California considers fines for creators who don't disclose paid political posts

California's Fair Political Practices Commission could soon gain the power to fine influencers and committees up to $5,000 per violation if they fail to disclose paid political content, bypassing the court process that currently makes the state's 2023 disclosure law slow to enforce.

Democratic Assemblymember Marc Berman has introduced a bill to penalise content creators and political committees when influencers post political content for payment without disclosing it to their audiences. The proposed legislation comes as campaigns increasingly work with smaller creators, sometimes with fewer than 100,000 followers, to reach tailored audiences ahead of the midterms and the 2028 presidential election.

California's existing law, passed in 2023, requires disclosure but is difficult to enforce. The state's campaign watchdog can seek a court order compelling an influencer to disclose payment, but that process can take months. The new bill would grant enforcement authority directly to the Fair Political Practices Commission, removing the need for prolonged court action.

What creators need to know

California is one of two states, along with Texas, that have passed policies requiring content creators to say if they've been paid by a political campaign to post. Texas Ethics Commission approved its rule in June 2024 with a 7-0 vote, requiring social media influencers to disclose when their content is a paid political advertisement.

The New York Legislature is also considering similar requirements, while at the federal level there remains no equivalent disclosure mandate for political content, despite the FTC requiring clear disclosure for commercial endorsements.

The compliance gap is sharp. While influencers promoting consumer products face FTC penalties for non-disclosure, those who are paid to promote or create political content are not required by the Federal Election Commission to disclose payments or perks from candidates, campaigns, or committees.

The enforcement problem states are trying to fix

California's move to introduce fines reflects a practical problem: laws without enforcement teeth don't change behaviour. Texas introduced its rule nearly a year after reports that influencers were being quietly paid to defend impeached Attorney General Ken Paxton, with the Texas Ethics Commission giving final approval in a 7-0 vote.

A company called Influenceable LLC paid Gen Z social media users on TikTok, Instagram and other platforms to share posts impugning the legitimacy of the impeachment inquiry and to accuse Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan of being an alcoholic, reaching millions of followers.

Cases like this have made the argument for state-level action more urgent. A lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center hopes disclosure requirements passed by states will lead to federal rules, calling transparency "one of the most important pillars of our election system".

Why this matters for 2028

Campaign operatives, state lawmakers and election ethics experts predict that the influx of influencer payments and AI media in California's primaries is just a taste of what voters could see on the federal level, where regulations are broadly weaker than in California, during the 2028 presidential race.

Democratic strategist Mike Nellis, who worked for former Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign, said: "If you're running for president and you are not currently trying to court some of these people or lining up your own people to act as surrogates for you, you're already behind".

The strategic shift is already visible. In California's recent gubernatorial primary, Los Angeles-based influencer Shaka Smith took to Instagram to tell his more than 700,000 followers whom he was voting for, opening with a clear disclaimer and specifying in the caption that he was paid by the campaign. That level of transparency is what California's proposed fines are designed to make standard, not exceptional.

The gap between commercial and political disclosure

The regulatory mismatch creates perverse incentives. An influencer paid to promote a skincare product must disclose that relationship or risk FTC enforcement. The same influencer paid to promote a political candidate faces no equivalent federal requirement, though the content may be far more consequential.

This creates two distinct categories of influencers, consumer and political, regulated by two separate federal agencies with sharply contrasting rules regarding sponsored content. While the FTC updated its Endorsement Guides in 2023 to tighten commercial disclosure standards, the FEC has not moved to impose similar requirements on political content.

State action is filling the gap, but inconsistently. California's proposed penalties would create real compliance risk for creators working on campaigns in the state, while creators working on the same campaigns but posting from other states face no such exposure. That patchwork creates complexity for national campaigns and raises questions about jurisdiction and enforcement when content crosses state lines.

What creators should do now

Even without federal mandates, the direction is clear. Disclose early, disclose clearly, and document everything. Treat political paid partnerships with the same compliance discipline you'd apply to a commercial brand deal, because the regulatory direction is towards equivalence, not away from it.

If California's bill passes and fines begin to land, expect other states to follow quickly. The cost of getting this wrong is no longer theoretical.