The Current Legal Landscape: NIL Agent Regulation Exists -- But It’s Fragmented, Uneven, and Outdated by Design

When I use the words “unregulated NIL agent," that’s not literally true. NIL agents are regulated, but that regulation misses the mark. In practice, it’s outdated, fragmented across federal law, state law, and school policy, and it certainly did not contemplate the current NIL/Rev-Share reality.

Federal law: SPARTA is real -- and the FTC just put it back in play

The somewhat relevant federal statute is the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act (“SPARTA”), codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 7801–7807. SPARTA is a law that prohibits certain conduct by sports agents relating to contracts with student-athletes, including recruiting through false or misleading statements or providing “anything of value” before an agency contract is signed.

SPARTA matters even more today because the FTC has now signaled that it intends to treat SPARTA as a live enforcement tool, not a dead letter. On January 12, 2026, the FTC announced it’s seeking information from 20 universities about whether sports agents working with student-athletes have complied with SPARTA’s requirements.

The FTC’s press release states three things plainly:

1. SPARTA requires disclosures to the athlete and notice to schools, including “specific language requirements” in a disclosure document.
   

2. Agents must notify the athlete’s school within 72 hours after entering a contract (or before the athlete’s next eligible athletic event, whichever is earlier).

3. The FTC’s letters request information such as the date the school was notified, the agent’s name, and whether complaints have been received, with responses requested by March 23, 2026.

This is not a theoretical future. It’s happening now.

But this still doesn’t solve the real problem. SPARTA is mainly a consumer-protection style statute focused on disclosures and deceptive recruiting conduct. Obviously addressing that conduct is important, but it’s not sufficient for NIL/Rev-Share representation.

SPARTA does not create a modern, industry-wide licensing system. It does not create uniform fee caps. It does not define the line between true NIL and salary-like compensation. It doesn’t create standardized contract terms. It’s more of a baseline, not a full professional-regulation regime. More is needed in order to properly protect college athletes from the unregulated agent.

State law: UAAA/RUAAA exists -- but states are not uniform in practice

At the state level, a major “model law” addressing agents has been the Uniform Athlete Agents Act of 2000 (“UAAA”) and its later updates (referred to as the Revised Uniform Athlete Agents Act in some states).

A model law is a draft statute created by experts, legal scholars, or organizations (the Uniform Law Commission drafted the UAAA and RUAAA) that serves as a template for a new law. It’s designed to be adopted, in whole or part, by state or national legislatures to promote uniformity in the law and what the drafter of the law considers to be "best practices" across different jurisdictions.

The NCAA has long promoted the UAAA because it governs certain aspects of the agent-athlete-school relationship. For example, the original UAAA requires agent background information and includes a written notice requirement to institutions when a student-athlete signs an agency contract. The RUAAA (updated in 2019) expanded the definition of “athlete agent” as well as “student-athlete,” allowed for reciprocal registration between the states, added new requirements for signing an agency contract, and expanded notification requirements. Currently, 42 states have adopted either the UAAA or the updated RUAAA.

But here’s the problem for athletes and families: the laws regulating athlete agents are not the same in every state.

While the majority of states have adopted either the UAAA or the RUAAA, some key states (California, Michigan, and Ohio) have non-UAAA agency laws. And of the 42 states that have adopted the UAAA or RUAAA, those states have made their personal changes to the model laws. So the “uniform” law is not so uniform across the states.

Add into the mix the fact that there’s also the NCAA NIL policy that must be followed, along with other emerging state NIL laws, as well as court cases flying off the presses, and this patchwork of policies, laws, and court orders becomes a legal minefield.

So yes, there are rules. But as a practical matter, the market is still operating without a unified, sports-industry standard for agent conduct and compensation that actually matches the NIL & Rev-Share world.

[Next in the Agent Series: The Pricing Problem: NIL Agent Representation Fees Are All Over the Map]