Key facts
- Representative Nathaniel Moran has proposed the AI Incident Reporting Act.
- The bill mandates AI model developers to report dangerous capabilities, security breaches, and safety incidents to the U.S. Commerce Department.
- Companies must report incidents within seven days of discovery.
- The Commerce Department will notify Congress of serious incidents within 48 hours.
- A New York AI transparency law requires companies with over $500 million in annual revenue to publish risk assessment frameworks and report safety incidents within 72 hours.
- AI industry groups spent significantly to oppose a co-author of the New York AI law in a congressional primary.
U.S. Representative Nathaniel Moran has introduced the AI Incident Reporting Act, a bill that would require developers of artificial intelligence models to report dangerous capabilities, security breaches, and safety incidents to the U.S. Commerce Department. The proposed legislation mandates that such incidents be reported within seven days of discovery. Following notification, the Commerce Department would be required to inform Congress about serious incidents within 48 hours.
Meanwhile, in New York, a significant primary election battle highlighted the intense industry opposition to AI safety legislation. State Assemblymember Alex Bores, a co-author of New York's Responsible AI Safety and Education Act (RAISE Act), lost his bid for a congressional seat after facing substantial opposition spending from AI industry groups. The RAISE Act, which takes effect in January 2027, requires AI developers with over $500 million in annual revenue to publish annual frameworks detailing their risk assessments and mitigation strategies for safety threats. It also mandates reporting serious safety incidents to the state within 72 hours, with potential fines of up to $1 million for initial violations and $3 million for subsequent ones.
AI industry political groups, such as the super PAC Leading the Future, reportedly spent over $27 million in the New York primary, arguing that state-level AI laws create a "chaotic patchwork" and that a single national regulatory framework would be more beneficial for innovation. These groups have raised substantial funds to influence legislation and oppose candidates who support detailed disclosure requirements.