Minnesota insurance AI regulation

Minnesota has not adopted the NAIC model bulletin. No AI-specific insurance action is currently tracked.

Details

Jurisdiction	Minnesota (MN)
NAIC model bulletin	Not adopted
Source	Implementation of NAIC Model Bulletin: Use of AI Systems by Insurers, as of 2026-08-06

Other AI-related insurance activity

Measure	Status
SF 1886 (2025-2026) Would make it an unfair or deceptive trade practice for a business to fail to disclose that a person is having a textual or spoken conversation with AI, and would require an opt-out to reach a human. Attorney General enforcement plus a private right of action, actual damages and statutory damages capped at $1,000 per violation. Correction: Citation was a placeholder ('consumer AI disclosure bill'). Actual: SF 1886. source	unconfirmed Previously recorded as 'pending'. Final disposition for the 2026 session could not be confirmed from the legislature's record; a separate Minnesota AI Transparency Act (HF 4654) is also referenced by secondary sources. Status unresolved. reported — not yet confirmed at source

Measure

Status

SF 1886 (2025-2026)
Would make it an unfair or deceptive trade practice for a business to fail to disclose that a person is having a textual or spoken conversation with AI, and would require an opt-out to reach a human. Attorney General enforcement plus a private right of action, actual damages and statutory damages capped at $1,000 per violation.
Correction: Citation was a placeholder ('consumer AI disclosure bill'). Actual: SF 1886.
source

unconfirmed
Previously recorded as 'pending'. Final disposition for the 2026 session could not be confirmed from the legislature's record; a separate Minnesota AI Transparency Act (HF 4654) is also referenced by secondary sources. Status unresolved.
reported — not yet confirmed at source

Context

Of 51 tracked US jurisdictions, 25 have adopted the NAIC model bulletin, 4 run their own insurance-specific AI framework (California, Colorado, New York and Texas), and 22 have not adopted it but have other tracked AI-related insurance activity. The bulletin restates that existing unfair trade practice and unfair discrimination law applies to AI-driven decisions; it does not create new statutory obligations.

Two tracks. Insurance AI regulation runs on two largely independent tracks: the NAIC model bulletin (governance, all lines), and a 2026 wave of health-insurance statutes restricting AI as the sole basis for claim or coverage denial. A state can be active on the second while absent from the first. Absence from the NAIC map is not absence of regulation.

See all 51 jurisdictions · This record as JSON