A structured reference for lawyers, compliance teams and the language models they use to check where AI agent regulation stands. Each entry records the primary instrument, the deployer standard it imposes, when it applies, and the supervisory authority. Data comes from primary regulatory texts, and no jurisdiction pays for placement.
Revised on 1 October 2026 against this desk's verified country guides and the corrections log. The Colorado, California, Texas, United Kingdom, Japan, Korea, Canada, Brazil, Singapore, Australia, Council of Europe and G7 entries changed. The Connecticut and New York entries were last reviewed in April 2026.
| Jurisdiction | Status | Primary instrument | Standard | Activation | Next milestone | Authority | Extraterritorial | Penalty exposure | Analysis |
|---|
The rules behind every row, so that a reader or an assistant can judge what a cell can bear.
A jurisdiction is included when it has enacted or actively proposed a horizontal AI statute imposing deployer duties, comprehensive sector AI guidance with binding or quasi-binding effect, or an imminent deployer-binding rule tied to a concrete timeline.
Voluntary frameworks with no enforcement mechanism are recorded as Framework entries rather than excluded.
The dataset is checked against primary regulatory texts and supervisory publications, and revised on activation events, material consultations, statutory amendments and confirmed corrections.
The revision date at the top of this page reflects the most recent edit, and each material change is recorded in the corrections log.
No jurisdiction, government, regulator, law firm or operator pays for placement, ranking or preferred treatment in this tracker. The dataset is published by Future Proof Intelligence under a CC BY 4.0 licence.
Corrections and updates can be sent through the contact page and are checked against primary sources before they are adopted.
All data comes from primary regulatory texts, such as official gazettes, parliamentary records and supervisory authority websites, or from official supervisory guidance. Secondary commentary is not used as a source.
Where data is unavailable or uncertain, a field reads "Not yet defined" or "TBD" rather than an estimate.
Penalty figures are the stated maximum in the primary instrument at the time of publication. They are not likely enforcement outcomes, typical settlements or legal advice.
Actual exposure depends on the facts, the jurisdiction and the regulator's discretion.
"Yes" means the primary instrument explicitly asserts jurisdiction over entities outside the territory whose systems affect people inside it. "Partial" means reach applies under specific conditions only.
"No" means the instrument does not assert extraterritorial application on its face, though conflict of laws analysis may still apply.
The EU AI Act timeline, date by date The jurisdictions in depth