Skip to content

CMS & Regulatory Compliance

Texas HB 149

Texas HB 149 AI Disclosure for Primary Care

Timestamped HB 149 disclosure before capture and RAM-only audio for Texas primary care. Book your audit at https://cal.com/merryai/demo.

Executive Key Takeaways

  • Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §552.051(f) requires health care providers to disclose AI use to the patient no later than the date the service is first provided
  • Merry exceeds the statutory floor with a per-encounter, timestamped attestation captured before ambient recording begins
  • The disclosure banner is DOM-injected into the note header so it travels with the legal medical record
  • Encounter audio stays RAM-only and is shredded at 0 days
  • Clinician attestation and human code selection protect G2211 and modifier 25 integrity
  • Validation via Access Clinical Prompts at templates.scribing.io
Regulatory Verification Framework
2026 Audit Ready
Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §552.051(f)Verified Compliant

Health Care AI Disclosure

Health care AI disclosure to patient or personal representative no later than the date service or treatment is first provided

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §552.051(d)Verified Compliant

Clear & Conspicuous Notice

Disclosure must be clear, conspicuous, in plain language, and free of dark patterns

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §§552.101 and 552.104Verified Compliant

Exclusive AG Enforcement & Cure

Exclusive Attorney General enforcement with 60-day notice and cure period

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §552.105Verified Compliant

Civil Penalties & Liability

Civil penalties of $10,000 — $12,000 curable, $80,000 — $200,000 uncurable, $2,000 — $40,000 per day continuing

Statutory Compliance Architecture for Texas HB 149

The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, enacted as HB 149 and effective January 1, 2026, adds Chapters 551 through 554 to the Texas Business and Commerce Code. For primary care, the operative provision is Section 552.051. Subsection (f) applies the disclosure duty directly to health care: when an AI system is used in relation to a health care service or treatment, the provider must disclose that use to the patient or the patient's personal representative.

The disclosure must be clear, conspicuous, and written in plain language under Section 552.051(d), and it may not rely on a dark pattern. The duty applies regardless of whether a reasonable person would already recognize that AI is present. A website notice or a line buried in intake paperwork is a weak evidentiary posture; an encounter-level record is stronger.

Section 552.051(f) Timing in Primary Care

The statute requires disclosure no later than the date the service or treatment is first provided, or as soon as reasonably possible in an emergency. Primary care complicates this baseline. Established patients return for chronic disease follow-up, wellness visits, and acute complaints, often with different clinicians or representatives present. A single disclosure at the first visit does not document what the patient understood at the fourth. Merry treats each encounter as a discrete disclosure event, which exceeds the statutory floor and produces a per-visit audit artifact.

Practices should also review Texas SB 1188, which separately addresses practitioner disclosure and review of AI used for diagnostic purposes under the Health and Safety Code.

Pre-Capture Attestation and DOM Injection

Merry inserts a timestamped attestation before the microphone stream opens for every Texas patient (Directive P1). The attestation records the AI system identity, its documentation-only role, the supervising clinician, the patient or representative acknowledgment, and an ISO 8601 timestamp with time zone. Recording controls remain disabled until acknowledgment is captured. If the patient declines, the encounter proceeds with manual charting and no audio is processed.

The disclosure banner is written into the note header through the Chrome extension's DOM layer (Directive P7). The extension traverses nested iframes to locate the active progress note, targets stable selectors such as contenteditable regions or named textareas rather than generated IDs, and prepends a distinct block above the SOAP template. Because the banner lives inside the legal medical record, it travels with the note to billing, release-of-information, and payer review.

Note Header Persistence Across Autosave

EHR autosave and template reloads can silently overwrite injected content. A MutationObserver watches the header node, verifies the attestation after each save cycle, and restores it if a template refresh removes it. A three-state machine (disclosed, capturing, finalized) prevents duplicate banners when a clinician reopens the note in another tab. A parallel text-only log records insertion time, encounter identifier, and EHR context, so attestation integrity can be demonstrated even if the chart is later amended.

RAM-Only Audio and Zero-Day Retention

Encounter audio remains in volatile memory and is never written to disk, cloud storage, or diagnostic logging. When recording stops or the encounter closes, buffers and transcription caches are overwritten and released. HB 149 does not set an audio retention period, but its consumer-protection structure and the Attorney General's investigative authority reward data minimization. There is no recording to subpoena, breach, or repurpose.

Billing Integrity Under 2026 CMS and NCCI Rules

Disclosure does not establish medical necessity. G2211 requires documentation showing the clinician is the continuing focal point for all needed services or manages a single serious or complex condition over time, reported with office or outpatient codes 99202 to 99215 and home or residence codes 99341 to 99350. Merry structures notes around NYHA class and LVEF for heart failure, DSM-5-TR criteria with PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores, ROM degrees for musculoskeletal complaints, and Bright Futures elements for pediatric visits.

Modifier 25 requires a significant, separately identifiable E/M service, and CMS generally does not pay G2211 when the base E/M carries modifier 25, except alongside the annual wellness visit, vaccine administration, or Medicare Part B preventive services. Modifier 59 is never appended to an E/M code. Merry flags weak separation between procedural and E/M work but leaves code selection with the clinician. Confirm descriptors at https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/cpt.

Statutory Comparison and Audit Readiness

Compliance DimensionManual ChartingStandard Generic AI ScribesMerry AI Compliance Architecture
§552.051(f) disclosure recordVerbal or intake form; rarely chartedWebsite or EULA notice; not encounter-boundTimestamped attestation in note header per visit
Timing relative to AI processingNot applicableDisclosure timing not loggedCapture locked until acknowledgment recorded
§552.051(d) plain-language standardVariable by clinicianGeneric vendor languageStandardized plain-language banner
Audio retentionNo audioVendor-defined cloud retentionRAM-only, shredded at 0 days
G2211 and modifier 25 supportDependent on clinician recallTemplate-driven; may over-suggestLongitudinal scaffolding; human code selection
§552.104 cure-period evidenceManual chart pullVendor log requestExportable attestation log

Enforcement under HB 149 rests exclusively with the Texas Attorney General under Section 552.101, with a 60-day cure period under Section 552.104 following written notice. Section 552.105 penalties range from $10,000 to $12,000 per curable violation, $80,000 to $200,000 per uncurable violation, and $2,000 to $40,000 per day for continuing violations. A per-encounter attestation converts policy into evidence producible within the cure window.

Clinics preparing for 2026 audits should reconcile attestations, finalized notes, and claims carrying G2211 or modifier 25 quarterly. Schedule a 15-Minute Workflow Audit to review your EHR field mapping and disclosure sequence.

Regulatory & Compliance FAQ

When does Texas HB 149 require primary care practices to disclose ambient AI scribe use?

Section 552.051(f) of the Texas Business and Commerce Code requires disclosure to the patient or personal representative no later than the date the health care service or treatment is first provided, or as soon as reasonably possible in an emergency. Merry exceeds that floor by inserting a timestamped attestation before ambient capture at every Texas encounter, creating a per-visit record of what each patient was told and when.

What makes an HB 149 AI disclosure legally sufficient in a clinical encounter?

Section 552.051(d) requires the disclosure to be clear and conspicuous, written in plain language, and free of dark patterns, and the duty applies even when AI involvement would be obvious to a reasonable person. Merry's banner names the AI system, states its documentation-only role, identifies the supervising clinician, and records acknowledgment with a time-zoned timestamp inside the note header where payers and auditors review the record.

Who enforces Texas HB 149 and what penalties can a primary care practice face?

The Texas Attorney General holds exclusive enforcement authority under Section 552.101, and the Act creates no private right of action. After written notice, Section 552.104 provides a 60-day cure period. Section 552.105 sets civil penalties of $10,000 to $12,000 per curable violation, $80,000 to $200,000 per uncurable violation, and $2,000 to $40,000 per day for continuing violations. Exportable attestation logs support a documented cure response.

Does an HB 149 attestation in the note header affect G2211 or modifier 25 billing?

No. The attestation documents AI involvement but does not establish medical necessity. G2211 still requires evidence of longitudinal or single serious condition care with E/M codes 99202-99215 or 99341-99350, and CMS generally does not pay G2211 when the base E/M carries modifier 25, except alongside listed preventive services. Modifier 59 is never appended to an E/M code. Merry flags weak documentation and leaves final code selection to the clinician.

Where can clinics verify compliant templates?

Clinics can review specialty-structured prompts at https://templates.scribing.io, including scaffolding for NYHA class and LVEF, DSM-5-TR criteria with PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores, ROM measurements, and Bright Futures elements. Each template is designed to sit beneath the HB 149 note header banner, keeping disclosure and clinical content in one auditable record. Compare template output against your EHR field mapping during a workflow audit before Texas deployment.

Explore More Knowledge

Related Clinical Rules & Compliance Guides

View all clinical rules & compliance
Florida Statute 934.03 Compliance for Psychiatry
CMS & Regulatory Compliance

Florida Statute 934.03 Compliance for Psychiatry

Enforce all-party verbal consent before psychiatric audio capture under Fla. Stat. 934.03(2)(d). Book your audit at https://cal.com/merryai/demo.

Dr. Sarah Chen, MD•7 min read
Read guide
Illinois 720 ILCS 5/14-2: Internal Medicine Consent
CMS & Regulatory Compliance

Illinois 720 ILCS 5/14-2: Internal Medicine Consent

Document all-party consent before ambient capture in Illinois internal medicine visits. Book your audit at https://cal.com/merryai/demo.

Dr. Sarah Chen, MD•7 min read
Read guide
Texas HB 149 AI Disclosure for Family Medicine
CMS & Regulatory Compliance

Texas HB 149 AI Disclosure for Family Medicine

Timestamp HB 149 disclosures before capture and protect G2211 integrity. Book your audit at https://cal.com/merryai/demo.

Dr. Sarah Chen, MD•7 min read
Read guide