Electronic Signature Laws in Washington

Washington has adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), and it is codified at Revised Code of Washington Chapter 1.80 (RCW 1.80.010 et seq.). Washington was notably one of the very last states to enact UETA: the legislature passed it as SB 6028 (Chapter 57, Laws of 2020), and under RCW 1.80.030 the chapter applies to any electronic record or electronic signature created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored on or after June 11, 2020. The core rule lives in RCW 1.80.060: a record or signature may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form, and a contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation. The short title appears at RCW 1.80.900, which provides that the chapter may be cited as the uniform electronic transactions act.

Washington's UETA works hand-in-hand with the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7001 et seq.), which has applied nationwide since 2000. ESIGN expressly lets a state's enactment of the official UETA supersede the federal default for transactions within that state, so for most Washington commerce the analysis runs through RCW Chapter 1.80, with ESIGN operating as the federal backstop and as the governing rule for interstate and federal-law matters. RCW 1.80.190 is Washington's own provision addressing the relation to the federal ESIGN Act. Because Washington adopted the uniform text of UETA rather than a heavily customized version, the two regimes are closely aligned — both give electronic signatures and records the same legal standing as ink-on-paper, and both require that the parties intend to sign and consent to do business electronically.

Washington also has its own context worth knowing. Before 2020 the state did not have UETA on the books. It had earlier relied on the Washington Electronic Authentication Act (former ch. 19.34 RCW), which was repealed in 2019, and on a separate state-agency electronic records statute (former RCW 19.360, enacted 2015); the 2020 UETA enactment (SB 6028) replaced RCW 19.360.010 through 19.360.060. Like every UETA state, Washington carves out categories where the act does not apply. Under RCW 1.80.020 the chapter does not govern a law concerning the creation and execution of wills, codicils, or testamentary trusts, and it does not apply to Title 62A RCW (Washington's Uniform Commercial Code) other than RCW 62A.1-306 and UCC Articles 2 and 2A (chapters 62A.2 and 62A.2A) on sales and leases. The statute does, however, expressly reach nonjudicial settlement agreements under RCW 11.96A.220. As a practical matter, certain instruments — wills and testamentary trusts especially, and many court filings, notices of default, and similar documents — may still demand a traditional wet-ink signature or formal witnessing/notarization, and various state agencies set their own rules on whether and how they accept electronic records under RCW 1.80.160 and 1.80.170.

What this means in practice for signing online in Washington: for ordinary business and consumer agreements — service contracts, sales orders, NDAs, leases of goods, employment paperwork, consents, and the like — an electronic signature is fully valid and enforceable, and it cannot be rejected just because it is electronic. To make an e-signature hold up, focus on the elements Washington courts look for: clear intent to sign, the parties' agreement (express or implied) to transact electronically, signatures attributable to the actual signer (RCW 1.80.080 lets attribution be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of the security procedure used), and an accurate, retainable, reproducible record of the document and signing history. A reputable e-signature platform that captures an audit trail, authenticates the signer, and stores a tamper-evident record covers these points. When you are dealing with a will, a testamentary trust, certain UCC-excluded matters, or anything a specific statute or agency says must be on paper or notarized, confirm the requirement before relying on an electronic signature. This is general information, not legal advice.