NIL law in Florida — SB 646 and the rules every Florida college athlete is signing under

State: Florida (FL)

Last reviewed 2026-05-18

[Reviewed by Darren Heitner or contracted NIL counsel — TBD]

Statute — in force

Florida was one of the earliest states with an NIL statute on the books. SB 646 (2020) took effect on July 1, 2021 — the same day the NCAA opened the interim NIL window — and it remains the operating framework for athletes at the University of Florida, Florida State, Miami, UCF, USF, and every other Florida postsecondary institution.

Statute citation

Florida Intercollegiate Athlete Compensation and Rights Act

SB 646 — Fla. Stat. § 1006.74

Enacted 2020 — effective 2021-07-01

Permits Florida postsecondary student-athletes to earn compensation for the use of their name, image, or likeness; requires NIL contracts to be disclosed to the school; and prohibits schools and the relevant athletic associations from punishing an athlete for accepting NIL compensation.

Read the statute on the official source

What the law actually says

Florida's SB 646 was signed by Governor Ron DeSantis on June 12, 2020 and took effect on July 1, 2021. It is codified at Florida Statutes section 1006.74. The statute lets athletes earn NIL compensation, requires written contracts, and obliges athletes to disclose NIL deals to a designated official at their school. Compensation cannot be conditioned on attendance at a particular institution (the recruiting-inducement bar) and cannot come from prohibited categories — alcohol, tobacco, gambling, controlled substances, and similar. The statute also gives student-athletes the right to obtain professional representation from agents or attorneys for NIL purposes. Florida's framework was one of the earliest in the country to bind NIL through statute rather than executive order, which means the governing text has a stable codified citation that lawyers and compliance offices can point to. The statute has been the subject of subsequent legislative discussion as the NIL landscape evolves, but the operative text remains the SB 646 framework as codified.

Allowed NIL activities

Endorsements, sponsorships, and influencer deals with permitted brand categories.
Use of an agent or attorney for NIL representation, with no loss of eligibility.
Group licensing, autograph signings, and athlete-run camps or clinics.
Pre-signing review of a contract by a licensed attorney before disclosure to the school.
NIL deals while a student is between semesters or in the offseason, subject to disclosure.

Restricted or prohibited NIL activities

NIL compensation conditioned on attending a particular school (the recruiting-inducement bar).
Endorsements of alcohol, tobacco, controlled substances, banned athletic substances, adult entertainment, or gambling.
Use of school marks, logos, or uniforms without an explicit license from the institution.
NIL contracts that conflict with an existing institutional or team sponsorship contract.
Failure to disclose the NIL contract to the school in the required window.

How individual schools layer their own policies

Florida's SEC and ACC institutions add a substantial layer of policy on top of SB 646. Disclosure platforms differ by campus, the list of categorical prohibitions can be tighter than the statute, and use of school marks is consistently more restrictive than the statutory minimum. Athletes signing at a Florida public university should expect both the statute and a multi-page institutional policy to bind their deal.

University of Florida

UF maintains a designated NIL reporting platform and expects athletes to disclose every agreement before execution. UF's policy reserves the right to flag conflicts with team contracts, and use of UF marks requires a separate licensing pathway.

Florida State University

FSU's policy frames NIL through both the SB 646 framework and ACC institutional standards. The school requires that NIL agreements be reviewed against the institution's sponsorship roster, and athletes are expected to surface conflicts before signing.

How RevU covers Florida

RevU's analysis treats Florida deals the way a Florida compliance office reads them: SB 646 sets the statutory floor, the institutional policy sets the operational ceiling, and the disclosure window is the hard deadline. RevU flags missing disclosure language, scope-creep on exclusivity, and clauses that would foreseeably conflict with an existing institutional sponsor. See /for-representatives for the agent-and-attorney workflow.

RevU is a software tool, not a law firm. The output is meant to make the conversation with your attorney more efficient — not to replace it. For binding legal advice on a Florida NIL contract, engage a licensed attorney in your state.

Check your contract free How the engine works