Missouri Telemarketing and Robocall Laws: Statutes, Rules, and How They Differ from the TCPA

Overview

Missouri regulates telephone solicitation through two statutory schemes housed in Chapter 407 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo), the chapter that also contains the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. The No-Call Law, sections 407.1095 to 407.1110, establishes a state no-call database administered by the Attorney General (AG), prohibits telephone solicitations to residential subscribers on that list, requires caller identification at the start of a solicitation, and bars blocking of caller ID. The Telemarketing Law, sections 407.1070 to 407.1085, governs the conduct of telemarketing sales calls: required disclosures, prohibited practices, calling hours, recordkeeping, and payment authorization.

The Attorney General enforces both laws, maintains the no-call database under rules at 15 CSR 60-13, and sells access to the list to telemarketers by area code. Consumers have a statutory private action under the No-Call Law when they receive more than one solicitation in a twelve-month period in knowing violation of the list or identification rules, and a damages action under the Telemarketing Law for losses caused by unlawful practices.

The headline difference from federal law: Missouri maintains its own no-call list, which telemarketers must purchase separately from the national registry; its statutory definition of "telephone solicitation" expressly includes texts (SMS and MMS) and faxes; and it allows statutory damages of up to $5,000 per knowing violation, ten times the TCPA's base award, subject to a two-year limitations period and a due care defense.

Key statutes and regulations

Detailed provisions

What counts as a telephone solicitation

RSMo 407.1095(3) defines the term broadly by medium:

"Telephone solicitation", any voice, facsimile, short messaging service (SMS), or multimedia messaging service (MMS), for the purpose of encouraging the purchase or rental of, or investment in, property, goods or services, but does not include communications:

The text-message and wireless coverage dates from House Bill 1549 (2012). "Residential subscriber" is defined in RSMo 407.1095(2) to include wireless service:

"Residential subscriber", a person who, for primarily personal and familial use, has subscribed to residential telephone service, wireless service or similar service, or the other persons living or residing with such person;

Exemptions from the No-Call Law

The five exclusions in RSMo 407.1095(3) are significant. Communications are not telephone solicitations when made:

(a) To any residential subscriber with that subscriber's prior express invitation or permission;

(b) By or on behalf of any person or entity with whom a residential subscriber has had a business contact within the past one hundred eighty days or a current business or personal relationship;

Subsection (3)(c) exempts 501(c)(3) fundraising "provided that a bona fide member of such exempt organization makes the voice communication." Subsection (3)(d) exempts entities regulated by a federal agency that must hold a license to sell the merchandise and must "develop and maintain a no-call list." Subsection (3)(e) exempts calls:

By a natural person responding to a referral, or working from his or her primary residence, or a person licensed by the state of Missouri to carry out a trade, occupation or profession who is setting or attempting to set an appointment for actions relating to that licensed trade, occupation or profession within the state or counties contiguous to the state.

The Attorney General's rules narrow these terms. Under 15 CSR 60-13.010(2)(F), "prior express invitation or permission" means "a specific oral or written grant of authority made by the residential subscriber at a verifiable date and time." A "business contact" means "a specific oral or written communication at a verifiable date and time" (15 CSR 60-13.010(2)(C)). Working from a primary residence "does not include calls that are normally made from a location other than that person's residence made by that person from his or her residence" (15 CSR 60-13.010(2)(H)).

The state no-call list

The core prohibition, RSMo 407.1098:

No person or entity shall make or cause to be made any telephone solicitation to any residential subscriber in this state who has given notice to the attorney general, in accordance with rules promulgated pursuant to section 407.1101 of such subscriber's objection to receiving telephone solicitations.

The Attorney General maintains the database (RSMo 407.1101(1)), and the statute folds Missouri numbers from the national registry into it. RSMo 407.1101(3):

If the Federal Communications Commission establishes a single national database of telephone numbers of subscribers who object to receiving telephone solicitations pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Section 227(c)(3), the attorney general shall include that part of such single national database that relates to Missouri in the database established pursuant to this section.

The list "is not intended to include any telephone number primarily used for business or commercial purposes" (RSMo 407.1101(1)). Registration is free to consumers, and database information is not a public record (RSMo 407.1101(2)(1), (4)).

Under the regulations, a notice of objection remains in effect for two years from the date the number first appears in the database and "shall be automatically renewed" unless the subscriber asks otherwise in writing (15 CSR 60-13.030). New numbers are added quarterly on a published schedule (15 CSR 60-13.020(3)).

List access and fees: 15 CSR 60-13.060 requires a telemarketer to submit a confidentiality agreement and pay fifty dollars per area code per quarter, and for online access, "an annual processing fee of forty dollars ($40), along with payment of fifty dollars ($50) per quarter for access to each Missouri area code." The rule as posted by the Secretary of State bears a 2012 publication footer. The Attorney General's telemarketer FAQ, which counts six area codes (314, 417, 573, 636, 660 and 816), states that obtaining all area codes costs $300 per quarter or $1,200 per year; because the total depends on the number of area codes in service, confirm the current count and cost with the Attorney General before budgeting. The FAQ also states that the confidentiality agreement "prohibits the transfer of the copy of the No-Call database," and that each business must register and pay separately. Missouri does not have a separate telemarketer registration or bonding statute beyond this list-access registration.

Identification at the start of the call and caller ID

RSMo 407.1104:

1. Any person or entity who makes a telephone solicitation to any residential subscriber in this state shall, at the beginning of such solicitation, state clearly the identity of the person or entity initiating the solicitation.

2. No person or entity who makes a telephone solicitation to a residential subscriber in this state shall knowingly use any method to block or otherwise circumvent any subscriber's use of a caller identification service.

A violation of section 407.1104 is also subject to all Merchandising Practices Act penalties and remedies (RSMo 407.1107(2)). The Telemarketing Law contains a parallel caller ID provision, making it unlawful to "Knowingly utilize any method to block or otherwise circumvent a consumer's use of a caller identification service" (RSMo 407.1076(11)). Missouri has no state statute modeled on the federal Truth in Caller ID Act's prohibition on transmitting false caller ID. A 2026 bill that would have created a "Caller ID Anti-Spoofing Act" (House Committee Substitute for House Bills 2658, 2147, 2472 and 2546) was perfected in the House; its last recorded action, on April 8, 2026, was second reading and referral to the Senate General Laws Committee. It was not enacted during the 2026 regular session.

Telemarketing Law disclosures

RSMo 407.1070(10) defines "promptly" as "at the beginning of any call initiated by a telemarketer to a consumer." RSMo 407.1073(1) requires a telemarketer to disclose promptly and clearly:

(1) That the purpose of the telephone call is to make a sale;

(2) The telemarketer's identifiable name and the seller on whose behalf the solicitation is being made;

(3) The nature of the merchandise or investment opportunity being sold;

For automated calls, RSMo 407.1073(1)(5) requires disclosure of whether the call is made by a recorded voice:

When engaged in telemarketing, such voice communication shall, promptly at the beginning of the telephone call, inform the consumer that the call is being made by a recorded, computer-generated, electronically generated or other type of voice communication, as the case may be.

Before the consumer pays, RSMo 407.1073(2) requires disclosure of the seller or telemarketer's name and contact address or number, total cost and quantity, material restrictions, refund and cancellation policies (including "the absence of such policies"), material aspects of investment opportunities, and material elements of any prize promotion, including odds and the no-purchase method of entry.

Unlawful telemarketing practices, company-specific do-not-call and calling hours

RSMo 407.1076 lists eleven unlawful acts. Those most relevant to calling practices:

(3) Cause the telephone to ring or engage any consumer in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously in a manner a reasonable consumer would deem to be annoying, abusive or harassing;

(4) Knowingly and willfully initiate a telemarketing call to a consumer, or transfer or make available to others for telemarketing purposes a consumer's telephone number when that consumer has stated previously that he or she does not wish to receive solicitation calls by or on behalf of the seller unless such request has been rescinded;

(5) Engage in telemarketing to a consumer's residence at any time other than between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. local time at the called consumer's location;

The section also bars advance fees for credit repair (subdivision (6)) and recovery services (subdivision (7)), regulates demand drafts with specific verifiable authorization requirements (subdivision (8)), prohibits courier pickup of payment before inspection (subdivision (9)), and imposes assisting liability:

(10) Knowingly provide assistance or support to any telemarketer when that person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the telemarketer is engaged in any act in violation of sections 407.1070 to 407.1085;

Missouri has no numeric call-frequency cap. Subdivision (3) is a qualitative harassment standard. The statute does not restrict Sunday or holiday calls.

Robocalls and autodialers

Missouri does not have a statute banning automatic dialing and announcing devices. Recorded-voice telemarketing is regulated through the disclosure requirement in RSMo 407.1073(1)(5), and the definition of "telemarketer" in RSMo 407.1070(12) expressly includes "any recorded, computer-generated, electronically generated or other voice communication of any kind." The Attorney General's no-call rules define "ADAD" (15 CSR 60-13.010(2)(A)) as a device used "for the purposes of automatically selecting or dialing telephone numbers and disseminating recorded messages to the numbers so selected or dialed," but no Missouri statute attaches a separate prohibition to that definition. Because the state's restrictions turn on the content and recipient of the call rather than on dialing equipment, Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 592 U.S. 395 (2021), has little bearing on Missouri claims: an autodialed or manually dialed solicitation to a no-call number is treated alike.

Texts and faxes

Because RSMo 407.1095(3) defines a telephone solicitation to include "short messaging service (SMS), or multimedia messaging service (MMS)" communications, a marketing text to a Missouri wireless number on the state list is a no-call violation unless an exemption applies. Faxes are likewise covered by the same definition.

Recordkeeping

RSMo 407.1079 requires sellers and telemarketers to keep records of advertising and scripts, prize recipients, customers and purchases, employees directly involved in telephone sales (including fictitious names, which must be traceable to one employee), and all written authorizations. Seller and telemarketer may allocate these duties by written agreement (RSMo 407.1079(3)).

Telemarketing Law exemptions and the fourteen-day return right

RSMo 407.1085(1) exempts from sections 407.1070 to 407.1082 calls where the sale is not completed until after a face-to-face presentation; consumer-initiated calls not resulting from telemarketing or certain advertisements; catalog sales; and calls:

(a) To any consumer with such consumer's prior express invitation or permission;

(b) To any consumer with whom the seller has an established business relationship; or

as well as calls by state or federally regulated licensees with qualifying telemarketing rules, and calls "Between a telemarketer and any business except calls involving the retail sale of nondurable office and cleaning supplies" (RSMo 407.1085(1)(4)(d)). For entities supervised by the Department of Commerce and Insurance or federally chartered banks, savings and loans and credit unions, subdivision (2) exempts completed sales where a written contract is forwarded and the consumer "may return the merchandise within fourteen days of receipt of the merchandise and receive a refund," provided the telemarketer gives the required notice during the call. RSMo 407.1070(4) defines "established business relationship" without a time limit, as a relationship formed by a voluntary two-way communication, "which relationship has not been previously terminated by either party."

Private right of action

Under the No-Call Law, RSMo 407.1107(3):

Any person who has received more than one telephone solicitation within any twelve-month period by or on behalf of the same person or entity in violation of section 407.1098 or 407.1104 may either:

(1) Bring an action to enjoin such violation;

(2) Bring an action to recover for actual monetary loss from such knowing violation or to receive up to five thousand dollars in damages for each such knowing violation, whichever is greater; or

(3) Bring both such actions.

The award is "up to" $5,000, so the amount is discretionary, and recovery requires a "knowing" violation. The statute provides a compliance defense in RSMo 407.1107(4):

It shall be a defense in any action or proceeding brought pursuant to this section that the defendant has established and implemented, with due care, reasonable practices and procedures to effectively prevent telephone solicitations in violation of section 407.1098 or 407.1104.

The limitations period, RSMo 407.1107(5), bars actions brought "More than two years after the person bringing the action knew or should have known of the occurrence of the alleged violation," or more than two years after termination of a related state proceeding, whichever is later. Section 407.1107 does not itself provide for attorney fees.

Under the Telemarketing Law, RSMo 407.1082(3):

In addition to the remedies already provided in sections 407.1070 to 407.1085, any consumer that suffers a loss or harm as a result of any unlawful telemarketing act or practice pursuant to section 407.1076 may recover actual and punitive damages, reasonable attorney's fees, court costs and any other remedies provided by law.

Violations of the Telemarketing Law are also unlawful practices under RSMo 407.020 (RSMo 407.1082(1)), which opens the Merchandising Practices Act private action in RSMo 407.025. That action requires a purchase or lease "primarily for personal, family or household purposes" and "an ascertainable loss of money or property" (RSMo 407.025.1(1)). Since Senate Bill 591 (2020), the plaintiff must also show that the plaintiff acted as a reasonable consumer, that the practice would cause a reasonable person to enter into the transaction, and individual damages "with sufficiently definitive and objective evidence to allow the loss to be calculated with a reasonable degree of certainty" (RSMo 407.025.1(2)). The court may award punitive damages and attorney fees to the prevailing party (RSMo 407.025.2), and class actions are authorized, subject to the same reasonable consumer showings by the class representative (RSMo 407.025.5). The purchase requirement means a consumer who merely receives an unwanted call ordinarily proceeds under section 407.1107, not section 407.025. Neither the No-Call Law nor the Telemarketing Law bars class actions.

Attorney General enforcement and penalties

RSMo 407.1107(1) authorizes the Attorney General to seek an injunction and "a civil penalty up to a maximum of five thousand dollars for each knowing violation" of sections 407.1098 or 407.1104, and to issue investigative demands and subpoenas. Telemarketing Law violations carry Merchandising Practices Act remedies, including a court-awarded civil penalty "of not more than one thousand dollars per violation" under RSMo 407.100(6), subject to a bona fide error defense. Criminal penalties apply under RSMo 407.1082(2): willful and knowing violations of subdivisions (2) to (5) of section 407.1076 (threats, harassment, company-specific do-not-call and calling hours) are class A misdemeanors; violations of subdivision (1) (misrepresentation of required disclosures) and subdivisions (6) to (11) are class E felonies; and willful and knowing failure to keep the records required by section 407.1079 is a class A misdemeanor.

How Missouri differs from federal law

Missouri is stricter than federal law in the size of its statutory award, the shorter 180-day window for the business-contact exemption, its separate paid state list, its express text and fax coverage, and its criminal penalties for harassment and calling-hour violations. It is looser in that it has no robocall consent requirement or autodialer restriction, its damages are discretionary and require a knowing violation, its limitations period is two years rather than four, and its exemptions for home-based callers, referrals and licensed professionals setting local appointments have no federal counterpart. Federal law applies concurrently, so the TCPA's robocall consent rules govern Missouri calls regardless of state law.

Notable case law

State ex rel. Koster v. Charter Communications, Inc., 461 S.W.3d 851 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D. 2015), No. WD78258 (May 26, 2015) State ex rel. Koster v. Charter Communications (Mo. Ct. App. 2015) opinion. The Attorney General issued civil investigative demands to a telephone service provider while investigating a customer suspected of violating Missouri's no-call and telemarketing laws. The court noted that section 407.1107 permits the Attorney General to "issue investigative demands, issue subpoenas, administer oaths and conduct hearings," concluded "that the CIDs issued by the AG are administrative subpoenas" for purposes of the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and reversed the trial court's judgment declaring them unenforceable. The decision confirms the Attorney General's ability to obtain carrier records in no-call investigations.

Golan v. Veritas Entertainment, LLC, 788 F.3d 814 (8th Cir. 2015), No. 14-2484 (June 8, 2015) Golan v. Veritas Entertainment (8th Cir. 2015) opinion. Plaintiffs who received prerecorded "survey" messages promoting a film sued under the TCPA and sought to represent a subclass of Missouri residents on state "do not call" lists under RSMo 407.1098. The Eighth Circuit reversed the dismissal, holding that "content may be instructive, but it is not dispositive" in determining whether a call is telemarketing, and that "'Telemarketing' occurs when the context of a call indicates that it was initiated and transmitted to a person for the purpose of promoting property, goods, or services." The opinion resolves only the federal question; it did not construe section 407.1098. It illustrates how Missouri no-call subclasses are pleaded alongside TCPA claims in federal court.

Recent amendments

• House Bill 1549 (2012), effective August 28, 2012: amended RSMo 407.1095 to 407.1107, extending the definition of telephone solicitation to SMS and MMS messages and the definition of residential subscriber to wireless service.
• Senate Bill 788 (2008), effective August 28, 2008: amended the Telemarketing Law exemptions in RSMo 407.1085 (current text effective August 28, 2008).
• Senate Bill 491 (2014), effective January 1, 2017: amended RSMo 407.1082 as part of the criminal code revision, including class E felony grading.
• Senate Bill 591 (2020), effective August 28, 2020: amended the Merchandising Practices Act private action, RSMo 407.025, to add the reasonable consumer and objective damages showings described above.
• As of the Revisor of Statutes text retrieved October 15, 2026, no section of the No-Call Law (RSMo 407.1095 to 407.1107) or the Telemarketing Law (RSMo 407.1070 to 407.1085) shows an amendment after 2017. House Bill 2658 (2026), which would have required the list to include any subscriber to telephone, wireless or similar service, made objections permanent without renewal, voided prior business relationships on reassigned numbers, and created a caller ID anti-spoofing offense with a private action of up to $5,000 per call, was not enacted.

Practical compliance checklist

• Purchase the Missouri no-call list for every Missouri area code you call, each quarter, under your own confidentiality agreement, and scrub against it in addition to the national registry.
• Treat marketing texts and faxes to Missouri numbers exactly like voice calls for no-call purposes.
• Document any consent or business contact with a verifiable date and time, as the Attorney General's rules require, and apply the 180-day business-contact window rather than the federal 18-month window.
• Identify the caller or entity at the beginning of every solicitation and disclose promptly that the purpose is a sale and what is being sold.
• If using prerecorded messages, disclose at the outset that the call is recorded or computer-generated, and separately satisfy the federal prior express written consent requirement.
• Never block or suppress caller ID on calls into Missouri.
• Honor company-specific do-not-call requests and do not transfer those numbers to others; restrict calls to 8:00 a.m. through 9:00 p.m. at the consumer's location.
• Maintain written no-call procedures, training and audit records to support the due care defense under RSMo 407.1107(4), and keep the records required by RSMo 407.1079.

References

• RSMo 407.1070: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1070
• RSMo 407.1073: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1073
• RSMo 407.1076: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1076
• RSMo 407.1079: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1079
• RSMo 407.1082: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1082
• RSMo 407.1085: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1085
• RSMo 407.1095: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1095
• RSMo 407.1098: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1098
• RSMo 407.1101: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1101
• RSMo 407.1104: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1104
• RSMo 407.1107: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.1107
• RSMo 407.025: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.025
• RSMo 407.100: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.100
• 15 CSR 60-13 (Missouri No-Call rules): https://www.sos.mo.gov/cmsimages/adrules/csr/current/15csr/15c60-13.pdf
• Missouri Attorney General, FAQs for Telemarketers: https://ago.mo.gov/get-help/no-call/faqs-for-telemarketers/
• House Bill 2658 (2026) status: https://house.mo.gov/BillContent.aspx?bill=HB2658&code=R&style=new&year=2026
• House Bill 2658 (2026) perfected bill summary: https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills261/sumpdf/HB2658P.pdf
• State ex rel. Koster v. Charter Communications, Inc., No. WD78258: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=86779
• Golan v. Veritas Entertainment, LLC, No. 14-2484: http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/15/06/142484P.pdf
• 47 U.S.C. § 227: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2023-title47/html/USCODE-2023-title47-chap5-subchapII-partI-sec227.htm
• 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-64/subpart-L/section-64.1200
• 16 C.F.R. Part 310: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-310

This page summarizes state law for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. Statutes change; confirm current text with the official source before relying on it.