Compliance SweepBack to stories →
← Back to stories
Privacy & health informationNew in this edition

AB 883 shortens qualifying data broker deletion checks

AB 883 reduces qualifying data brokers’ deletion-mechanism access and processing periods to 30 days and tightens recurring deletion. A separate notice and civil-enforcement framework for elected officials and judges becomes operative July 1, 2027, with existing deletion exceptions retained.

What happened

California enacted AB 883 on September 27, amending Civil Code section 1798.99.86 to replace specified 45-day deletion-mechanism periods with 30 days. The chaptered text requires a data broker to access the mechanism at least once every 30 days, process qualifying deletion requests and delete covered information within 30 days, and treat unverifiable requests as sale-or-sharing opt-outs within that period. It also requires directions to associated service providers and contractors. Following a deletion, recurring deletion is at least every 30 days unless the consumer requests otherwise or an exception applies, and new information generally cannot be sold or shared without the consumer’s request or a statutory basis. The enactment is the event reported here; the applicable commencement of these provisions must be confirmed separately.

The section retains exceptions for information reasonably necessary for the listed CCPA purposes or exempt under the cited provisions; retained information is restricted to those purposes, including a ban on repurposing it for marketing. New section 1798.99.86.5 assigns specified public bodies notice duties so elected officials and judges can use the mechanism and authorizes the Attorney General, county counsel or a city attorney to seek civil relief on their behalf. A willful violation can support punitive damages. That separate section becomes operative July 1, 2027. Its date should not be substituted for the distinct broker-interval amendment or the older dates retained in section 1798.99.86.

Scope and timing

Authority status
Final
Applicability
Potentially applicable
Audience
Health systems, Provider networks, Health-tech
Jurisdiction
California

Why it matters

Covered data businesses need recurring scheduling and downstream cooperation, not only a one-time deletion event. Healthcare activity does not by itself answer whether a business or a particular dataset is within the broker law or a cited exception. Separate commencement rules need to remain visible when implementation dates are assigned.

Sources

Complete edition and supplemental material

This finding in the complete approved report →

Regulatory horizons, CIA trends and implementation trackers remain in the full report.

Read the entire Compliance Sweep report →

← Return to stories

Privacy preferences

Where enabled for this site, Cloudflare Web Analytics can send page-use and performance measurements to Cloudflare. This panel provides information and does not turn analytics on or off.

This panel stores no tracking choice and does not change your tool saves, screening, resets, reports or exports. Other sites have separate settings.

Read Privacy & Cookies