<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With Legislative Decree no. 47 of March 27, 2026, published in the Official Journal no. 86 of April 14, 2026, and which entered into force on April 29, 2026, the legislator introduced artificial intelligence into the Consolidated Law on Finance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The formal inclusion of artificial intelligence in the Consolidated Law on Financial Intermediation (TUF) represents a significant development in the regulation of financial markets and services in Italy. The interest lies not only in the updating of the regulatory text, but also in the fact that a technology already widely discussed at European level and already in practical use by operators is now expressly recognized in domestic legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From this perspective, the amendment appears consistent with the general evolution of financial regulation over the past few decades. Market law has long ceased to be a discipline built solely around the stability of intermediaries or the formal correctness of transactions, but rather a system that progressively tends to incorporate the organizational, technological, and informational changes that impact the relationship between intermediaries, investors, and market infrastructures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Historically, financial regulation has often responded to innovations through a gradual process. First, new operating practices emerge; then, issues of transparency, control, and the allocation of responsibilities emerge; finally, the legislator intervenes, or supervisory guidelines consolidate, to bring these phenomena within more clearly defined legal categories. Artificial intelligence also appears to be part of this development: from a technical tool used in internal activities or in customer-facing services, it is now tending to become the subject of independent regulatory attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The financial sector, moreover, is among the contexts where the adoption of AI is particularly relevant in practice. The OECD project hosted and promoted by the Bank of Italy in 2026 highlighted that artificial intelligence is already being used or tested in Italian financial markets, with implications for data analysis, process efficiency, fraud prevention, and more generally for the structure of supervisory controls and policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This finding is also important from a social perspective, as it signals a broader transformation in the way economically relevant decisions are made, supported, or guided. In the financial sector, the use of AI affects areas where public trust, investor protection, and market stability remain central; for this reason, technical innovation tends to be viewed not only in terms of efficiency, but also in terms of reliability, comprehensibility, and control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is one of the most interesting aspects of AI's inclusion in the TUF. The point does not appear to be, at least initially, the creation of a completely separate discipline, but rather the clarification that the use of intelligent systems in financial services can no longer be considered neutral with respect to the intermediary's traditional obligations.[cite:1][cite:16] Financial regulation therefore continues to move along its classic guidelines\u2014fairness, transparency, organization, controls, and accountability\u2014but reinterprets them in light of technological tools that can impact decision-making, customer relations, and the overall risk structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this context, coordination with the European framework becomes inevitable. The communications released in 2025 by ESMA and Consob on the use of artificial intelligence in investments confirm that the issue concerns not only internal innovation within operators, but also the way AI impacts relationships with the public and informs investment decisions. The new provisions in the TUF can therefore also be seen as part of a broader process of integration between technological innovation and market regulation, in which the European and national levels are destined to mutually influence each other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another issue concerns the relationship between automation and accountability. European and national authorities insist that AI tools cannot be assumed as a self-sufficient source of decision-making, especially when they impact investment decisions or public communications. The growing focus on supervision, information quality, and the informed use of AI tools signals that financial services law continues to presuppose a human and organizational responsibility, even when operations are supported by advanced models.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From this perspective, the ongoing regulatory evolution seems to reflect a more general shift in legal modernity. Contemporary finance is increasingly infrastructural, digital, and data-driven; consequently, regulation tends to shift from the sole regulation of documents and products to the regulation of the processes, organizational models, and technological architectures that enable financial activity. Artificial intelligence is also incorporated into the TUF as an indicator of this transformation: not only as a new operational tool, but as an element that changes the way regulators view the market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For intermediaries, the issue therefore takes on more than just formal significance. The new regulation suggests the need to assess how the use of AI fits within governance frameworks, internal controls, relationships with technology providers, and the documentation of decision-making processes. More generally, a phase appears to be dawning in which regulatory compliance in the financial sector will increasingly have to address technological aspects that, until recently, remained marginalized by the sector's positive legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The amendment to the TUF therefore has a value that goes beyond the textual content. It confirms that artificial intelligence has firmly entered the field of financial regulation and that market law, as often happens during periods of economic and technological transformation, is adapting to preserve the continuity of principles and the adequacy of its tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Content edited by Avv. Claudio Bonora<\/a> and Lawyer. Gianmaria Pesce<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Sources<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n