AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Horsford, Steven [D-NV-4]
- Committees
- Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 18, 2026
Bottom line
The bill establishes a federal framework for collecting and reporting data on how artificial intelligence is affecting the U.S. labor market.
What it actually does
This bill mandates that publicly-traded companies, federal agencies, and certain non-publicly-traded companies disclose quarterly data to the Department of Labor regarding job impacts (layoffs, hires, unfilled positions, retraining) that are substantially due to artificial intelligence. The Department of Labor is then required to compile, analyze, and publicly release reports based on this collected data to inform policymakers and the public.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this legislation is crucial for providing policymakers, educators, and workers with the necessary data to understand and proactively adapt to the evolving job landscape shaped by AI. They contend that robust data will enable the development of effective workforce development programs and informed policy responses to both the challenges and opportunities presented by AI.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that the bill imposes an undue reporting burden on businesses, particularly smaller non-publicly-traded companies, potentially stifling innovation or creating significant administrative overhead. They may also raise concerns about the subjective nature of attributing job changes 'substantially due to AI,' which could lead to inconsistent or inaccurate data without clear benefits.
The bill is concise and can be read quickly, allowing an informed reader to grasp its core provisions and implications within a short timeframe.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the Act as the 'AI-Related Job Impacts Clarity Act.' This is the common name by which the legislation would be known and referenced.
Supporters argue
Establishing a clear short title is standard legislative practice, making the bill easily identifiable and referable in public discourse and legal contexts.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision, as it is a procedural element of legislative drafting.
Tradeoffs
None inherent in the provision itself.
Section 2(a)
Covered Entity Quarterly Disclosures
This provision requires 'covered entities'—including publicly-traded companies, federal agencies, and certain non-publicly-traded companies—to submit quarterly disclosures to the Secretary of Labor. These disclosures must detail the number of individuals laid off, hired, or whose positions were left unfilled due to AI, as well as those retrained because of AI, along with corresponding industry codes.
Section 2(b)
Department of Labor Reports and Publication
This section directs the Secretary of Labor, acting through the Commissioner of Labor Statistics, to prepare and publish quarterly and biennial reports. These reports will summarize and analyze the data collected from covered entities, making the findings publicly available on the Bureau of Labor Statistics website and submitting them to Congress.
Section 2(c)
Application to Non-Publicly-Traded Companies
This provision requires the Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Secretary of the Treasury, to issue regulations within 180 days of enactment. These regulations will determine the extent to which non-publicly-traded companies will be subject to the reporting requirements, considering factors like workforce size, revenue, industry, proportionality of burden, and confidentiality of data.
The bill defines 'artificial intelligence' by referencing Section 5002 of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020 (15 U.S.C. 9401).
Section 2(d)(1)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to ensure consistency with existing federal law and avoid redundant definitions, promoting a unified understanding of key terms across different acts.
Case for: Using an established, federally recognized definition of AI ensures consistency in application and leverages prior legislative work, avoiding definitional disputes and providing clarity for covered entities.
Case against: Requiring external lookup for a core definition can make the bill less immediately accessible to a general audience or those unfamiliar with the referenced statute, potentially hindering quick comprehension of the bill's scope.
Estimated impact: This definition fundamentally shapes the scope of the entire bill, determining which technologies' job impacts are subject to reporting and analysis.
The bill defines 'publicly-traded company' by referencing Section 5003(a) of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (15 U.S.C. 9009c(a)).
Section 2(d)(4)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative technique to maintain consistency across federal laws and avoid re-litigating established definitions, streamlining the drafting process.
Case for: Leveraging an existing definition for 'publicly-traded company' provides immediate legal clarity and avoids ambiguity, ensuring that a well-understood category of entities is subject to the reporting requirements.
Case against: The reliance on external statutes for definitions can create a barrier to immediate understanding for readers who do not have ready access to or familiarity with the referenced legal texts.
Estimated impact: This definition determines a significant portion of the entities immediately subject to the bill's reporting requirements, establishing the initial scope of data collection.
The bill specifies that the 'Secretary' (referring to the Secretary of Labor) shall act 'through the Commissioner of Labor Statistics' for the purposes of this Act.
Section 2(d)(6)
Why it matters:This is standard administrative clarification, designating the specific office or official within a department responsible for executing the Act, ensuring that the appropriate expertise and infrastructure are utilized.
Case for: Designating the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) as the implementing entity ensures that the data collection, analysis, and reporting are handled by an agency with established expertise in labor market statistics and data integrity, enhancing the credibility of the reports.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against this administrative detail, though some might argue for broader departmental involvement or a different agency if they believed BLS lacked specific capabilities.
Estimated impact: This provision directs the operational responsibility for all data collection, analysis, and reporting under the Act to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, thereby shaping the institutional approach to the bill's mandate.