Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481 (2026)
Exemptions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 45.50.481. Exemptions.
(a) Nothing in AS 45.50.471 — 45.50.561 applies to
(1) an act or transaction regulated by a statute or regulation administered by the state, including a state regulatory board or commission, unless the statute or regulation does not prohibit the practices declared unlawful in AS 45.50.471;
(2) an act done by the publisher, owner, agent, or employee of a newspaper, periodical, or radio or television station in the publication or dissemination of an advertisement, when the owner, agent, or employee did not have knowledge of the false, misleading, or deceptive character of the advertisement or did not have a direct financial interest in the sale or distribution of the advertised product or service;
(3) an act or transaction regulated under AS 21.36 or AS 06.05 or a regulation adopted under the authority of those chapters.
(b) The exemption in (a)(3) of this section does not apply to an act or transaction between a bank and its borrowers, depositors, or other customers or potential customers.
(c) The exemption in (a)(1) of this section does not apply to an act or transaction listed in AS 45.50.471(b) or regulated under AS 06.60.
(a) Nothing in AS 45.50.471 — 45.50.561 applies to
(1) an act or transaction regulated by a statute or regulation administered by the state, including a state regulatory board or commission, unless the statute or regulation does not prohibit the practices declared unlawful in AS 45.50.471;
(2) an act done by the publisher, owner, agent, or employee of a newspaper, periodical, or radio or television station in the publication or dissemination of an advertisement, when the owner, agent, or employee did not have knowledge of the false, misleading, or deceptive character of the advertisement or did not have a direct financial interest in the sale or distribution of the advertised product or service;
(3) an act or transaction regulated under AS 21.36 or AS 06.05 or a regulation adopted under the authority of those chapters.
(b) The exemption in (a)(3) of this section does not apply to an act or transaction between a bank and its borrowers, depositors, or other customers or potential customers.
(c) The exemption in (a)(1) of this section does not apply to an act or transaction listed in AS 45.50.471(b) or regulated under AS 06.60.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Adkins v. Collens, 444 P.3d 187 (Alaska 2019).
Adkins v. Collens, 444 P.3d 187 (Alaska 2019). “Collens's UTPA claim was not exempt under AS 45.50.481(a)(1). Both of Maxim's exemption defenses involve arguments about how to interpret the UTPA.”
State v. First Nat'l Bank of Anchorage, 660 P.2d 406 (Alaska 1982). “Brown filed his answer and later moved for summary judgment on the ground that the Consumer Protection Act did not apply to real estate transactions, or in the alternative that he was exempt from the Act under AS 45.50.481. [4] The trial court granted Brown's summary judgment…”
Alaska Interstate Constr., LLC v. Pac. Diversified Investments, Inc., 279 P.3d 1156 (Alaska 2012). “The pertinent exemption relating to conduct regulated by other statutory schemes appears in AS 45.50.481(a)(1): Nothing in [the UTPA] applies to .”
Smallwood v. Cent. Peninsula Gen. Hosp., 151 P.3d 319 (Alaska 2006). “” 46 But AS 45.50.481(a)(1) exempts from the UTPA any acts or transactions “regulated under laws administered by the state, [or] by a regulatory board or commission .”
State v. O'Neill Investigations, Inc., 609 P.2d 520 (Alaska 1980). “" AS 45.50.481(1). It can be noted at this juncture that the debt collection licensing statute, set out in Title 8, Chapter 24 of the Alaska Statutes, does not prohibit the practices declared to be unlawful in § 471 of the Act.”
Cornelison v. TIG Ins., 376 P.3d 1255 (Alaska 2016). “We agree with Griffin & Smith that the Cornelisons’ claim is essentially one for unfair claims settlement, which falls within the AS 45.50.481(a)(3) exemption. The Cornelisons alleged the defendants acted in concert to misrepresent Floyd’s physical capacities, delayed the…”
Pepper v. Routh Crabtree, APC, 219 P.3d 1017 (Alaska 2009). “First, Routh Crabtree argues that any alleged violations are exempt from UTPA regulation under AS 45.50.481(a)(1) because they are already prohibited by the Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure and the *1024 Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct.”
Matanuska Maid, Inc. v. State, 620 P.2d 182 (Alaska 1980). “" AS 45.50.481. Appellants assert that insofar as the practices which are the subject of the investigative demand, if proven, would also violate the Alaska Restraint of Trade Act, the above quoted section precludes the Attorney General from issuing an investigative demand…”
O.K. Lumber Co. v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 759 P.2d 523 (Alaska 1988). “AS 45.50.481(3). We conclude that O.K. Lumber has no cause of action under the Consumer Protection Act due to the express exemption for the insurance industry found in AS 45.”
White v. NYLIFE Sec., LLC (D. Alaska 2021). “]”32 NYLIFE argues that under AS § 45.50.481(a)(1), “the UTPA does not apply to acts in trade or commerce ‘regulated by a statute or regulation administered by the state, including a state regulatory board or commission, unless the statute or regulation does not prohibit the…”
White v. NYLIFE Sec., LLC (D. Alaska 2022). “6 In February 2021, NYLIFE moved to dismiss White’s UTPA claim, asserting the claim is barred by AS 45.50.481(a)(1). That provision exempts from the UTPA “an act or transaction regulated by a statute or regulation administered by the state, including a state regulatory board or…”
The State of Alaska v. Express Scripts, Inc. (D. Alaska 2024). “”100 Ultimately, “unfair acts and practices are exempt from the purview of the Act only where the business is both regulated elsewhere and the unfair acts and practices are therein prohibited.”101 The ACSA provides that “[a] controlled substance classified under federal law or…”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(1) — 2 cases
State v. O'Neill Investigations, Inc., 609 P.2d 520 (Alaska 1980). “" AS 45.50.481(1). It can be noted at this juncture that the debt collection licensing statute, set out in Title 8, Chapter 24 of the Alaska Statutes, does not prohibit the practices declared to be unlawful in § 471 of the Act.”
State v. First Nat'l Bank of Anchorage, 660 P.2d 406 (Alaska 1982). “Brown filed his answer and later moved for summary judgment on the ground that the Consumer Protection Act did not apply to real estate transactions, or in the alternative that he was exempt from the Act under AS 45.50.481. [4] The trial court granted Brown's summary judgment…”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(3) — 1 case
O.K. Lumber Co. v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 759 P.2d 523 (Alaska 1988). “AS 45.50.481(3). We conclude that O.K. Lumber has no cause of action under the Consumer Protection Act due to the express exemption for the insurance industry found in AS 45.”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(a) — 1 case
Roberson v. Southwood Manor Assocs., LLC, 249 P.3d 1059 (Alaska 2011).
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(a)(1) — 8 cases
Adkins v. Collens, 444 P.3d 187 (Alaska 2019). “Collens's UTPA claim was not exempt under AS 45.50.481(a)(1). Both of Maxim's exemption defenses involve arguments about how to interpret the UTPA.”
Alaska Interstate Constr., LLC v. Pac. Diversified Investments, Inc., 279 P.3d 1156 (Alaska 2012). “The pertinent exemption relating to conduct regulated by other statutory schemes appears in AS 45.50.481(a)(1): Nothing in [the UTPA] applies to .”
Smallwood v. Cent. Peninsula Gen. Hosp., 151 P.3d 319 (Alaska 2006). “” 46 But AS 45.50.481(a)(1) exempts from the UTPA any acts or transactions “regulated under laws administered by the state, [or] by a regulatory board or commission .”
Pepper v. Routh Crabtree, APC, 219 P.3d 1017 (Alaska 2009). “First, Routh Crabtree argues that any alleged violations are exempt from UTPA regulation under AS 45.50.481(a)(1) because they are already prohibited by the Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure and the *1024 Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct.”
White v. NYLIFE Sec., LLC (D. Alaska 2021). “]”32 NYLIFE argues that under AS § 45.50.481(a)(1), “the UTPA does not apply to acts in trade or commerce ‘regulated by a statute or regulation administered by the state, including a state regulatory board or commission, unless the statute or regulation does not prohibit the…”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(a)(3) — 1 case
Cornelison v. TIG Ins., 376 P.3d 1255 (Alaska 2016). “We agree with Griffin & Smith that the Cornelisons’ claim is essentially one for unfair claims settlement, which falls within the AS 45.50.481(a)(3) exemption. The Cornelisons alleged the defendants acted in concert to misrepresent Floyd’s physical capacities, delayed the…”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.50.481(a)(8) — 1 case
Cornelison v. TIG Ins., 376 P.3d 1255 (Alaska 2016). “We agree with Griffin & Smith that the Cornelisons’ claim is essentially one for unfair claims settlement, which falls within the AS 45.50.481(a)(3) exemption. The Cornelisons alleged the defendants acted in concert to misrepresent Floyd’s physical capacities, delayed the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.