California’s new photo law: What real estate agents need to know
Being catfished by photos is disappointing, to say the least. The time, energy and mind space you’ve invested in a property – imagining yourself there, calculating the lifestyle, envisioning renovations – all evaporate the moment you walk through the door and realize the listing photos bear no resemblance to reality.
It never disappoints.
This has been the norm for almost twenty years. Agents and photographers enhanced images – sometimes subtly, sometimes dramatically – to present properties in their best light. It started with small improvements.
AI tools have removed utility poles, cleared the air, added grass, and staged entire houses. The line between “improved” and “cheated” became blurred, and buyers showed up expecting the MLS photos, only to discover the harsh reality. Some controls were put in place early on. MLS requirements to publicly disclose virtually staged homes have been around for a while, but California has decided it has had enough.
What has changed? California Bill 723
From January 1, 2026 California’s (new) Assembly Bill (AB) 723 requires real estate professionals to disclose when real estate listing images have been digitally altered and provide access to unaltered versions.
The statute is short, 580 words, but clear and impactful. The California Department of Real Estate has enforcement mechanisms with real teeth. These include regulatory discipline against brokers and sellers, legal liability for agents and their companies, and in cases of intentional violation, criminal prosecution. The principle is age-old and unyielding: Ignorantia legis non excusat – ignorance of the law is no excuse.
What you can’t do
Real estate agents, sellers and anyone acting on their behalf must disclose when images are digitally altered and provide access to unmodified versions via a link, URL, or QR code. Disclosures must be “reasonably prominent” and located on or next to the modified image (so use those captions, or get comfortable adding text to photos).
On websites managed by agents, original images must be posted or linked directly. This requirement applies to all platforms, and I mean all of them. MLSs, our personal websites, social media, portals and virtual tours. If a digitally altered image appears somewhere where a buyer can see it before placing a bid, disclosure is required.
There is no exception for Instagram. No exception for Facebook. No, “everyone does it.” The language is intentionally open to interpretation because lawmakers understand that buyers everywhere are researching properties and that altered images on any platform can influence their decision to make an offer.
Operations that agents have used for years without disclosure now clearly require them under AB 723: turning on lights, greening the grass, removing clutter or equipment, adding pool water, removing snow or cords, adding fireplace effects, removing blemishes and the like. These practices existed, but disclosure was voluntary. In California it is now mandatory.
What you can do
Routine professional adjustments (exposure, sharpening, white balance, color correction, straightening, cropping, and exposure) do not require disclosure if they do not change the appearance of the property.
The distinction is simple: does the edit make the property look different than it actually is? White balance, exposure and cropping are not.
Implications
The DRE can take disciplinary action for violations, but civil liability poses a greater risk.
If a buyer decides to make an offer, some foreigners, investors or buyers may move still does not physically inspect the properties, based on undisclosed altered photographs, and the properties do not match, then the buyer has a claim of misrepresentation.
Discovery questions are simple: Have you changed images? Has there been disclosure? Has the buyer seen unmodified versions?
“We thought the edits were acceptable” is not a legal defense. California’s consumer protection and false advertising statutes increase the risk of fraud and unfair competition claims, including possible attorneys’ fees and damages.
What about existing listings?
The law has no retroactive effect. Precedent suggests the law only applies to ads posted after January 1, 2026, and not retroactively to ads posted earlier. However, for properties relisted or reactivated after January 1, full compliance should be assumed to apply. The safest approach: consult your broker’s compliance team for definitive advice, as this remains unanswered.
No more catfishing
AB 723 does not prohibit image enhancement, but it does require disclosure. Buyers deserve clarity about which images represent reality versus enhancement; disclosure does not weaken marketing. Agents with integrity face minimal compliance burdens. Those using secret modifications must change course now.
America Foy is a broker at The Grubb Co. Connect with him LinkedIn And Instagram.
