California AB 723: what virtual staging disclosure actually requires
Last checked
As of January 1, 2026, California's AB 723 requires a real estate broker, salesperson, or anyone acting on their behalf to disclose when a listing image has been digitally altered and to make the unaltered original available alongside it. It covers any physical change made with photo-editing software or AI, from virtual staging to a removed power line, and it applies to whoever publishes the listing, not to the software used to edit the photo.
What the law actually says
AB 723 (Pellerin) was approved by the Governor and chaptered on October 10, 2025 as Chapter 497, Statutes of 2025, and took effect January 1, 2026. It adds Section 10140.8 to the Business and Professions Code’s Real Estate Law, and applies to "a real estate broker or salesperson, or person acting on their behalf" whenever they use a digitally altered image in an advertisement or other promotional material for the sale of real property. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
A "digitally altered image" is one changed with photo-editing software or AI to add, remove, or change elements such as furniture, fixtures, landscaping, a view, or a neighboring property. Ordinary photographic adjustments are excluded: lighting, sharpening, white balance, and color correction don’t change what the property actually shows. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
The disclosure itself has two parts. A statement that the image has been altered must be reasonably conspicuous on or adjacent to it, and the unaltered original has to be reachable from that same spot, either posted directly or reached through a link, URL, or QR code. If the licensee controls the site, the original has to be on that site, not just available somewhere else. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
The $250 fine that doesn't exist
Several blogs covering AB 723 state a flat $250-per-violation fine; one puts the number in its own title. The bill sets no such figure: its own Legislative Counsel’s Digest says only that violating the new duty "is a crime," because it is now part of the Real Estate Law generally. an example of the $250 claim
The number appears to come from somewhere real, just not from the state. CRMLS, the Southern California MLS most Bay Area and SoCal brokers list through, runs its own Rule 11.5.2 for digitally altered photos: a warning on first violation, then, its own knowledgebase says, "a $250 fine" if it isn’t corrected in time. That is one MLS’s own enforcement schedule, not a state penalty. An agent who never lists through CRMLS would never see it. CRMLS Rule 11.5.2 FAQ
What a licensee is actually exposed to under existing Real Estate Law is less tidy than a flat fine. Substantial misrepresentation is separate grounds for the Real Estate Commissioner to suspend or revoke a license, under Business and Professions Code Section 10176(a). That section names no dollar figure: the consequence is the license itself. Business and Professions Code § 10176
Knowingly aiding a false or misleading advertisement is its own, separate ground for discipline, under Section 10177(c) of the same code. Same outcome available: suspension or revocation, not a fine. Business and Professions Code § 10177
The one place an actual dollar fine does exist under existing Real Estate Law is the Department of Real Estate’s own Cite and Fine program, and it tops out at $2,500 per citation, for what the department itself describes as relatively minor or technical violations, not the flat $250 some blogs describe. DRE's Cite and Fine program
A different figure, $10,000, also circulates as "the AB 723 fine." That number is real, but it belongs to Section 10086, and it applies only to violating a desist-and-refrain order the Commissioner has already issued against someone: a later, heavier step than a first undisclosed photo, not the baseline exposure for one. Business and Professions Code § 10086
What MLS rules require
AB 723 sets a statewide floor; each MLS below layers its own label wording, placement rule, and enforcement on top, and the three don't match.
| MLS | What it requires |
|---|---|
| NorthstarMLS (Minnesota) | Any virtually staged, AI-generated, or AI-enhanced photo must be identified in the caption, on the photo, or in remarks. Every affected room needs an unaltered "before" image alongside the "after." NorthstarMLS guidelines |
| CRMLS (Southern California) | Label the image "digitally enhanced," "digitally altered," or "virtually staged" in the photo description field, and post the unaltered original immediately before or after it. A warning first, then a $250 fine if uncorrected. CRMLS Rule 11.5.2 FAQ |
| SDMLS (San Diego) | Tag the altered image "Virtually Staged." The unaltered original has to sit immediately before or after it in the photo sequence, or be reachable by a public URL or QR code with no login required. SDMLS AB 723 requirements |
| Stellar MLS (Florida & Puerto Rico) | Mark the photo "Virtually staged" in its description field and check the matching box. Public remarks must open with "One or more photo(s) was virtually staged." Stellar MLS photo rules |
| Bright MLS (Mid-Atlantic) | Virtually staged photos and renderings must be disclosed. Editing in or out anything not within the property owner's control, such as a view that isn't physically possible from that spot, is barred outright. Bright MLS image policy |
| NTREIS (Dallas-Fort Worth) | Reported to carry a comparable label-plus-original rule for AI-staged photos. NTREIS's own rulebook wasn't reachable to confirm the exact wording, so treat this row as directional rather than quoted. HousingWire |
Where NAR stands
The National Association of Realtors has not adopted a photo-labeling rule of its own. Its Code of Ethics, Article 12, requires members to be honest and truthful in their communications and to present a "true picture" in advertising, marketing, and other representations. NAR has confirmed that language extends to online images, including a bar on misleading ones. It does not name AI, and it does not require a specific label or a linked original. NAR Code of Ethics, Article 12
In an August 2026 post, NAR said AI in listing photos should only "show possibilities" in a home, "not rewrite reality": guidance, not a rule, and it carries none of AB 723’s or an MLS’s mechanics. A study cited alongside that post found that nearly 11% of roughly 40,000 primary listing photos pulled from Zillow, Redfin, Realtor.com, and Homes.com in the first quarter of 2026 showed signs of digital alteration. RealEstateNews.com
That gap is why the same staged photo can mean three different things depending on where it runs. In California, skipping the disclosure now means a possible Real Estate Law violation. On CRMLS, it means a warning and then a $250 fine. Under NAR's own Code, it's an ethics complaint judged against "true picture," a standard with no photo rule behind it.
Before you publish a staged photo
- Check whether the edit falls under AB 723's definition: adding, removing, or changing a physical element needs disclosure. Exposure, white balance, sharpening, and color correction don't. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
- Put a conspicuous disclosure statement on or right next to the image, not buried in a footer or a separate policy page. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
- Make the unaltered original reachable from that same spot: posted directly, linked, or reachable by a QR code. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
- Check that MLS's own label wording and placement rule before uploading: "digitally altered" on one board is not automatically "virtually staged" on another (see the table above).
- Apply the same disclosure to your own site and social posts, not only the MLS listing: AB 723 covers any advertisement or promotional material. AB 723 bill text, California Legislature
- When an edit is borderline, disclose it anyway. The Commissioner's tools for material misrepresentation attach to the misrepresentation generally, not narrowly to staging.
Questions
Common questions
Does California require disclosure for virtually staged listing photos?
Yes, since January 1, 2026. AB 723 requires a broker, salesperson, or anyone acting on their behalf to disclose a digitally altered image and make the unaltered original available, and virtual staging fits its definition of a change to a physical element of the property.
AB 723 bill text, California LegislatureIs there really a $250 fine for not disclosing an altered photo in California?
Not under AB 723 itself. The $250 figure comes from CRMLS's own internal rule for uncorrected violations on its system, not from the state law, which sets no dollar amount of its own.
CRMLS Rule 11.5.2 FAQDoes the NAR Code of Ethics require AI photo labeling?
No. Article 12 requires a "true picture" in advertising and bars misleading images, but it doesn’t name AI or set a specific disclosure format the way AB 723 or an MLS rule does.
NAR Code of Ethics, Article 12Do MLS disclosure rules outside California work the same way as AB 723?
No, and they don't match each other either. NorthstarMLS, CRMLS, SDMLS, Stellar MLS, and Bright MLS each set their own label wording and their own rule for where the unaltered original has to appear, so a photo compliant on one board can be missing a required element on another.
HousingWireMiravely reminds you to label a staged export as digitally altered before you generate it, and keeps the original photo you uploaded in your account alongside the result.