Is it worth the hassle of getting clients to sign a separate 7216 AI consent, or is the pushback just about avoiding client friction?

One view raised is that firms resist doing this mainly because it's a hassle and they fear it will generate a flood of client questions and calls, not because of a real legal objection. The counterargument is that clients routinely sign disclosures they don't fully read or understand (e.g., HIPAA forms at a doctor's office) because they trust the professional, so most clients will likely sign without issue. The concern about a painful transition period was raised: some clients may sign/onboard while others refuse, requiring firms to track consent status (similar to tracking payment method preferences) in their CRM, and to build workflows/agent rules that hard-stop AI use if a client hasn't consented. This was seen as adding operational complexity. The comparison was made to the early days of e-signatures, which were initially controversial but are now a routine, unquestioned checkbox — the expectation is 7216 AI consent will follow the same path.