Regulatory Landscape Beyond EU

Overview

AI regulation is accelerating globally. The EU AI Act gets the most attention, but US state laws, sector-specific guidance, and international frameworks are creating a patchwork of compliance requirements that enterprises must navigate.

United States

Federal Level

There is no comprehensive federal AI law as of early 2026. Instead, regulation comes through executive orders, agency guidance, and enforcement of existing laws.

SourceWhat It DoesStatus
Executive Order 14110 (Oct 2023)Directs agencies to develop AI safety standards, requires reporting for large model training runsActive — implementation ongoing
NIST AI RMFVoluntary risk management frameworkActive — widely adopted
FTC enforcementUsing existing consumer protection authority against deceptive AI practicesActive — multiple enforcement actions
EEOC guidanceAI in hiring must comply with Title VII anti-discriminationActive
CFPB guidanceAI in lending must comply with fair lending laws, adverse action noticesActive
SEC guidanceBroker-dealers can't use AI to place firm interests ahead of investorsActive
FDA AI/ML guidanceFramework for AI-based medical devicesActive — evolving

State Level

States are moving faster than the federal government.

StateLawFocusEffective
ColoradoSB 24-205Deployers of high-risk AI must conduct impact assessments, notify consumers, disclose AI useFeb 2026
IllinoisAI Video Interview ActEmployers must notify applicants of AI use in video interviews, get consentActive
IllinoisBIPA (Biometric Information Privacy Act)Applies to AI using biometric data — facial recognition, voice analysisActive — heavy litigation
CaliforniaVarious bills in progressTransparency, algorithmic accountability, deepfake disclosureMultiple timelines
New York CityLocal Law 144Annual bias audits for automated employment decision toolsActive
TexasHB 2060Requires disclosure when AI is used in certain government decisionsActive
ConnecticutSB 1103AI inventory and impact assessments for state agenciesActive

Key Takeaway for Enterprises

Even without a federal law, US companies face regulatory risk from: existing anti-discrimination laws applied to AI (EEOC, CFPB), state-specific AI laws (Colorado is the most comprehensive), and sector-specific regulator guidance (SEC, FDA, FINRA).

Sector-Specific Regulation

Financial Services

RegulatorGuidanceKey Requirements
FINRAAI in securities industryModel risk management, explainability, supervision of AI-generated communications
OCC / FedSR 11-7 (Model Risk Management)Applies to AI/ML models — validation, monitoring, governance
CFPBFair lending + AIAdverse action notice must explain AI-driven denials, can't use "the algorithm decided"
SECPredictive data analyticsBroker-dealers must manage conflicts of interest in AI-driven recommendations

Healthcare

RegulatorGuidanceKey Requirements
FDAAI/ML-Based SaMD FrameworkPre-market review for AI medical devices, continuous monitoring for adaptive algorithms
HHS / OCRHIPAA + AIAI processing PHI must comply with HIPAA — applies to cloud AI services
CMSAI in Medicare/MedicaidTransparency and oversight requirements for AI used in coverage decisions

Government / Defense

FrameworkScopeKey Requirements
DoD AI PrinciplesMilitary AIResponsible, equitable, traceable, reliable, governable
FedRAMPCloud AI for governmentAI services must meet FedRAMP security requirements
NIST AI 100-1Federal AI useTrustworthy AI characteristics — valid, reliable, safe, secure, accountable

International

JurisdictionFrameworkStatus
EUAI ActPhased implementation 2024-2026
UKPro-innovation approachSector-specific, no single AI law — regulators (FCA, ICO, CMA) issue own guidance
CanadaAIDA (Artificial Intelligence and Data Act)Proposed — focuses on high-impact systems
ChinaMultiple AI regulationsActive — algorithmic recommendation rules, deep synthesis rules, generative AI rules
JapanAI Guidelines for BusinessVoluntary, principles-based
SingaporeAI Verify, Model AI Governance FrameworkVoluntary governance toolkit with testing framework
BrazilAI Bill (PL 2338/2023)Under legislative review — risk-based approach similar to EU
IndiaNo comprehensive AI lawAdvisory approach — NITI Aayog principles

Compliance Strategy

Multi-jurisdictional approach:

  1. Baseline to the strictest applicable standard — if you operate in the EU, the AI Act is your floor
  2. Map state-specific requirements — Colorado and NYC have specific obligations
  3. Sector-specific overlay — add FINRA, FDA, or other sector requirements on top
  4. Monitor actively — AI regulation is moving fast. Assign someone to track changes quarterly
  5. Build for transparency — almost every regulation requires some form of AI disclosure, documentation, or explainability. Building these capabilities once covers most frameworks

Regulatory Monitoring Resources

  • AI Policy Observatory (OECD): Tracks AI policy across 50+ countries
  • Stanford HAI AI Index: Annual report on global AI regulation trends
  • IAPP AI Governance Resource Center: Privacy-focused AI regulation tracking
  • State AI legislation trackers: Multi-state Legislative Service, National Conference of State Legislatures