Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (HB 149)

• Authority: Texas
• Parent authority: State governments
• Jurisdiction: United States
• Collections: Editors' Picks;U.S. state and local documents
• Most recent activity: Enacted
• Most recent activity date: 2025-06-22

Risk subdomain coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the risk subdomain are explicitly described.

• Unfair discrimination and misrepresentation
• Exposure to toxic content
• Compromise of privacy
• Disinformation, surveillance, and influence at scale
• Fraud, scams, and targeted manipulation
• Governance failure
• Lack of capability or robustness
• Lack of transparency or interpretability

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the risk subdomain are described.

• AI system security vulnerabilities
• False or misleading information
• Overreliance and unsafe use
• Loss of human agency and autonomy
• Power centralization and unfair distribution
• Competitive dynamics

All other risk subdomains had no coverage in this document.

Risk Coverage Summary

The document has good coverage of approximately 10-12 subdomains, with strong focus on malicious actors (4.1, 4.3), discrimination and toxicity (1.1, 1.2), privacy and security (2.1, 2.2), misinformation (3.1), human-computer interaction (5.1, 5.2), governance (6.5), and AI system safety (7.3, 7.4). Coverage is concentrated in preventing harmful uses, protecting civil liberties, and establishing governance frameworks.

Sector coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the sector are explicitly described.

• Information
• Health Care & Social Assistance
• Public Administration (excl. National Security)

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the sector are described.

• Agriculture, Mining, Construction & Manufacturing
• Trade, Transportation & Utilities
• Finance & Insurance
• Real Estate, Rental & Leasing
• Professional & Technical Services
• Scientific Research & Development Services
• Management, Administrative & Support Services
• Educational Services
• Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
• Accommodation, Food & Other Services

All other sectors had no coverage in this document.

Sectors Summary

This is an external regulation that applies broadly across all economic sectors in Texas. The Act governs AI developers, deployers, and distributors doing business in Texas regardless of sector, with explicit mentions of healthcare, finance, education, and public services in the sandbox program provisions. Government agencies and public administration are also explicitly regulated.

Legislative Status

Hard Law

Legislative Status Summary

This is a binding legislative act with mandatory obligations, enforcement mechanisms including civil penalties ranging from $10,000 to $200,000, and enforcement authority vested in the attorney general and state agencies. The document uses mandatory language throughout ('shall', 'must', 'required') and establishes specific prohibited uses with legal consequences.

Actors

Proposer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The document is a legislative act enacted by the Texas Legislature, as indicated by the opening clause and legislative structure.

Target

• Entity Types: AI_Developer, AI_Deployer, AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The Act explicitly defines and regulates developers, deployers, and distributors of AI systems, as well as government agencies and state agencies using AI. It applies to persons conducting business in Texas or producing products/services consumed by Texas residents.

Enforcer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The Attorney General has primary enforcement authority including civil investigative demands, injunctions, and administrative fines. State agencies can sanction licensed individuals. The Department of Information Resources administers the sandbox program. The AI Council provides oversight and recommendations.

Monitor

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The AI Council is established to monitor AI use, conduct studies, issue reports, and provide recommendations. The Department of Information Resources monitors the sandbox program and collects information on state agency AI use. The Attorney General receives complaints and conducts investigations. State agencies monitor AI systems under their jurisdiction.

AI Lifecycle Stages

Lifecycle stages covered by the documents, as defined in the OECD Framework for the Classification of AI Systems

• Plan and Design
• Collect and Process Data
• Build and Use Model
• Verify and Validate
• Deploy
• Operate and Monitor

AI Lifecycle Summary

The document covers multiple lifecycle stages with primary focus on deployment and operation/monitoring. It addresses planning through sandbox program requirements, development through prohibited uses and compliance frameworks, deployment through disclosure requirements and sandbox testing, and operation/monitoring through ongoing reporting, consumer appeals, and post-deployment oversight mechanisms.

Technical Scope

Terms relating to technical scope that are mentioned or implicitly referenced in the document

• AI Systems

Technical Scope Summary

The document explicitly defines and covers AI systems broadly, including both AI models and AI systems. It does not specifically mention frontier AI, general purpose AI, task-specific AI, foundation models, generative AI, predictive AI, open-weight models, or compute thresholds. The focus is on a general definition of AI systems using machine learning and related technologies.