On the Policy board, the liability-allocation axis is moving. As the industry meets this week at AGNTCon in San Jose to standardize what agents may do, the law still has not said who pays when they do it wrong. The answer, for now, is a delegation trap: Regulation E was written for the human delegate with the card and it does the same work handed to software. The cost of the wrong purchase lands on whoever handed over the credentials.
The mechanics of this allocation are increasingly clear. Under Regulation E, a transfer is not “unauthorized” if it was initiated by a person the consumer furnished the access device to. Software agents, acting on behalf of the user, fall into this same trap. Contract law further binds the principal to what the agent accepted, including arbitration terms that are now being contested in various forums. California Civil Code 1714.46 already bars the “the AI did it” defense outright, stating that AI autonomy is no shield against liability.
But federal law remains largely silent on the specific question of agent authorization. The CLARITY Act focuses on custody and segregation duties for intermediaries, leaving the agent-authorization void intact. Meanwhile, the Warner AI Agent-Fiduciary bill attempts to impose fiduciary duties on agent providers, but it remains in committee.
The pattern is consistent across the stack. Our recent coverage of the measurement layer and the unpriced reviewer shows how the industry is offloading the margin of error to human queues while the law settles on the deployer as the point of responsibility. As noted in our tracking of the 42-state AG coalition and the twelve-state chatbot rulebook, the states are moving to fill the void that federal silence has left open.
Ultimately, the current legal landscape favors the provider. By framing agent actions as delegated authority, the risk is transferred to the user at the moment of onboarding. Until federal rules define a specific “meaningful human review” standard for agents, builders and users are navigating an allocation map where the exit leads back to the principal. Industry efforts, such as those discussed at AGNTCon, are attempting to standardize agent identity, but these efforts remain distinct from the statutory allocation of liability.
