Product2 publishers2 min readPublished
Newsom signs a $5,000 per-post fine onto California's 2023 political-disclosure rule
AB 1130 gives the Fair Political Practices Commission power to fine an undisclosed paid political post $5,000 and to refer it to law enforcement. The penalty follows the creator who took the campaign's money.
The Product Desk · Product desk
What happened
- Gavin Newsom signed AB 1130 on Saturday, and a paid political post in California that hides the payment now carries a $5,000 fine each.
- The state has required that disclosure since 2023, with no fine and no criminal penalty attached for anyone who skipped it.
- The Fair Political Practices Commission can now impose administrative, civil or criminal penalties, and refer a violation to law enforcement as a potential misdemeanour.
- Berman introduced the bill after the New York Times reported in May that Tom Steyer had paid dozens of creators to post favourably about his campaign for governor.
- Ken Bensinger, who reported the law for the New York Times, wrote on X that a wilful violation could carry up to a year in prison.
Compiled by The Product DeskSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- exposure The money risk lands on whoever hit publish: at the maximum, a single brief cross-posted undisclosed to the four services Steyer's creators used is $20,000 out of one creator's fee.
- decision Agencies and campaigns placing these posts now choose between trusting the creator to add the line and withholding final payment until the disclosed version is live.
- precedent Texas already requires disclosure and other states are weighing it, so a creator working multiple states has to know which of them attach a dollar figure to a missing line.
- constraint With the deepfake rule's sunset moved to 2031, anyone shipping synthetic political media in California through the 2028 presidential cycle plans inside that rule instead of around its expiry.
The person who pays the fine is the person who posted. According to the Governor's office, AB 1130 covers someone paid by a campaign committee to put up online content supporting or opposing a candidate or a measure. The violation is the missing disclaimer on that person's post [6]. TechCrunch and The Next Web did not report a penalty for the agency that placed the deal or the platform that carried the post.
The Fair Political Practices Commission opened an investigation into Tom Steyer's campaign in May and closed it this week. It found that Steyer had properly notified the influencers of their obligations and "then reminded the influencers when posts were discovered without the disclaimer" [12]. A second investigation into the campaign is still open [12].
The creators Steyer paid posted on TikTok, YouTube, Instagram and Reddit, and many of those posts carried no written disclosure at first [11]. The fine is up to $5,000 for each violation [3]. One brief cross-posted undisclosed to those four services is $20,000 at the maximum, for one creator [20].
Berman said the practice reached him from inside campaigns. "I was hearing from people in the campaign world that there's this new strategy of paying political influencers to post content," he said. "Some were good about disclosure and others were a bit fast and loose" [8]. He introduced the bill after realising the existing law, and the way it was enforced, left some ambiguity, according to TechCrunch [9].
There is no federal rule requiring disclosure of those payments [13]. The New York Times reported that politicians and advocacy groups are paying creators to reach younger audiences [14]. A creator with a national client list is working one rule in California, another in Texas, and nothing at the federal level [15].
AB 1130 was one of 13 elections and social media bills Newsom signed at the Democracy Center in Los Angeles [16]. "Donald Trump won't stop until he can exert dictatorial control over your free vote and disenfranchise millions of people this November," he said in a statement [18].
Whether a post sits inside this law turns on who paid for it, and on whether the disclaimer is in the file the creator uploads or only in the brief they were sent. Campaign committee money brings the requirement with it, and an unpaid creator posting their own opinion sits outside [6]. On the evidence of the one closed Steyer file, a payer who can produce the notice and the follow-up reminder gets a closed investigation. The poster who left the line off is the one the commission can fine $5,000 [12][2].
What to watch
- Whether the FPPC treats a cross-post as one violation or one per platform. That count sets a creator's maximum bill.
- A first FPPC referral to prosecutors would test the up-to-a-year prison exposure Bensinger described.
- The November race between Xavier Becerra and Steve Hilton is the first California general election run with the fine in force.