Pennsylvania has enacted Act 99 of 2026, which, once effective, would require an AI disclosure on advertisements whose synthetic content creates a false consumer impression

Key takeaways

• The act was approved on 22 October 2026 after Senate passage 48-2 (10 June 2026) and House passage 163-40 (7 October 2026).
• Once effective, it would reach an advertiser that acts "knowingly, recklessly or willfully", so the trigger includes a mental-state element.
• Once effective, the act would not reach, under subsection (a), content that is evidently fictional, parody, satire, commentary, criticism, or limited to text.
• Once effective, section 5 would let the Attorney General or a district attorney seek injunctions, and a court may award a civil fine that does not exceed $3,000 plus actual attorney fees and court costs.

What does Pennsylvania Act 99 of 2026 prohibit?

Once the act takes effect, section 4(a) would provide that an advertiser "may not knowingly, recklessly or willfully create and disseminate or cause to be created and disseminated" an advertisement that uses synthetic content in a manner that creates a false consumer perception about the nature, origin or authenticity of the goods or services being advertised, without clear and conspicuous disclosure. Three elements would have to line up: synthetic content in the ad, a false consumer perception of the kind the section names, and the stated mental state. The act defines synthetic content as information, including an image, video, audio clip or text, that has been significantly modified or generated by artificial intelligence. The short title is the Artificial Intelligence Deceptive Advertising Act, and section 2 says the act relates to deceptive advertising. Section 4(c) adds that making an AI disclosure does not limit any recourse under law.

What must the AI disclosure say, and which ads are excepted?

The act sets both content and presentation. Once effective, section 4(a) would require that a disclosure "must state that the advertisement contains content that was modified or generated using artificial intelligence." Once effective, the text would have the disclosure displayed in the first instance whenever the synthetic content is presented to the consumer, presented in the same medium as the synthetic content, and, to the extent technically feasible, permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove from the synthetic content.

"Clear and conspicuous" has its own definition in section 3, which, once the act is effective, would govern the disclosure. It covers size, color, contrast, location, duration and audibility, and provides that statements are presented in the language or other interaction the consumer uses to comprehend the synthetic content. It also adds rules for audio, visual and print formats, such as a volume and cadence sufficient to hear the statement and a visual statement that stays on screen long enough to read.

Once effective, section 4(b) would provide that subsection (a) "shall not include content" that is evidently fictional based on the content or context of the depiction, parody, satire, commentary or criticism, or limited to text. Section 4(b)(3) excepts content limited to text from subsection (a); the definition of synthetic content in section 3 separately names text among its examples.

Who enforces the act, and what are the penalties?

Section 5 provides for enforcement by public officials, and section 4(c) says an AI disclosure does not limit any recourse under law. Once the act takes effect, under section 5(a), when the Attorney General or the appropriate district attorney has reason to believe a person is using or is about to use a practice declared unlawful by section 4, and that proceedings would be in the public interest, either would be able to bring an action in the name of the Commonwealth to restrain the practice by temporary or permanent injunction. Section 5(b) says they may bring a civil action for violations of the act. Under section 5(c), a court of competent jurisdiction may award damages, including "A civil fine that does not exceed $3,000" and actual attorney fees and court costs. The words "may award" make both discretionary. The text we read does not say whether the cap applies per ad, per day or per proceeding, and it does not mention a private right of action.

What should advertisers, agencies and brand counsel do now?

The following are the desk's suggestions, not requirements in the act. A reasonable first use of the 60-day period is an inventory, because the trigger would depend on what each ad communicates.

• List live and planned campaigns that reach Pennsylvania audiences and use AI-generated or significantly AI-modified images, video or audio, including assets supplied by agencies and influencers.
• For each, ask whether the synthetic content could leave a consumer with a false impression of what is being sold, where it came from, or whether it is real.
• Where it could, plan a disclosure with the statutory wording, shown the first time the content appears, in the same medium, and built into the asset so it survives resharing where feasible.
• Optionally, keep a short note of why any ad is treated as evidently fictional, parody, satire, commentary, criticism or text-only. The act does not require records; this is an editorial suggestion.
• Optionally, ask agencies and talent to flag AI use in supplied assets. The act does not address supplier contracts; this is an editorial suggestion.

What are the key dates and votes?

What we did not verify

What we opened: the Pennsylvania General Assembly bill information page for Senate Bill 806 and the Printer's Number 1808 bill text (PDF), both on 25 October 2026.

What we did not open: the enacted Act as printed in the Laws of Pennsylvania, the House amendments listed on the status page (A04520 and A04522), the fiscal notes, the co-sponsorship memo, the roll-call records, and any Attorney General guidance. We read Printer's Number 1808, the latest printer's number listed, and did not separately confirm that the signed Act matches it word for word.

What we refuse to claim: an exact effective date, that the fine applies per violation, whether text-only advertising is or is not covered in a particular case, that private parties can sue, or how any court or enforcer will apply the false-perception standard.

Related briefings

• AI Regulation News hub
• North America AI regulation tracker
• AI disclosure rules
• California SB 1050 on synthetic performer advertising disclosure
• New York S8420A on synthetic performer advertising disclosure
• UK ASA monitoring of AI advertising disclosure
• Philippines ASC Circular 2026-014 on AI advertising disclosure