Being deceived by photos is a shame, to say the least. All the mental time, energy and space you spent on a property – imagining yourself there, calculating lifestyle compatibility, imagining renovations – all evaporates the moment you walk in the door and realize that the photos you see bear no resemblance to reality.
You will definitely be disappointed.
This has been the norm for nearly 20 years. Agents and photographers have enhanced their images, sometimes subtly and sometimes dramatically, to show the property in the best possible light. It started with small enhancements.
AI tools removed telephone poles, brightened the sky, added grass, and spruced up the entire house. The line between “enhanced” and “cheated” became blurred, and buyers showed up expecting MLS photos, only to be met with the harsh reality. Some checks were introduced early on. The MLS requirement to disclose virtually staged homes has existed for some time, but California has decided enough is enough.
What has changed? California Assembly Bill 723
Starting January 1, 2026, California’s (new) Assembly Bill (AB) 723 requires real estate professionals to disclose if images in real estate listings have been digitally altered and provide access to the unaltered versions.
Although the statute is short at 580 words, it is clear and impactful. The California Department of Real Estate has implemented a full-fledged enforcement mechanism. These include legal discipline against brokers and salespeople, the pursuit of civil liability against agents and their companies, and criminal prosecution in cases of willful violation. This principle is old and unwavering. “Ignorantia Legis Non Excusat”, i.e. ignorance of the law, is not an excuse.
What you can’t do
Real estate agents, salespeople, and their representatives must disclose if an image has been digitally altered and provide access to the unaltered version via link, URL, or QR code. Disclosures must be “reasonably conspicuous” and placed on or adjacent to the altered image (so get used to using captions for them or adding text to your photos).
Agency-managed websites must either display the original image directly or provide a link. This requirement applies to all platforms. MLS, our personal website, social, portals, and virtual tours. Disclosure is required if a digitally altered image appears somewhere a buyer might see it before making an offer.
There are no carve-outs on Instagram. There are no exceptions for Facebook. No, “everyone does it.” This language is intentionally open to interpretation because Congress understands that buyers research properties everywhere, and that changing images on any platform can influence offer decisions.
Edits that agents have used without disclosing for years are now explicitly required under AB 723. Turn on the lights, green the lawn, remove clutter and equipment, add water to the pool, remove snow and cords, add a fireplace effect, remove imperfections, and more. Although these practices existed, disclosure was voluntary. California now requires it.
What you can do
Professional and routine adjustments such as lighting, sharpness, white balance, color correction, deskewing, cropping, and exposure do not need to be disclosed if they do not change the depiction of the property.
The distinction is easy. Does the edit make the property look different than it actually is? No white balance, exposure, or cropping is done.
result
DREs can seek disciplinary action for violations, but civil liability poses a greater risk.
If a buyer decides to make an offer and some foreign, investor, or transfer buyer does not physically inspect the property based on unpublished and altered photos and the property does not match, that buyer will have a misrepresentation claim.
The discovery question is simple. Did you change the image? Was a disclosure made? Did the buyer see the unaltered version?
“We considered the edits acceptable” is not a legal defense. California’s consumer protection and false advertising laws increase your exposure to claims of fraud and unfair competition, including attorneys’ fees and damages.
What about existing lists?
This law does not mention retroactivity. Case law suggests that the law only applies to properties listed after January 1, 2026, and does not apply retroactively to properties listed previously. However, you should assume that full compliance applies to properties relisted or reactivated after January 1st. Safest approach: This is still unresolved, so consult your broker’s compliance team for final guidance.
No more catfish fishing
AB 723 does not prohibit image enhancements, but requires disclosure. Buyers must be clear about which images represent reality or enhancement. Disclosure does not weaken marketing. Honest agents minimize compliance burdens. Anyone using private changes will need to change their policies.
America Foy is a broker associate at The Grubb Co. Connect with him on LinkedIn and Instagram.
