When does Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA) take effect?
Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA) has been effective since January 1, 2026.
In effectHB 149Texas
Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA)
Compliance reference — obligations, penalties, applicability, and primary sources.
Last verified July 24, 2026
Effective
January 1, 2026
Max penalty
$200K
Applies to
developer + deployer
Status
In effect
Summary
TRAIGA stands for the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, the state's first comprehensive AI statute. Enacted as House Bill 149 in the 89th Texas Legislature and signed June 22, 2025, TRAIGA is codified at Texas Business and Commerce Code Chapters 551 through 554 and took effect January 1, 2026 per the enrolled bill text (retrieved 2026-05-06; ledger re-verified 2026-07-24, with the § 552.105 civil-penalty tiers and § 552.106 licensing-sanction cap confirmed against the enrolled HB 149 text). The Act applies to persons doing business in Texas who develop or deploy artificial intelligence systems and creates obligations targeted at AI consumer disclosures, manipulation that incites self-harm or violence, government social scoring, biometric capture, unlawful discrimination, and certain sexually explicit synthetic content.
Key provisions include clear and conspicuous disclosure when covered AI systems interact with consumers, prohibitions on AI systems intentionally developed or deployed for unlawful discrimination, restrictions on government use of AI for social scoring, a complaint intake mechanism at the Texas Attorney General's office, a regulatory sandbox program, and the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council. Related Atlas coverage: Utah AI Policy Act.
Civil-penalty tiers at a glance
- Curable violation, not cured — $10,000 to $12,000 per violation (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.105).
- Uncurable violation — $80,000 to $200,000 per violation (§ 552.105).
- Continuing violation — $2,000 to $40,000 per day until corrected (§ 552.105).
- State licensing-agency sanctions — up to $100,000 against licensed, registered, or certified persons (§ 552.106), separate from AG enforcement.
Enforcement and notice-and-cure
The Texas Attorney General has exclusive enforcement authority under Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.101; TRAIGA does not create a private right of action. Before suit, the AG issues written notice under § 552.104, giving the entity an opportunity to cure curable violations and avoid the tier-1 civil penalty. Failure to cure, or an uncurable violation (for example, intentional unlawful discrimination prohibited under § 552.056), authorizes the tier-2 and continuing-violation penalties under § 552.105.
Sector implementation routes
Because TRAIGA applies by Texas business activity and AI-system use rather than a single regulated vertical, compliance teams usually need to map the same Chapter 552 controls into sector workflows. Start with financial services AI compliance for credit, lending, fraud, and account-servicing AI; healthcare AI compliance for patient-facing and regulated-occupation AI interactions; HR and hiring AI compliance for employment decisions; AI in insurance compliance for underwriting, claims, and pricing; and the education, housing, legal services, and government services hubs when Texas deployments touch those operating areas.
Sandbox and Texas Artificial Intelligence Council
TRAIGA establishes a regulatory sandbox program and the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council to advise the legislature on emerging AI policy questions; both sit alongside the Chapter 552 substantive prohibitions. Companies considering Texas-only AI pilots should review sandbox eligibility before deploying covered systems against consumers and map the resulting control owners in an AI governance model and AI compliance framework register.
Key obligations
Specific compliance requirements derived from the primary source. Each item links to the relevant statutory section where applicable.
- DisclosureRole: deployerTex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.051
Provide clear and conspicuous disclosure to consumers when they are interacting with an AI system in a manner where a reasonable consumer might believe they are interacting with a human.
Deadlineat_interaction
- GovernanceRole: developerTex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.056
Refrain from developing or deploying AI systems with the intent to engage in unlawful discrimination against protected classes under Texas or federal law.
Deadlineongoing
- GovernanceRole: bothTex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.104, § 552.105
On receipt of a written notice of alleged violation from the Texas Attorney General, cure the violation within the statutory cure window to avoid tier-1 civil penalties of $10,000–$12,000; uncurable violations and continuing violations escalate to $80,000–$200,000 per violation and $2,000–$40,000 per day under § 552.105.
Deadlineon_ag_notice
- GovernanceRole: deployerTex. Bus. & Com. Code § 552.106
Licensed, registered, or certified persons remain separately subject to discipline by their Texas licensing authority, including sanctions of up to $100,000, in addition to civil penalties imposed by the Attorney General under § 552.105.
Deadlineongoing
Related comparisons
Use the side-by-side comparisons to see how this law interacts with adjacent US AI laws and governance frameworks.
- Colorado AI Act vs Texas TRAIGA
Compare scope, roles, penalties, and source-backed compliance evidence side by side.
- Texas TRAIGA vs ISO/IEC 42001
Compare the law and framework records using the same source-backed entity data.
Related analysis
Deeper Atlas write-ups on how this law is being interpreted and operationalized.
- Texas TRAIGA in practice — first quarter post-effective
How TRAIGA (HB 149) is being interpreted after its January 1, 2026 effective date.
- Mapping NIST AI RMF functions to U.S. state AI laws
How the NIST AI RMF functions map onto the TRAIGA disclosure and governance duties.
Build a compliance program around these obligations
A single law is one input to a broader program. These guides show how to assign accountability, map every obligation to a control, and split developer-versus-deployer duties across the systems a team operates.
- AI governance: building an AI compliance program
The operating model — owners, committee, decision rights, lifecycle gates — that turns a law into an accountable, auditable program anchored to the NIST AI RMF GOVERN function.
- AI compliance framework: the regulatory control map
How to map each AI system to the laws it triggers, the controls that satisfy them, and the evidence that proves the controls operate.
- Deployer vs developer obligations
Which duties attach to building an AI system versus putting one into use — the split most state AI laws turn on.
Frequently asked questions
What is the maximum penalty under Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA)?
Up to $200K per violation under Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA).
Who must comply with Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA)?
Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA) applies to developer, deployer of AI systems within its jurisdictional scope.
Sources
Every fact above is sourced from the official primary source. Independent verification recommended before acting on the information.
- Officialcapitol.texas.gov — Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Chs. 551-554
- capitol.texas.gov
- capitol.texas.gov
- capitol.texas.gov
- www.texasattorneygeneral.gov
Last reviewed July 24, 2026. Reviewed by the AI Compliance Atlas editorial process against primary sources. Source selection, retrieval dates, and update rules are documented in the Atlas methodology.
We may receive referral commissions from recommended compliance tools. Recommendations are based on product fit and not on commission size. Links marked “partner link” include a tracked redirect.