Skip to content

AI law comparison · Data verified 2026-08-22

California AB 2013 vs China AIGC Measures

California AB 2013 and China AIGC Measures are two of the 169 AI and data regulations Aegis Firma tracks. They have different scopes, effective dates, and penalties — and many businesses fall under both. Here is the side-by-side, drawn directly from the regulatory registry.

Find which laws apply to my business

Side by side

Attribute
California AB 2013
China AIGC Measures
Region
US-CA
CN
Effective date
2026-01-01
2023-08-15
Enforcement begins
Who must comply
Applies to any person or entity that "designs, codes, produces, or substantially modifies" a generative AI system and makes it available to California residents. Retroactive: covers GenAI systems deployed since January 1…
Applies to organizations providing generative AI services to the "general public within China" — this includes both Chinese-registered entities and overseas companies accessible in China (unless blocked by the Great Fire…
Maximum penalty
No statutory penalty — AB 2013 specifies NO monetary penalty amount and names NO enforcer (the statute is silent on enforcement). There is no private right of action. Non-compliance would most likely be pursued by the California Attorney General (or district/city attorneys) under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 et seq.); any monetary exposure derives from that general theory, not from AB 2013 itself. The prior "$5,000 per violation" figure was not in the statute. legal_review_pending.
Service suspension; fines under Cybersecurity Law (up to ¥1,000,000) and PIPL (up to ¥50,000,000 or 5% revenue)
Compliance requirements
3 tracked
5 tracked
Enforcement actions on record
None on record yet
1
Data last verified
2026-08-22
2026-08-22

Summary of publicly available regulatory text. Verify against current official sources before relying on this for compliance decisions. Not legal advice.

The key difference

China AIGC Measures takes effect first, so it is usually the more urgent of the two. California AB 2013 tracks 3 compliance requirements and China AIGC Measures tracks 5. They are not interchangeable — meeting one does not discharge the other. The practical question is not which law is “stricter,” but which of them — or both — actually applies to your business.

US-CA

California AB 2013 — Generative AI Training Data Transparency Act

California AB 2013 requires any person or company that designs, codes, produces, or substantially modifies a generative AI system made available to California residents (since January 1, 2022) to publicly post a high-level summary of the training datasets used. This applies to businesses that build their own AI models or substantially customize foundation models — not just those using off-the-shelf AI APIs. If your p…

Full California AB 2013 requirements
CN

China Interim Measures for Generative AI Services (AIGC)

China's Interim Measures for the Management of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services (issued by CAC and six agencies, effective August 15, 2023) applies to any organization providing generative AI services to the general public within China — including overseas companies with users in China. Requirements cover training data legitimacy, content accuracy, security assessments, algorithm registration (for services…

Full China AIGC Measures requirements

Common questions

Could both California AB 2013 and China AIGC Measures apply to my business?

Yes. California AB 2013 and China AIGC Measures are separate regulations with separate scopes — a business can fall under both at once. California AB 2013 covers Applies to any person or entity that "designs, codes, produces, or substantially modifies" a generative AI system and makes it available to California residents… China AIGC Measures covers Applies to organizations providing generative AI services to the "general public within China" — this includes both Chinese-registered entities and overseas com… If your operations meet both scopes, you must comply with both. Aegis Firma's free scan checks all 169 tracked regulations against your business profile so you do not have to read each law to find out.

Which has the higher maximum penalty — California AB 2013 or China AIGC Measures?

California AB 2013: No statutory penalty — AB 2013 specifies NO monetary penalty amount and names NO enforcer (the statute is silent on enforcement). There is no private right of action. Non-compliance would most likely be pursued by the California Attorney General (or district/city attorneys) under the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 et seq.); any monetary exposure derives from that general theory, not from AB 2013 itself. The prior "$5,000 per violation" figure was not in the statute. legal_review_pending. China AIGC Measures: Service suspension; fines under Cybersecurity Law (up to ¥1,000,000) and PIPL (up to ¥50,000,000 or 5% revenue) Penalty structures differ by regulator and violation type — read each law's full page for the cure periods and per-violation detail.

When does each law take effect?

California AB 2013 — effective 2026-01-01. China AIGC Measures — effective 2023-08-15. Dates last verified against official sources on 2026-08-22 and 2026-08-22 respectively.

Related comparisons

See all law comparisons

Stop guessing which laws apply

Answer a short questionnaire about your business and Aegis Firma tells you exactly which of 169 regulations apply — and what each one requires you to do.

Start free compliance scan