“We are therefore proposing a targeted transparency framework, one that could be applied at the federal, state, or international level, and which applies only to the largest AI systems and developers while establishing clear disclosure requirements for safety practices.”
Mandate published safety frameworks and incident reporting
Require developers above a capability or compute threshold to publish their safety frameworks, report critical incidents to a state authority, and protect whistleblowers.
Where it stands
Adopted in the two lead states, CA SB 53 (signed Sep 29, 2025; in force Jan 1, 2026) and NY RAISE (signed Dec 19, 2025 with chapter amendments; effective Jan 1, 2027), and operational in the EU, where GPAI transparency obligations apply since Aug 2, 2025 via the AI Act, the GPAI Code of Practice (signed by OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, Mistral; declined by Meta; xAI safety chapter only), the Commission Guidelines and the Art. 53 training-data template. In the US federal executive lane the mandates receded: EO 14110's compute-threshold reporting was revoked in Jan 2025 and EO 14409 moved cyber-capability benchmarking into classified channels. The Great American AI Act discussion draft would create federal transparency obligations as the counterpart to preemption.
first seen 2023-10-30 · last seen 2026-07-21 · locus: developer
Bill-status would miss this
The vehicles it rode
- 2023-10-30
EO 14110 Sec. 4.2 imposes DPA-based reporting on dual-use foundation models above 10^26 operations
EO 14110 - 2024-08-31
Passed both chambers with liability provisions
CA SB 1047 - 2024-09-29
Vetoed
CA SB 1047 - 2025-01-20
EO 14110 revoked by EO 14148 initial rescissions; EO 14179 (Jan 23) directs unwinding of actions taken under it
EO 14110 - 2025-06-13
RAISE Act passes the New York Legislature (S6953/A6453)
NY RAISE Act - 2025-07-07
Anthropic publishes targeted federal/state transparency framework proposal (secure development frameworks, system cards, whistleblower protections)
- 2025-07-10
AI Office publishes final GPAI Code of Practice (Transparency, Copyright, Safety & Security chapters)
GPAI Code of Practice - 2025-07-18
Meta announces it will not sign the Code; Commission publishes GPAI scope Guidelines the same day
GPAI Code of Practice - 2025-07-30
Google announces it will sign, with reservations on copyright, approvals and trade secrets; OpenAI (Jul 11) and Anthropic (Jul 21) had announced signing earlier the same month
GPAI Code of Practice - 2025-08-02
GPAI obligations begin to apply; Code signatories get streamlined compliance route
EU AI Act - 2025-09-29
Re-vehicled as transparency-only; signed
CA SB 53 - 2025-12-19
Signed in New York with chapter amendments
NY RAISE Act - 2026-01-01
SB 53 in force; AG-enforced penalties up to $1M per violation
CA SB 53 - 2026-03-27
Final chapter amendment signed; law effective Jan 1, 2027
NY RAISE Act - 2026-06-02
EO 14409 shifts frontier cyber-capability benchmarking to a classified NSA-led process; CAISI public evaluation publishing curtailed
EO 14409 (frontier security) - 2026-06-04
Discussion draft includes federal transparency/safety obligations for the largest frontier developers
Great American AI Act
12 claims · every quote links to its document
The record
For · 8
“Today, we’re announcing our intention to sign the EU’s Code of Practice for General Purpose AI—subject to the current version being formally approved by the AI Board during its upcoming adequacy assessment.”
“After review, Anthropic intends to sign the European Union's General-Purpose AI Code of Practice. We believe the Code advances the principles of transparency, safety and accountability—values that have long been championed by Anthropic for frontier AI development.”
“We will join several other companies, including U.S. model providers, in signing the European Union’s General Purpose AI Code of Practice. We do so with the hope that this Code, as applied, will promote European citizens’ and businesses’ access to secure, first-rate AI tools as they become available.”
Signing announced with stated reservations on copyright departures, approvals, and trade-secret exposure.
“SB 53’s transparency requirements will have an important impact on frontier AI safety. Without it, labs with increasingly powerful models could face growing incentives to dial back their own safety and disclosure programs in order to compete.”
“California has proven that we can establish regulations to protect our communities while also ensuring that the growing AI industry continues to thrive. This legislation strikes that balance.”
“By enacting the RAISE Act, New York is once again leading the nation in setting a strong and sensible standard for frontier AI safety, holding the biggest developers accountable for their safety and transparency protocols”
“Sponsored and passed SB 53, California’s landmark AI safety law. Helped pass the RAISE Act, New York’s landmark AI safety law.”
Mutable homepage; quote verified live 2026-07-21. docDate records access date.
Against · 4
“The RAISE Act would create a legal minefield for New Yorkers trying to innovate by imposing vague, unworkable standards that punish developers instead of bad actors. This bill would stifle AI tech development, harm economic competitiveness and undermine free expression. NetChoice urges Governor Hochul to veto this misguided legislation and support a clear, national approach to AI governance”
“This level of forced transparency goes beyond reasonable accountability and may discourage responsible companies from operating in California. It also creates opportunities for misuse by malicious actors who could exploit disclosed model weaknesses or mitigation gaps.”
“While the code’s safety and security measures have been streamlined for greater clarity, they remain overly prescriptive and disproportionate – for example, with respect to external evaluations. Furthermore, key measures in the final code still go beyond the AI Act’s agreed scope and objectives, subjecting potential signatories to burdensome requirements.”
“Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI. We have carefully reviewed the European Commission's Code of Practice for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and Meta won't be signing it. This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act.”
Speaker: Joel Kaplan, Chief Global Affairs Officer, Meta.