Disclosure rules for digitally altered listing photos
Since January 1, 2026, California has required a conspicuous disclosure and a link to the original photo on any digitally altered listing image. Virtual staging is squarely covered. This page sets out what the law asks for, what happens if you skip it, what NAR's Code of Ethics already required everywhere, and the exact wording you can paste into a listing.
No signup, no paywall. Every claim below links to its primary source so you can check it yourself.
Does California require disclosure of virtually staged photos?
Yes. Since 1 January 2026, California Business & Professions Code § 10140.8 (AB 723) requires two things on any digitally altered listing photo: a conspicuous statement that the image was altered, and a link to the unaltered original. Virtual staging is covered. In a 297-listing audit, 95.3% met neither requirement.
Updated:
1. What does California AB 723 require?
- Citation
- AB 723 — Bus. & Prof. Code § 10140.8
- Effective
- January 1, 2026
- Applies to
- CA brokers, salespersons, and anyone acting on their behalf
Two things are required, not one:
- 1A statement disclosing that the image has been altered, “reasonably conspicuous and located on or adjacent to the image.”
- 2A link, URL, or QR code to a publicly accessible page that includes and clearly identifies the original, unaltered image.
Where the posting is on a website the licensee controls, the unaltered image itself has to be included or linked. The second requirement is the one most listings miss: a “virtually staged” label alone does not satisfy the statute.
2. What counts as a digitally altered image?
AB 723 draws the clearest line of any rule so far, and it is wider than most agents assume. It is not only virtual staging.
Needs disclosure
- Virtual staging — adding furniture, rugs, art, or decor
- Removing furniture, clutter, or personal items
- Changing paint color, flooring, or wall finishes
- Replacing or altering fixtures and appliances
- Sky replacement and day-to-dusk conversion
- Greening or reshaping lawns, landscaping, and hardscape
- Altering the facade, floor plan, or anything outside the property
Explicitly excluded
- Lighting adjustments
- Sharpening
- White balance and color correction
- Angle, straightening, and cropping
- Exposure
- Other common photo editing that does not change how the property is represented
The test is whether the edit changes how the property is represented — not whether software was involved.
3. What applies if your state has no statute?
No statute in your state does not mean no obligation. Two of the three rules below have applied nationwide for years.
NAR Code of Ethics — Article 12
REALTORS® must be honest and truthful in their real estate communications and present a true picture in their advertising, marketing, and other representations.
NAR 2026 Code of EthicsNAR Standard of Practice 12-10
Prohibits manipulating listing content in any way that produces a deceptive or misleading result, and otherwise misleading consumers, including use of misleading images.
NAR 2026 Code of EthicsYour MLS rulebook
Effectively every MLS has photo rules that already cover altered images, typically requiring a label on the photo and sometimes requiring the original to be uploaded alongside it. These bind you whether or not your state has a statute.
4. What happens if you do not disclose?
AB 723 creates no penalty of its own. It writes a new requirement into the Real Estate Law, and that law's existing enforcement is what attaches: a willful violation is a misdemeanor under Bus. & Prof. Code § 10185, punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, up to six months in county jail, or both, and the Real Estate Commissioner can suspend or revoke a license under § 10177(d) for willfully disregarding or violating the law.
The realistic exposure is the licensing one. A consumer complaint goes to the DRE, not to a district attorney. As of this review we have found no published DRE enforcement action under § 10140.8, which is what you would expect eight months into a statute nobody is following yet — not evidence that it will stay that way.
A willful violation is a misdemeanor
Bus. & Prof. Code § 10185: anyone who willfully violates, or knowingly participates in a violation of, the Real Estate Law is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, up to six months in county jail, or both. AB 723 wrote its requirement into that same division, and the bill's digest states the consequence in terms.
Bus. & Prof. Code § 10185The Real Estate Commissioner can suspend or revoke the license
Bus. & Prof. Code § 10177(d) lets the commissioner suspend or revoke the license of a licensee who has willfully disregarded or violated the Real Estate Law. This is the realistic exposure. It does not need a criminal charge, and it is the route a consumer complaint takes.
Bus. & Prof. Code § 10177Hiring it out does not move the exposure
The statute reaches a broker or salesperson “or person acting on their behalf”, and defines a digitally altered image as one created by or at the direction of them. Separately, § 10177(h) reaches a broker who failed to exercise reasonable supervision. A photographer or staging vendor does not absorb the obligation; the license on the listing carries it.
Bus. & Prof. Code § 10140.8Outside California the exposure is not criminal, it is professional: a Code of Ethics complaint to your association, an MLS photo-rule violation, or a state advertising rule of the kind New York's Department of State has already invoked against misleading AI imagery. Section 7 lists what we found where.
5. How do you publish a compliant listing?
- 1
Label the image
Put a short disclosure on the photo or in the caption directly beside it. “Digitally Altered — Virtually Staged” is enough. A disclaimer buried at the foot of the page is not “adjacent to the image”.
- 2
Publish the original somewhere public
The original has to be reachable without a login. A page that shows the unaltered photo next to the altered one satisfies both the “includes” and “clearly identifies” parts of the statute.
By hand this means a public folder per listing and a URL that has to keep resolving for as long as the listing is up. QuickStaging mints that page for each staged photo, with the original beside the altered version and a QR code for print.
See how it works - 3
Put the link in your MLS remarks
Public remarks, not agent-only remarks. Use one of the snippets below so the wording carries both the statement and the link.
- 4
Use a QR code in print
Flyers and brochures cannot carry a hyperlink, which is exactly why the statute names QR codes as an option.
- 5
Keep the originals
Archive the unaltered files. If a disclosure is ever questioned, the original photo is the evidence, and the link has to keep resolving for as long as the listing is up.
6. What should the disclosure actually say?
Replace {LINK} with the URL where the original photo is published. Short on purpose — long legalese gets deleted before it reaches a listing.
MLS public remarks
Some photos are digitally altered (virtually staged). Original, unaltered photos: {LINK}
Keep it in public remarks, not agent-only remarks — the disclosure has to reach the consumer.
On-image label
Digitally Altered — Virtually Staged
On or adjacent to the image itself. A caption under the photo counts; a note at the bottom of the page does not.
Listing description / portal
This listing includes digitally altered images. Furniture and decor shown are virtual and not included in the sale. View the original, unaltered photos here: {LINK}
Use where you control the body text — your own site, portal descriptions, email.
Single-photo caption
Virtually staged. See the original photo: {LINK}
Shortest form that still carries both required parts: the statement and the link.
Print flyer / brochure
Digitally altered image. Scan the QR code to view the original, unaltered photo.
Print cannot carry a hyperlink, which is exactly why the statute allows a QR code.
Social post
Virtually staged — furniture is digital and not included. Original photo: {LINK}
Put it in the caption itself. A link in bio does not clearly identify the original for a specific image.
7. Which states have a rule?
One state has a statute. Every row here was read against its own primary source, and each row carries the date it was read, because a table with a single review date quietly claims freshness for rows nobody reopened.
- In force — a statute or rule that binds you today.
- Regulator guidance — no image-specific rule, but the licensing regulator has published where it stands under an existing advertising rule.
- Proposed — a bill or rulemaking that is not law. Listed so a headline about it is not mistaken for one.
- Checked, none found — we read the state's own rules and there is nothing image-specific. That is an answer, not a gap.
Whole table last walked August 22, 2026. Next walk due November 1, 2026, and the two rows worth reopening first are the proposed ones, because those are the ones that can turn into law.
| Jurisdiction | Status | Citation | Effective | Source | Checked |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | In force | AB 723 — Business & Professions Code § 10140.8Chapter 497, Statutes of 2025, approved October 10, 2025. The only dedicated statute on digitally altered listing images in force anywhere in the United States as of this review. | 2026-01-01 | ||
| New York | Regulator guidance | 19 NYCRR § 175.25(c)(9); Real Property Law § 441-cNo dedicated statute. On November 13, 2025 the Department of State issued a consumer alert saying AI-generated listing images that misrepresent a property can violate the existing rule requiring advertising to honestly and accurately depict the property, and can expose a licensee to discipline under § 441-c. Senate Bill S9584, which would name materially misleading digital representations a deceptive act, was reported and committed to the Judiciary Committee on April 28, 2026 and is not law. | — | ||
| New York City | Proposed | —Proposed, not adopted, and rental listings only. On July 16, 2026 the city announced, as one of 23 measures in its Rental Ripoff Report, a rule requiring landlords, brokers and listing platforms to disclose when listing photos or video were created or altered with AI. The Department of Consumer and Worker Protection would write the rule; no rule text has been published yet. Listed because a city rule reaches brokers a state statute has not. | — | ||
| Texas | Checked, none found | 22 TAC § 535.155 (general advertising rule)Checked TREC's rules index and the advertising rule. Nothing image-specific. § 535.155 defines an advertisement broadly enough to cover a listing photo and bars any advertisement that is false, misleading or deceptive, which is the rule an undisclosed altered photo would be argued under. Trade coverage describing a 2025 TREC rule update on altered images is something we could not substantiate against the Texas Administrative Code, so it is recorded here as not found rather than repeated. | — | ||
| Wisconsin | Checked, none found | Wis. Stat. § 452.136; Wis. Admin. Code ch. REEB 24 (general)Chapter REEB 24, the licensee conduct rule, was amended effective March 1, 2026 and nothing in the amendments addresses photographs or altered images. Advertising is governed by § 452.136, and REEB 24 bars exaggerating or misrepresenting facts in practice. That is the rule that would reach an undisclosed altered photo; there is no image-specific one. | — | ||
| Colorado | Checked, none found | SB 24-205, as amended by SB 25-189Nothing image-specific, and nothing in force. Colorado's broader AI Act was pushed to 2027 by SB 25-189, and it is a general algorithmic-discrimination statute rather than a listing-photo rule. Recorded so the row shows it was checked. | — |
Every other state: California is still the only one with a statute written for digitally altered listing images. That does not leave you unregulated — NAR Article 12 and Standard of Practice 12-10 apply to REALTORS® nationwide, every state has a general rule against misleading advertising, and your MLS almost certainly has a photo rule that covers altered images already. If you know of a rule missing from this table, send us the citation and we will add it with its source.
8. Questions we get asked
Where the statute answers a question, the answer quotes it. Where it does not, the answer says that instead of filling the gap.
Who is responsible — the agent, the brokerage, or the photographer?
The licensee. § 10140.8 reaches “a real estate broker or salesperson, or person acting on their behalf”, and defines a digitally altered image as one created by or at the direction of them. Ordering staging from a vendor puts the vendor inside the statute; it does not take the listing agent out of it.
The brokerage sits behind that. § 10177(h) lets the commissioner discipline a broker who failed to exercise reasonable supervision over the licensees acting under them, which is the ordinary route by which a salesperson's advertising becomes the broker's problem.
Does it cover listings that went live before January 1, 2026 and are still up?
The statute contains no grandfather clause and no transition period. The obligation attaches to the advertisement or promotional material rather than to the moment the listing was created, so on the face of the text a listing still being published is still an advertisement.
That is our reading, and it is the one place on this page where we are reading rather than quoting. We have found no DRE guidance addressing pre-2026 listings either way. If a listing of yours has been live since 2025 with altered photos, that is a question for your broker, and the cheap answer is to add the disclosure rather than to litigate the timing.
Is a disclosure in the MLS remarks enough?
For the first requirement, probably, depending on where the remarks render. The statute asks for a statement that is “reasonably conspicuous and located on or adjacent to the image” and does not define adjacent. On most portals the description sits below the photo carousel; a disclaimer at the foot of the page does not.
For the second requirement, no, and this is the part that is being missed at scale. A sentence saying the photos are virtually staged carries no route to the original. In our own audit of California listings that disclose alteration, the disclosure sentence is present in every one and only a handful carry a link or QR code to the unaltered photo.
Does ordinary photo enhancement count as a digital alteration?
No, and the statute is unusually specific about it. Subdivision (b)(2) excludes images where only lighting, sharpening, white balance, color correction, angle, straightening, cropping, exposure or other common photo editing adjustments were made.
The line is whether the edit changes how the property is represented. Brightening a room is outside the statute. Replacing the sky, greening the lawn, removing a power line, changing a paint color or adding furniture is inside it, and the definition names fixtures, furniture, appliances, flooring, walls, paint color, hardscape, landscape, facade and floor plans.
Does it apply to agents outside California?
It is a licensing rule, so the question is whose license is on the listing rather than where the desk is. It binds California brokers and salespersons and anyone acting on their behalf, which includes an out-of-state photographer or staging service working on a California listing at a licensee's direction.
Outside California there is no equivalent statute anywhere yet. That is not the same as no obligation: NAR Article 12 and Standard of Practice 12-10 bind REALTORS® nationwide, New York's Department of State has said in terms that misleading AI imagery can violate its existing advertising rule, and effectively every MLS already has a photo rule that reaches altered images.
Not legal advice
This page is a plain-language summary written for real estate professionals, not legal advice, and it may be incomplete or out of date. Statutes and MLS rules change, and how a rule applies depends on your situation. Confirm your obligations with your broker, your MLS, and your own attorney before relying on anything here. Links to primary sources are provided throughout so you can read the underlying text yourself.
Disclosure built into the staging
QuickStaging stamps a disclosure label onto the image and mints a public page showing the original photo beside the staged one — with a shareable link and a QR code for print. That covers both halves of what AB 723 asks for, without a separate workflow.
Try virtual staging