On June 16, 2026, the Vermont Governor signed into law the Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act, making Vermont the fourth state to enact a comprehensive data privacy law this year. The law will take effect on January 1, 2028.

This law most closely resembles the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, with definitions that are generally consistent with the Connecticut model. The below lists the key provisions in the law:

  • Scope. The law applies to businesses that conduct business in Vermont or target products and services to state residents and that (1) control or process the personal data of at least 35,000 consumers, (2) control or process the sensitive data of at least 3,000 consumers, or (3) offer for sale the personal data of at least 3,000 consumers. However, the law’s consumer health data provisions apply more broadly.
  • Exemptions. The law includes several entity-level and data-level exemptions. For example, it exempts HIPAA-covered entities, data subject to the GLBA, certain banks and their affiliates, and data subject to FERPA.
  • Consumer Rights. The law gives Vermont consumers the right to access, correct, delete, and obtain copies of their personal data, as well as to opt out of the processing of their personal data for the purposes of targeted advertising, sale, or profiling in furtherance of any automated decision that produces any legal or similarly significant effect concerning the consumer. In connection with such profiling, consumers also have additional rights, including to be informed of the reason profiling resulted in the relevant decision and to question the results of such profiling. The law allows a consumer to designate an authorized agent using a technology, such as an internet link or an internet browser setting, that allows the consumer to indicate their intent to opt out of certain processing. Controllers that are subject to the law must respond to consumer rights requests without undue delay, but no later than 45 days, and must establish an appeal process for consumers if the controller denies a request.
  • Data Minimization. Controllers must limit the collection of personal data to what is “reasonably necessary and proportionate” in relation to the purposes for which data are processed, as disclosed to the consumer. Controllers must obtain consent to process personal data for any “material new purpose” that is “neither reasonably necessary to, nor compatible with” the disclosed purposes for which the personal data is processed.
  • Data Protection Assessments. Controllers are required to conduct data protection assessments for processing activities that present a heightened risk of harm, including processing for targeted advertising, the sale of personal data, and processing of sensitive data. The law also requires a separate impact assessment for any profiling used to make a decision that produces a legal or similarly significant effect concerning a consumer. The data protection and impact assessment requirements will apply to processing activities beginning after January 1, 2028 and are not retroactive.
  • Sensitive Data. Controllers must obtain consent and limit processing of sensitive data to what is reasonably necessary in relation to the purposes for which sensitive data was collected. Controllers must also obtain consumer consent prior to selling sensitive data. Sensitive data includes, for example, consumer health data, genetic or biometric data, personal data collected from a known child, precise geolocation data, and neural data.
  • Additional Controller Obligations. Controllers are required to establish reasonable data security practices and to provide a privacy policy on their website that is reasonably accessible, clear, and meaningful. Among other requirements, the privacy policy must include a statement disclosing whether the controller collects, uses, or sells personal data for the purpose of training large language models. Controllers are prohibited from selling or processing for targeted advertising purposes the data of individuals who are at least 13 and younger than 18 years old. Like the Connecticut and Maryland privacy laws, the law also imposes several obligations and restrictions on businesses that process consumer health data, including prohibiting businesses from selling consumer health data without prior consent from the consumer.
  • Enforcement. The Vermont Attorney General has exclusive authority to enforce the law as a violation of the Vermont Consumer Protection Act. The law has a cure period that gives businesses 60 days to address any alleged violations until June 30, 2029.
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
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 2025 ranks Libbie in Band 3 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.”

Photo of Jayne Ponder Jayne Ponder

Jayne Ponder provides strategic advice to national and multinational companies across industries on existing and emerging data privacy, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence laws and regulations.

Jayne’s practice focuses on helping clients launch and improve products and services that involve laws governing data privacy…

Jayne Ponder provides strategic advice to national and multinational companies across industries on existing and emerging data privacy, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence laws and regulations.

Jayne’s practice focuses on helping clients launch and improve products and services that involve laws governing data privacy, artificial intelligence, sensitive data and biometrics, marketing and online advertising, connected devices, and social media. For example, Jayne regularly advises clients on the California Consumer Privacy Act, Colorado AI Act, and the developing patchwork of U.S. state data privacy and artificial intelligence laws. She advises clients on drafting consumer notices, designing consent flows and consumer choices, drafting and negotiating commercial terms, building consumer rights processes, and undertaking data protection impact assessments. In addition, she routinely partners with clients on the development of risk-based privacy and artificial intelligence governance programs that reflect the dynamic regulatory environment and incorporate practical mitigation measures.

Jayne routinely represents clients in enforcement actions brought by the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general, particularly in areas related to data privacy, artificial intelligence, advertising, and cybersecurity. Additionally, she helps clients to advance advocacy in rulemaking processes led by federal and state regulators on data privacy, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence topics.

As part of her practice, Jayne also advises companies on cybersecurity incident preparedness and response, including by drafting, revising, and testing incident response plans, conducting cybersecurity gap assessments, engaging vendors, and analyzing obligations under breach notification laws following an incident.

Jayne maintains an active pro bono practice, including assisting small and nonprofit entities with data privacy topics and elder estate planning.

Photo of Bryan Ramirez Bryan Ramirez

Bryan Ramirez is an associate in the firm’s San Francisco office and is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He advises clients on a range of regulatory and compliance issues, including compliance with state privacy laws. Bryan also maintains…

Bryan Ramirez is an associate in the firm’s San Francisco office and is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He advises clients on a range of regulatory and compliance issues, including compliance with state privacy laws. Bryan also maintains an active pro bono practice.

Photo of Rosie Moss Rosie Moss

Rosie Moss is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Rosie advises clients on a wide range of data privacy and technology…

Rosie Moss is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Rosie advises clients on a wide range of data privacy and technology regulatory issues, including emerging artificial intelligence compliance matters. She assists clients in complying with federal and state privacy laws and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations. Rosie also maintains an active pro bono practice.