The proposal under review
According to AI4Business, the US state of Delaware is studying a corporate model in which an artificial intelligence agent administers the company: it signs contracts, selects suppliers, purchases services and decides how to use resources in accordance with its own instructions. The owners contribute capital and receive the profits, while day-to-day management of the business is entrusted to the software.
The central issue of the model concerns liability. If a decision by the agent causes harm to a customer or another company, the main party from which compensation would be sought would be the company itself, through its own assets. The arrangement described therefore concentrates risk at the company level, with safeguards designed for the owners.
What is still missing
The Delaware initiative is still a draft, as the source specifies: it is therefore not a rule in force, but a hypothesis under study. The US Congress has requested clarifications on this proposal, a step that signals the existence of open questions on the regulatory and supervisory front.
The available material does not specify which aspects were challenged by Congress, nor what technical or transparency requirements would be imposed on AI agents called upon to administer a company. The timing of any legislative process and any application outside Delaware also remain to be verified.
Why it matters and the European issues
The significance of the proposal lies in the shift in perspective it introduces: not AI as a tool to support human decisions, but as an entity that directly manages the company's affairs, while liability remains anchored to the company and its assets. According to the source, this arrangement would change the way business is done and raises the question of how to treat entities that act without a human director.
On the European front, AI4Business observes that Italy and the EU would need different rules, without going into detail on which rules would be involved. The material does not indicate which specific legal obstacles would stand in the way of adopting such a model in Europe, nor does it provide assessments from regulatory authorities or EU institutions. It is therefore a substantive indication, not a verified regulatory analysis.
To be verified
The reconstructed picture is based on a state draft and a request for clarifications from Congress: there is no confirmation on adoption, final contents or how liability would be allocated. The scope of safeguards for owners and any impact on contractual relationships with customers and suppliers will also need to be verified, aspects that the source does not detail.
