Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Utah Legislature Passes Comprehensive Privacy Bill

By Lindsey Tonsager, Libbie Canter & Jayne Ponder on March 7, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Utah appears poised to be the next state with a comprehensive privacy law on its books, following California, Virginia, and Colorado.  On March 2nd, the Utah House of Representatives voted unanimously to approve an amended version of the legislative proposal, and the Senate concurred with the House amendment on the following day.  Formalities are now being completed to send the bill to Governor Spencer Cox for signature.

The Utah Consumer Privacy Act (“UCPA”) provides for consumer rights and responsibilities for controllers and processors.  Although the bill generally tracks the comprehensive privacy law passed in Virginia last year, the VCDPA, there are some notable differences.  Key provisions in the bill include the following:

  • Scope of the Law: The UCPA would apply to controllers or processors that (1) conduct business in the state or produce a product or service that is targeted to Utah consumers, (2) have annual revenue of $25,000,000 or more, and (3) satisfy one or more of the following thresholds:  (a) during a calendar year, controls or processes personal data of 100,000 or more consumers or (b) derives over 50% of its gross annual revenue from the sale of personal data and controls or processes personal data of 25,000 or more consumers.  Notably, the law would not apply to nonprofits, institutions of higher education, covered entities under HIPAA, several types of health data, or financial institutions or an affiliate of a financial institution governed by, or data regulated by, the GLBA.
  • Consumer Rights: The UCPA provides consumers with rights to confirm whether a controller is processing the consumer’s personal data, access personal data, delete the consumer’s personal data that the consumer provided to the controller, and obtain a portable copy of the consumer’s personal data that the consumer previously provided.  The right to delete only applies to personal data provided by the consumer and not all data the controller has obtained about the consumer.  The bill also grants consumers a non-discrimination right, and the bill does not include a consumer right to correct inaccuracies in personal data.
  • Opt-out Rights for “Sale” and “Targeted Advertising”: Consistent with the VCDPA, the UCPA would provide Utah consumers with rights to opt-out of the “sale” of their personal data and targeted advertising.  However, it would not provide consumers with the right to opt-out of certain “profiling” activities, distinguishing it from the VCDPA.  The definitions of “sale” and “targeted advertising” generally follow the VCDPA’s approach, though “sale” is arguably narrower under the UCPA.  Notably, the UCPA does not require controllers to undertake data protection assessments for these (or any other) activities.
  • Sensitive Data Processing: Prior to processing the consumer’s sensitive data, the controller must first present the consumer with a clear notice and the opportunity to opt-out of such processing, or in the case of a known child, process the data in accordance with the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act.  This opt-out approach notably diverges from the VCDPA and Colorado Privacy Act, which require consent prior to processing sensitive data.  “Sensitive data” is defined as  data that reveals racial or ethnic origin, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, citizenship or immigration status; or reflects information regarding medical history, conditions, or treatment; genetic or biometric data, if that data is used to identify a person; or specific geolocation data.  Notably, “sensitive data” does not include personal data that reveals an individual’s racial or ethnic origin “if the personal data is processed by a video communications service” or by a person licensed to provide healthcare.  Video communications service is not defined in the bill.
  • Enforcement: The law would not provide consumers a private right of action to enforce the law’s requirements.  Instead, the law empowers a division within state government to establish and administer a system to receive and investigate consumer complaints.  If the division has “reasonable cause to believe that substantial evidence exists” that an entity is in violation of the law’s requirements, the division may refer the matter to the Attorney General.  Once the matter is referred to the Attorney General, there is a 30-day notice and cure period.
  • Effective Date: If signed by the governor, the bill would take effect on December 31, 2023.

 

Photo of Lindsey Tonsager Lindsey Tonsager

Lindsey Tonsager is a recognized leader in representing companies before federal and state regulators, and is renowned for advising on minor protection, AI, and state comprehensive privacy laws.

Lindsey chairs the firm’s global Data Privacy and Cybersecurity practice. She advises clients in their…

Lindsey Tonsager is a recognized leader in representing companies before federal and state regulators, and is renowned for advising on minor protection, AI, and state comprehensive privacy laws.

Lindsey chairs the firm’s global Data Privacy and Cybersecurity practice. She advises clients in their strategic and proactive engagement with the Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Congress, the California Privacy Protection Agency, and State Attorneys General on proposed changes to data protection laws, and regularly represents clients in responding to investigations and enforcement actions involving their privacy and information security practices.

Lindsey’s practice focuses on helping clients launch new products and services that implicate the laws governing the use of artificial intelligence; data processing for robotics, autonomous vehicles, and other connected devices; biometrics; online advertising; the collection of personal information from children, teens, and students online; e-mail marketing; disclosures of video viewing information; and new technologies.

Lindsey also assesses privacy and data security risks in complex corporate transactions where personal data is a critical asset or data processing risks are otherwise material. In light of a dynamic regulatory environment where new state, federal, and international data protection laws are always on the horizon and enforcement priorities are shifting, she focuses on designing risk-based global privacy programs for clients that can keep pace with evolving legal requirements and efficiently leverage the clients’ existing privacy policies and practices. She conducts data protection assessments to benchmark against legal requirements and industry trends and proposes practical risk mitigation measures.

Read more about Lindsey TonsagerEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Libbie Canter Libbie Canter

Libbie Canter represents a wide variety of multinational companies on managing privacy, cyber security, and artificial intelligence risks, including helping clients with their most complex privacy challenges and the development of governance frameworks and processes to comply with U.S. and global privacy laws.

Libbie Canter represents a wide variety of multinational companies on managing privacy, cyber security, and artificial intelligence risks, including helping clients with their most complex privacy challenges and the development of governance frameworks and processes to comply with U.S. and global privacy laws. She routinely supports clients on their efforts to launch new products and services involving emerging technologies, and she has assisted dozens of clients with their efforts to prepare for and comply with federal and state laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act, the Colorado AI Act, and other state laws. As part of her practice, she also regularly represents clients in strategic transactions involving personal data, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence risk and represents clients in enforcement and litigation postures.

Libbie represents clients across industries, but she also has deep expertise in advising clients in highly-regulated sectors, including financial services and digital health companies. She counsels these companies — and their technology and advertising partners — on how to address legacy regulatory issues and the cutting edge issues that have emerged with industry innovations and data collaborations.

Chambers USA 2026 ranks Libbie in Band 2 Nationwide for both Privacy & Data Security: Privacy and Privacy & Data Security: Healthcare.Chambers USA notes, Libbie is “incredibly sharp and really thorough. She can do the nitty-gritty, in-the-weeds legal work incredibly well but she also can think of a bigger-picture business context and help to think through practical solutions.”

Read more about Libbie CanterEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Jayne Ponder Jayne Ponder

Jayne Ponder counsels companies on the intersection of privacy, AI, and emerging technology regulation, and routinely represents clients in regulatory inquiries, investigations, and enforcement matters before federal and state agencies.

Jayne counsels clients across industries to launch and enhance products, services, and governance…

Jayne Ponder counsels companies on the intersection of privacy, AI, and emerging technology regulation, and routinely represents clients in regulatory inquiries, investigations, and enforcement matters before federal and state agencies.

Jayne counsels clients across industries to launch and enhance products, services, and governance programs involving their collection and use of data and emerging technologies. Her experience spans U.S. comprehensive privacy, automated decisionmaking, AI governance, biometric privacy, surveillance and algorithmic pricing, and AI transparency, disclosure, and safety frameworks. She partners with clients to design products and governance programs that keep pace with the dynamic regulatory environment, including in connection with digital and online advertising, social media, AI-powered and agentic services, connected devices, and robotics.

In addition, she advises companies on engagement with federal and state regulators, including through enforcement and rulemaking. Jayne analyzes privacy and security risks in complex corporate transactions. She also provides strategic input on the legislative, regulatory, and policy developments shaping the privacy and AI landscape.

Jayne maintains an active pro bono practice, focusing on assisting nonprofits with their privacy programs and elder estate planning.

Read more about Jayne PonderEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Privacy and Cybersecurity
  • Blog:
    Global Policy Watch
  • Organization:
    Covington & Burling LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo