Navigating the Regulatory Shift: Ensuring State-Level TCPA and DNC Compliance in an Evolving Landscape

There are many reasons to maintain contact compliance. First and foremost, it’s the law. Additionally, failing to ensure collections contact compliance can lead to possible litigation, class action lawsuits, loss of consumer trust, damaged brand reputation, and more. Adhering to the Telephone Consumer Protect Act, Do Not Call Lists, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and other relevant regulations is crucial for protecting your business and maintaining positive relationships with consumers.

Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), all marketing calls and texts are regulated by placing restrictions on the use of an automated telephone dialing system (ATDS) and prerecorded messages (PRM), as well as maintaining and adhering to Do Not Call (DNC) lists. TCPA rules also govern wireless restrictions, the Reassigned Numbers Database (RND), call curfews, established business relationships (EBRs), express written consent, emergency purpose exemptions, call frequency (for prerecorded messages), text message restrictions, and disclosures.

Understanding State-Level TCPA and DNC Telemarketing Laws

In addition to the federal TCPA, several states have enacted their own TCPA and DNC laws. The state TCPA landscape is constantly changing, with five states introducing new legislation this year alone. The continued regulatory shift means that maintaining state-level compliance is more important than ever.

State-level telemarketing laws can differ from the federal regulations in significant ways, including differences in calling times, holiday restrictions, call frequency limits, consent requirements, and penalties per violation. The federal TCPA does not preempt state laws, so it is essential to understand the nuances of each state’s telemarketing laws to ensure compliance.

To date, 12 states have their own state TCPA compliance laws that differ from the federal TCPA:

• Arizona House Bill 2498: Updates amend the state’s existing “do not call” law to prohibit sellers and solicitors, in the absence of consent, employment agreement, or a personal relationship from transmitting text message solicitations to telephone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry. The state attorney general is empowered to investigate and fine alleged violators up to $1,000 per violation.
• Connecticut Senate Bill 1058: Expands Connecticut’s telemarketing statutes prohibiting telemarketers from making a telephonic sales call to a consumer without the consumer’s prior express written consent. Previously, the law only prohibited making telephonic sales calls if the calls were unsolicited, automatically dialed and recorded. This bill requires those making a telephonic sales call to disclose, within the first 10 seconds of the call, the (1) caller’s identity, (2) the purpose of the call, and (3) entity for which the person is making the call.
• Florida House Bill 761: The bill amended the Florida Telemarketing Solicitation Act and the definition of an autodialer, restricts the prohibition on telephonic sales calls that use an automated system to specifically include unsolicited calls using automated systems for the selection and dialing of phone numbers or playing of a recorded message, clarifies disclosure, and modifies the definition of “prior express written consent.”
• Maine Legislative Document 2234: Evolving from the Act to Impede Robocalling initiated in June 2023, the new makes amendments to the law related to telephone solicitations requiring a telephone solicitor to use the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) Reassigned Numbers Database to verify consumer telephone numbers have not been reassigned prior to initiating telephone sales calls to consumers. 
• Maryland House Bill 31/Senate Bill 90: This law prohibits placing telephone solicitations using a prerecorded voice or automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers without prior express written consent. It also places limits on time and frequency of telemarketing and text messages and requires the calling party to transmit its telephone number and name to any caller ID service.
• New Jersey Senate Bill 921: New legislation states that a telemarketer making a sales call must, within the first 30 seconds of the call, accurately identify the telemarketer’s name, the name and telephone number of the person on whose behalf the call is being made, and the purpose of the call. A telemarketer will also be required to disclose the mailing address of the telemarketer, and any company on whose behalf the company is telemarketing, on any website owned or operated by the telemarketer, and on any subsequent written communication to a customer.
• New York Senate Bill A4456: Updating New York’s Do Not Call laws, this bill increases the penalty for violators of the law regulating telemarketing from $11,000 to up to $20,000 per violation. Additionally, it limits the time that telemarketers may legally call consumers and requires the telemarketer to provide the name, person on whose behalf the solicitation is being made, option to automatically be added to the seller’s do not call list, notification of whether the call is being recorded, purpose of the call, and the identity of the goods or services for which a fee will be charged.
• Oklahoma Telephone Solicitation Act of 2022: Expands the definition of “auto-dialer” and removes established business relationship (EBR) and inquiry defenses from callers, extends calling limitation to landlines (limiting outreach attempts to three per 24 hours), and contains a private right of action for consumers with penalties ranging from $500 to $1,500 per call or text message.
• Oregon House Bill 2498: Revises portions of Oregon’s Do Not Call laws, provides that a person who knows or consciously avoids knowing that another person is engaging in an act or practice that violates laws that regulate telephone solicitations or use of automatic dialing and announcing devices and nonetheless provides substantial assistance or support for violation is liable for loss and subject to a penalty of the same extent as the person that engaged in violation.
• Tennessee Senate Bill 868: This bill extends the prohibitions, requirements, and penalties that apply to telephone solicitations to text message solicitations.
• Utah House Bill 217: Modifies the definition of “telephone solicitation” in Utah’s Telephone Facsimile Solicitation Act, expanding the definition to include “a telephone solicitation made to encourage a person to sell real or personal property to the solicitor.” The bill also prohibits telephone solicitations made to cell phones without prior consent.
• Washington House Bill 1497: Revises portions of Washington’s new telemarketing laws (including the definition of “telephone solicitation” and the reach of a do not call request), imposing new obligations on callers requesting a donation or gift, and tightening requirements for callers to identify themselves.

Additionally, 11 states operate their own DNC list in conjunction with the National DNC Registry: Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming. If a consumer is not listed on the National DNC list but is listed on their state’s DNC list, they are prohibited from being contacted.

The Ever-Changing State Telemarketing Regulatory Landscape

Telemarketing laws continue to evolve, with multiple states proposing or passing new legislation each year. For instance:

• Missouri: Missouri representatives have introduced House Bill 2603 (caller ID anti-spoofing act) and House Bill 2648 (deceptive, deep fake, and fraudulent political ads) which include legislation addressing no caller ID spoofing, new violation amounts for callers who use false information, “deceptive and fraudulent deepfake” synthetic media with new definitions, and more. The status is still pending.
• Wisconsin: Passed earlier this year and effective on April 1, 2025, Wisconsin’s anti-caller ID spoofing law prohibits a telephone solicitor from blocking the transmission of caller ID information, knowingly transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller ID information through a telephone call or text message with the intent to defraud or wrongfully obtain anything of value (including personally identifiable information), and knowingly transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller ID information for any purpose.
• Pennsylvania: This bill went into effect on February 12, 2024, and allows a recipient of a telemarketing or robocall to wiretap/record conversations with telemarketers, enabling the recipient the ability to provide evidence of telemarketing-related schemes to law enforcement. The law also states that recipients of a telemarketing or robocall do not have to disclose that they are recording the call. Recipients are permitted to record phone calls without the telemarketer’s knowledge. However, the disclosure requirement remains in place for telemarketers calling into Pennsylvania.
• West Virginia: West Virginia introduced two new TCPA-impacting bills this year. The bills place further responsibility on phone companies, and also adds civil penalties, new definitions, exemptions, and prohibitions. The status of these bills are pending.
• Maine: Like mentioned above, earlier this year Maine enacted a law in July 2024 requiring telephone solicitors to use the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) Reassigned Numbers Database to verify consumer telephone numbers have not been reassigned prior to initiating telephone sales calls to consumers.
• Tennessee: Tennessee amended HB2504, which prohibits inaccurate Caller ID information for both telemarketing and collections calls. This bill went into effect July of 2024.
• Florida: The state of Florida amended HB 1031 in July 2024 as well, adding an exception for telemarketers and sellers providing debt relief services.

Lead Generation and Consent: New FCC Rules

One of the most significant regulatory shifts involves the FCC’s new lead generation laws, particularly in how businesses obtain consent from potential leads. Recent updates from the FCC have strengthened regulations around lead generation, making it critical for businesses to secure clear, express written consent before contacting individuals.

Under new FCC rules on lead generation, telemarketers and businesses must:

• Disclose the purpose of obtaining contact information at the time of data collection
• Ensure consent is specific to the communication method (calls, texts, or emails)
• Store consent records securely and make them easily accessible in case of an audit

This shift underscores the importance of transparency in lead generation practices. 

Consequences of Non-Compliance

Violating TCPA regulations can result in significant consequences, ranging from monetary fines to long-lasting damage to a company’s reputation.  TCPA’s fines can range from $500 per violation to $1500 per violation if proven to be willful. These fines add up quickly if your organization is found to have made multiple unlawful calls or texts.  

At the state level, penalties for state TCPA compliance violations vary, but the impact is often similar. Beyond monetary penalties, businesses may face civil lawsuits and class action lawsuits, which are common in TCPA cases due to the high potential payout. Class action lawsuits resulting from TCPA violations have led to some of the largest settlements in U.S. history. 

In addition to fines, violating TCPA and FDCPA compliance can damage your brand reputation and reduce shareholder value. When consumers lose trust in your organization due to TCPA violations, it can result in long-term financial losses and a decreased ability to raise capital.  

Advanced Contact Compliance: Going beyond the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Do Not Call Basics

If you are in a compliance role, chances are you have a good understanding of the basics of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and Do Not Call (DNC) regulations. However, to succeed in a compliance role, you must go beyond the basics and understand the complicated nuances of the TCPA and DNC, like understanding state-level legislation for every state you are calling or texting into.

Check out our new guide that dives into the more complex rules and regulations under the TCPA and DNC, so your organization can avoid devastating fines, loss of consumer trust, possible litigation, and more.

Strategies for Maintaining Compliance

Remaining compliant with federal and state-level telemarketing regulations can be challenging, but Gryph for Compliance is here to help. Our robust, automated solution helps enterprise businesses and their third-party vendors eliminate Do Not Call (DNC) and Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) compliance risks across their entire organization.

We are the only real-time, automated solution on the market that mitigates the risk of DNC and TCPA violations for all outbound communications, helping your organization maintain contact compliance while reducing legal risks. Contact us today to learn more.