AI Agents Can Move Money, But They Can’t Pay for Their Mistakes

Agentic artificial intelligence (AI) wallets may be capable of moving money, negotiating terms and entering transactions without human intervention, but under existing U.S. law they cannot be held legally responsible when those actions go wrong.

That accountability gap is emerging as a central legal issue as businesses experiment with autonomous AI systems capable of paying invoices, rebalancing portfolios, executing trades and managing other financial operations, according to an analysis by Gamma Law.

“The problem with agentic wallets is not that they can move money,” Gamma Law said. “The problem is that they can move money without becoming legally responsible for what they do.”

American commercial law generally assumes that economic activity can ultimately be attributed to a person or legally recognized entity. Agentic wallets challenge that premise because they can perform functions resembling those of employees, financial managers and agents without having legal status themselves.

AI systems have no legal personhood under current U.S. law. Unlike people, corporations, partnerships and other recognized entities, an AI wallet cannot independently own property, incur legal obligations or bear liability. Courts cannot impose damages on software, meaning responsibility for an autonomous transaction must ultimately be attributed to a user, developer, platform operator or other legally recognized party.