AI Policy Wiki
Dashboard

Washington State AI Task Force

low confidence · updated 2026-08-08

Washington state advisory body on artificial intelligence policy, to be disbanded following the publication of its final report in July 2026. Four of its eleven recommendations were adopted in part or in full and enacted in spring 2026, including the state's companion-chatbot disclosure law and a bar on insurers denying coverage solely on an AI assessment. Its work moves to a Tech Policy Team at the Washington Attorney General's Office.

The Washington State AI Task Force was a state advisory body convened to recommend artificial-intelligence policy to the Washington Legislature. It published a final report in July 2026 and is to be disbanded, with its work transferring to a newly created Tech Policy Team in the Washington Attorney General's Office led by Yuki Ishizuka (Source: geekwire.com).

Recommendations and legislative outcomes

The final report carried eleven recommendations, of which four were adopted in part or in full and enacted in spring 2026. The enacted measures require companion chatbots to remind users that they are not human — the obligation set out in Washington ESHB 2225 — and bar medical insurers from denying coverage solely on the basis of an AI assessment, a restriction of the kind treated at Insurance — AI Deployment and Healthcare — AI Deployment.

Three recommendations that did not pass mark the boundary of what the legislature was prepared to enact: regulation of high-risk AI decision-making, a requirement that developers disclose training datasets, and the development of workplace AI guidelines (Source: geekwire.com). The first of the three is the obligation that Colorado SB 189 imposes and that several other states have considered, and the second is the transparency duty at issue in the disputes recorded at AI Transparency and Training Data Walls.

Assessment of the enacted measures

University of Washington law professor Ryan Calo said the companion-chatbot law exposes developers to negligence per se and to a private right of action under the state Consumer Protection Act (Source: geekwire.com). Negligence per se treats violation of the statutory standard as itself establishing breach, which would remove the need to litigate the standard of care separately; on the underlying liability question see AI and Tort Liability.

Relationships