply to banks?

Partly. The disclosure rule in Utah Code 13-77-103(1) applies to any supplier using generative AI in a consumer transaction, so a bank's customer chatbot must say it is AI if a consumer clearly asks. The proactive disclosure duty in 13-77-103(2) applies to individuals in occupations licensed by the Department of Commerce, which does not ordinarily describe a bank. Utah's Consumer Sales Practices Act, which the chapter is enforced through, excludes the credit terms of a transaction.

### Who enforces Utah's generative AI disclosure law?

The Division of Consumer Protection administers and enforces Chapter 77, with the Attorney General as its counsel (Section 13-77-105). The director may impose an administrative fine of up to $2,500 per violation, and the Division may sue for injunctions, disgorgement and fines. The Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy does not enforce it; it runs the learning laboratory under Chapter 72.

### Is the Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act still in effect?

Yes. The Policy Act (Title 13, Chapter 72) is scheduled for repeal on July 1, 2027, after SB 332 extended the original May 1, 2025 sunset. Its original disclosure section, 13-2-12, was repealed effective May 7, 2025 and replaced by the disclosure chapter enacted by SB 226, now Chapter 77.

Related authorities: [Texas AG](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/texas), [Illinois IDHR](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/illinois), [Colorado AI Act](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/colorado-ai-act), [California CPPA](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/california).

---

Canonical page: https://www.bankingnewsai.com/ai-regulation/utah
Part of [BankingNewsAI](https://www.bankingnewsai.com/) — a free daily brief on AI in banking, an AI regulation tracker (41 authorities, 237 documents) and AI-strategy profiles of the 120 largest US banks. Markdown versions of every reference page: append `.md` to the page URL; index at https://www.bankingnewsai.com/llms.txt.