Control
Consequential AI decision without consumer notice
A consumer must be told when a high-risk AI system makes/substantially factors a consequential decision about them.
Informational data, not legal advice. Summaries are TwinEthos's own words and rules have not been reviewed by a lawyer: check the official text before relying on any of it. A guard addresses an item; adding it is not a statement that your code meets any law.
Reach
Law in force in Texas (US-TX); enacted, not yet applying in European Union (EU), California (US-CA), Colorado (US-CO), Connecticut (US-CT); next date 2027-01-01.
The guard to add
Send the person an AI-use notice on the decision path, before or when an AI system makes or substantially factors a consequential decision about them, and record its delivery.
A notice step in the decision workflow itself (application intake, underwriting, eligibility, applicant or employee scoring, diagnostic support) that runs before the model call, e.g. send_admt_notice(consumer) ahead of underwrite(), or a notice block rendered on the intake page the person submits from. The notice says that AI is used in the decision, for what, and how to get more information or ask for review, and its delivery is stored with the decision (notice id, channel, timestamp). The template lives in the repo so its content is reviewable; a privacy-policy paragraph alone is not on the decision path.
Where it goes: 1 application source code, 9 AI output handling, 14 user-facing text.
What reviewers look for: a notice call or rendered notice on the same path as the decision call (send_admt_notice / send_ai_notice / notify_applicant before the model, an intake-page notice component, an after-visit-summary AI line), a stored delivery record linked to the decision, and a template that names the AI use and how to learn more; not just a privacy-policy section or an internal log entry the person never sees.
Example (FastAPI + OpenAI SDK), before:
@app.post('/applications')
def apply(app_in: Application):
resp = client.chat.completions.create(model=MODEL, messages=underwriting_prompt(app_in))
return {'decision': underwrite(resp.choices[0].message.content)}After:
@app.post('/applications')
def apply(app_in: Application):
notice = send_admt_notice(app_in.applicant_id, template='ai_decision_notice_v2')
resp = client.chat.completions.create(model=MODEL, messages=underwriting_prompt(app_in))
decision = underwrite(resp.choices[0].message.content)
db.decisions.insert(app_in.id, decision, notice_id=notice.id)
return {'decision': decision, 'ai_notice': notice.text}Engineering guidance, not legal advice. Each provision below may add its own details (a cadence, a deadline, a required notice element): open it for those.
Upcoming dates
- : Automated decision technology requires pre-use notice (California (US-CA); first application)
- : Deployers must give point-of-interaction notice when covered ADMT influences a consequential decision (Colorado (US-CO); first application; stayed)
- : AEDT deployers must give employees a pre-decision notice (Connecticut) (Connecticut (US-CT); first application)
- : Deployers must inform people they are subject to a high-risk AI decision (EU AI Act Art. 26(11)) (European Union (EU); first application)
Every rule this guard addresses
Binding law — in force (1)
- Texas (US-TX)
- Texas practitioners must tell patients when they use AI for diagnostic purposes (Texas SB 1188) Tex. Health & Safety Code 183.005(b)
Binding law — not yet in force or stayed (4)
- California (US-CA)
- Automated decision technology requires pre-use notice 11 CCR 7010(c)-(d) · applies from 2027-01-01
- Colorado (US-CO)
- Deployers must give point-of-interaction notice when covered ADMT influences a consequential decision C.R.S. 6-1-1704(1) · applies from 2027-01-01 · stayed
- Connecticut (US-CT)
- AEDT deployers must give employees a pre-decision notice (Connecticut) Conn. PA 26-15 Sec. 10 · applies from 2027-10-01
- European Union (EU)
- Deployers must inform people they are subject to a high-risk AI decision (EU AI Act Art. 26(11)) Article 26(11) · applies from 2027-12-02
Standard / soft law (1)
- Singapore (SG)
- Financial AI decisions should offer enquiry, appeal, and review channels to affected people (MAS FEAT) MAS FEAT Principles — Accountability (External), Principles 10-11