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

Overview

Wisconsin regulates telemarketing through two layers that work together:

• The statute. Wis. Stat. § 100.52 ("Telephone solicitations") bars calls and texts to numbers on the Wisconsin portion of the National Do Not Call Registry. It also bars prerecorded sales messages without consent, blocked or misleading caller ID, and solicitation by unregistered telephone solicitors. A companion statute, § 100.523, makes fraudulent caller ID spoofing unlawful for anyone, not only telemarketers.
• The rule. The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) administers chapter ATCP 127 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, the Direct Marketing rule (as it is commonly called). Subchapter II governs every "telephone transaction". It covers opening disclosures, pre-sale disclosures, calling hours of 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM, company-specific do-not-call requests, misrepresentations and recordkeeping. Subchapter V implements the state do-not-call program. It sets registration and fees, requires a scrub against the registry at least every 31 days, and adds a written-agreement requirement for prerecorded sales calls.

Wisconsin's own do-not-call list is now simply the Wisconsin-area-code slice of the federal registry. The statute defines the "State do-not-call registry" as "the portion of the national do-not-call registry that consists of telephone numbers with Wisconsin area codes."

Wisconsin is unusual in four ways:

1. Paid registration. Telemarketers must register with DATCP and pay an annual fee of up to $20,000.
2. Texts are covered by name. Both the statute and the rule expressly cover text messages.
3. A signed written agreement for robocalls. The rule requires a signed written agreement before any prerecorded sales call, and it applies to business lines as well as consumers.
4. No statutory damages. Section 100.52 is enforced by DATCP and by civil forfeitures. A consumer's private remedy runs through Wis. Stat. § 100.20(5), which allows double damages and attorney fees but only for a "pecuniary loss." The do-not-call rule itself says that a call to a listed number does not, by itself, create a recoverable monetary loss.

The official statutes page states that the text is "updated through 2025 Wis. Act 247 and through all Supreme Court Orders and Controlled Substances Board Orders filed before and in effect on October 1, 2026." The Administrative Code pages state they are "Updated on the first day of each month." Text on this page was taken from those official pages on October 15, 2026.

Key statutes table

Detailed provisions

1. Scope and definitions

The statute defines the core term broadly enough to include texts. A "Telephone solicitation" is "the unsolicited initiation of a telephone conversation or text message for the purpose of encouraging the recipient of the telephone call or text message to purchase property, goods or services" (Wis. Stat. § 100.52(1)(i)).

The obligations of § 100.52 fall on a "telephone solicitor," defined as "a person, other than a nonprofit organization or an employee or contractor of a nonprofit organization, that employs or contracts with an individual to make a telephone solicitation" (§ 100.52(1)(j)). Most prohibitions in § 100.52(4)(a) also apply to "an employee or contractor of a telephone solicitor."

The statute distinguishes residential and business lines:

• Residential customer. "an individual who is furnished with basic local exchange service or commercial mobile service by a telecommunications utility, but does not include an individual who operates a business at his or her residence" (§ 100.52(1)(f)). Commercial mobile service means wireless numbers are included.
• Nonresidential customer. "a person, other than a residential customer, who is furnished with telecommunications service by a telecommunications utility" (§ 100.52(1)(d)).

The do-not-call rule uses parallel terms. A "Covered telephone customer" is "an individual in this state who receives basic local exchange service or commercial mobile service from a telecommunications utility" (ATCP 127.80(4)). Its definition of telephone solicitation is "an unsolicited telephone call or text message for the purpose of encouraging the recipient to buy property, goods, or services, or that is part of a plan or scheme to encourage the recipient to buy property, goods, or services" (ATCP 127.80(10)).

Subchapter II of ATCP 127 uses a different, voice-focused definition. There, a telephone solicitation is "a solicitation, under s. ATCP 127.01 (22), that a seller makes to a consumer by telephone, videoconferencing, or other interactive electronic voice communications" (ATCP 127.02(3)). The rule reaches everyone in the selling chain. The official note explains: "a telemarketing firm that makes telephone solicitations on behalf of a "seller" is also a "seller" for purposes of this chapter." Individual employees of the firm are also sellers when they make solicitations.

The statute has express extraterritorial reach: "This section applies to any interstate telephone solicitation received by a person in this state and to any intrastate telephone solicitation" (§ 100.52(7)).

2. Registration and bonding

Registration. The Legislature directed DATCP to require registration. Section 100.52(3) provides that DATCP "shall promulgate rules that require any telephone solicitor who requires an employee or contractor to make a telephone solicitation to a residential customer in this state to register with the department, obtain a registration number from the department, and pay an initial registration fee and an annual registration renewal fee to the department." A telephone solicitor may not "Require an employee or contractor to make a telephone solicitation to a person in this state unless the telephone solicitor is registered with the department under the rules promulgated under sub. (3)" (§ 100.52(4)(b)1.).

The rule implements this in ATCP 127.81:

• Who must register. "No person may employ or contract with any individual to make telephone solicitations to covered telephone customers unless" the person is registered or the calls are covered by a seller's registration (ATCP 127.81(1)(a)).
• Seller registrations. A seller may register on behalf of agents who sell its products. The official note gives the example of an insurance company registering for a self-employed agent.
• Individual callers. "No individual may make a telephone solicitation to a covered telephone customer unless the telephone solicitation is covered by a registration under this section" (ATCP 127.81(1)(c)).
• The form. The annual form must list legal and trade names, addresses, the federal employer identification number, an agent for service, the number of telephone lines and each line's number, the number of callers, and "The registrant's valid subscription access number (SAN) for the national do-not-call registry" (ATCP 127.81(2)(j)).
• Fees. "A basic annual registration fee of $700 for the first year of registration, and $500 for each subsequent year," plus "A supplementary annual fee of $75 for each telephone line identified under sub. (2) (g)." The line fee "does not apply if the registrant identifies fewer than 4 telephone lines." The total is capped: the registrant pays those fees "or an annual fee of $20,000, whichever is less" (ATCP 127.81(3)). Fees are paid in quarterly installments (ATCP 127.81(3m)). DATCP may reduce or waive installments when its program account has a surplus (ATCP 127.81(5)).
• Expiration. "A registration under this section expires on November 30 of each year" (ATCP 127.81(4)).
• Registration number on request. A caller to a covered customer "shall give the call recipient, at the call recipient's request, the number of the registration under s. ATCP 127.81 that covers the telephone solicitation" (ATCP 127.83(3)).

Bonding. Neither § 100.52 nor ATCP 127 requires a surety bond for telemarketers.

3. Calling hours

Subchapter II prohibits a seller from initiating "a telephone solicitation to a consumer before 8:00 AM or after 9:00 PM without the prior consent of the consumer" (ATCP 127.16(3)). The rule adds: "Time, for purposes of this section, is the local time at the place where the consumer resides."

This matches the federal window. The rule measures time at the consumer's residence rather than at the "called party's location," and it allows the consumer's prior consent to override the window. Because subchapter II defines telephone solicitation in terms of voice communications, it is not clear that the hours rule reaches text messages. The statute itself contains no calling-hours provision.

4. Call frequency and harassment

ATCP 127.16 bars a seller in a telephone transaction from:

• Threats. Doing anything to "Threaten, intimidate, or harass a consumer" (ATCP 127.16(1)).
• Repeated calls. Repeatedly or continuously causing "a consumer's telephone to ring, or repeatedly or continuously engage a consumer in telephone conversation, if the seller knows or reasonably should know that those actions will have the effect of annoying, abusing, or harassing the consumer" (ATCP 127.16(2)).

There is no numeric cap on call attempts. The company-specific do-not-call rule in section 9 below also limits repeat calls.

5. Autodialers, prerecorded messages and Facebook v. Duguid

Prerecorded messages. The statute bars a telephone solicitor or its employee or contractor from using "an electronically prerecorded message in telephone solicitation without the consent of the recipient of the telephone call" (§ 100.52(4)(a)1.).

The rule sets a stricter, written form of consent. No person may use "an electronically prerecorded message in a telephone call for the purpose of encouraging a covered or noncovered telephone customer to purchase property, goods, or services, without first obtaining a written agreement that contains the telephone number and signature of the customer to be called" (ATCP 127.83(2)(b)). The agreement must also make two disclosures:

• "The agreement shall disclose in writing that the customer is not required to sign the agreement as a condition of making a purchase and, by signing the agreement, the customer authorizes telemarketing calls from that person."
• The official note adds: "A written agreement and disclosures may be in an electronic form as provided in s. 137.15, Stats."

The rule applies to both covered (consumer) and noncovered (business) customers. It does not apply to callers who fall within the nonprofit or individual exclusions in ATCP 127.80(10)(a) or (b).

Autodialers. Wisconsin has no separate statute or rule on automatic telephone dialing systems. Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (2021) narrowed the federal autodialer definition, but it has no direct effect on Wisconsin law. Wisconsin's robocall rules turn on whether a prerecorded message is used, not on the dialing technology. A live call placed with any dialer is still subject to the registration, do-not-call, hours and disclosure rules.

6. Text messages

Wisconsin brings marketing texts into its do-not-call regime by name:

• The statute. The § 100.52(1)(i) definition covers "the unsolicited initiation of a telephone conversation or text message."
• The rule. ATCP 127.80(10) covers "an unsolicited telephone call or text message." ATCP 127.80(12) defines a text message as "an electronic text or graphic message sent to a cellular telephone, pager, or similar wireless device that is equipped with SMS or similar capability." It adds: "Text message includes messages originated using SMS, e-mail, or similar electronic communication." The ATCP 127.80(10) exclusions are also written as "A telephone call or text message" exclusions.

As a result, a marketing text to a Wisconsin-area-code number on the National Do Not Call Registry is a prohibited telephone solicitation under § 100.52(4)(a)2. and ATCP 127.82(2), unless an exclusion applies.

This matters more in Wisconsin because of federal law. In Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services (7th Cir. 2026), the Seventh Circuit, whose decisions bind federal courts in Wisconsin, held that the federal do-not-call private right of action does not reach texts (see Case law). Wisconsin's state-law text coverage is enforced by DATCP and by forfeitures, not by statutory damages.

The subchapter II rules on hours, disclosures and repeat calls are framed around "interactive electronic voice communications" (ATCP 127.02(3)). Whether they apply to texts is uncertain.

7. Caller ID

Since 2023 Wis. Act 243 took effect, § 100.52 bars a telephone solicitor or its employee or contractor from two practices:

• Blocking. "When making a telephone solicitation, block the transmission of a caller identification record" (§ 100.52(4)(a)4.).
• Misleading caller ID. "When making a telephone solicitation, knowingly transmit a misleading or inaccurate caller identification record" (§ 100.52(4)(a)5.). There is a safe harbor: a solicitor "may transmit the name of the seller on whose behalf the telephone solicitation is being made and the seller's customer service telephone number if an individual may call that number to make a do-not-call request during regular business hours."

A "Caller identification record" is "a record that is delivered electronically to the recipient of a telephone call or text message simultaneously with the reception of the telephone call or text message and that indicates the telephone number from which the telephone call or text message was initiated or similar information regarding the telephone call or text message" (§ 100.52(1)(bd)). The exception in § 100.52(6)(c) covers caller ID changes made "in connection with the authorized activity of a law enforcement agency or a court order that specifically authorizes the manipulation of a caller identification record."

Act 243 also created § 100.523, which applies to any person, not only telemarketers. It provides that "no person may, in connection with any telecommunications service, knowingly transmit a misleading or inaccurate caller identification record with the intent to defraud or wrongfully obtain anything of value, including personally identifiable information" (§ 100.523(2)). Carriers acting as intermediaries, configuring a feature at the customer's request, or acting as required by law are exempt (§ 100.523(3)(b)).

The rules overlap with these provisions:

• Telephone transactions. ATCP 127.14(16) bars a seller in a telephone transaction from causing "any caller identification service to transmit or display misleading or inaccurate caller identification information." It was added in 2013.
• Do-not-call program. ATCP 127.83(2)(e) bars any person from using "caller-ID blocking when making a telephone solicitation."

8. Disclosures and opt-out

Opening disclosures. A seller "shall disclose all of the following to the consumer before asking any questions or making any statements other than an initial greeting" (ATCP 127.04(1)):

• "The name of the principal seller."
• "The name of the individual making the telephone solicitation."
• "That the seller is offering or promoting the sale of consumer goods or services."
• "The nature of the goods or services which the seller is offering or promoting."

A caller may use a fictitious individual name only if "No other individual making telephone solicitations for the same seller uses the same fictitious name" and the seller keeps records linking the fictitious name to the real person (ATCP 127.04(2)(b)).

The statute separately directs DATCP to require callers to identify, "at the beginning of the telephone conversation," the telephone solicitor and, if different, the seller or the recipient of any contribution (§ 100.52(4)(d)).

Pre-sale disclosures. In a telephone transaction, the seller must disclose material terms "before the consumer enters into any purchase contract, and before the seller takes the consumer's credit card number or accepts any payment from the consumer" (ATCP 127.06(1)). These terms include "The nature and quantity of consumer goods or services included in the sale" and "The total cost to purchase and receive the consumer goods or services." The disclosures must be in writing, or oral with a written confirmation (ATCP 127.06(2)). If the solicitation is primarily in a language other than English, the disclosures must be made in that language (ATCP 127.06(3)).

Misrepresentations. ATCP 127.14 lists sixteen prohibited misrepresentations, including any attempt to "Misrepresent a seller's identity, affiliation, location, or characteristics" or to "Misrepresent the nature, purpose, or intended length of a solicitation." It closes with a catch-all: no seller may "Make any false, deceptive, or misleading representation to a consumer" (ATCP 127.14(15)).

Opt-out. For consumers, the company-specific opt-out is in ATCP 127.16(4), discussed in section 9.

For business lines, the statute uses a mail-based opt-out. A telephone solicitor may not "Make a telephone solicitation to a nonresidential customer if the nonresidential customer has provided notice by mail to the telephone solicitor that the nonresidential customer does not wish to receive telephone solicitations" (§ 100.52(4)(a)3.). The rule extends this to "mail including electronic mail" (ATCP 127.83(2)(c)). On request, the caller must provide a mailing or email address for the notice. The rule requires it to "provide the mailing address or email address within 10 days after the call recipient requests it" (ATCP 127.83(4)).

9. Do-not-call

State registry. The statute bars any telephone solicitor or its employee or contractor from making "a telephone solicitation to a telephone number that, at the time the solicitation is made, is listed on the state do-not-call registry" (§ 100.52(4)(a)2.). The rule restates the prohibition for everyone, including calls made through others: "No person may make a telephone solicitation, either directly or through an employee or agent, to a covered telephone customer whose telephone number appears on the current state do-not-call registry" (ATCP 127.82(2)).

Scrubbing. "Registered telephone solicitors must obtain and use a current state do-not-call registry from the national do-not-call registry website at least once every 31 days" (ATCP 127.82(1)). A solicitor may not "Use or possess a copy or updated version of the state do-not-call registry that the telephone solicitor has obtained in violation of federal law" (§ 100.52(4)(b)3.). Registrants must prove federal compliance in obtaining the registry at registration and renewal (§ 100.52(3)).

History. Wisconsin once kept its own "nonsolicitation directory." Section 100.52(1m) now only lets DATCP "cooperate with the federal trade commission to add telephone numbers included in the nonsolicitation directory, as defined in s. 100.52 (1) (e), 2011 stats., to the national do-not-call registry."

Company-specific requests. A seller may not initiate a solicitation to a consumer "who has previously stated that he or she does not wish to receive telephone solicitations from the seller for whom the solicitation is being made" (ATCP 127.16(4)). A safe harbor applies only if all four conditions are met:

• the seller has "clear written procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent violations";
• the seller has trained its personnel in those procedures;
• the seller "maintains a recorded list of persons who have stated that they do not wish to be called";
• "The repeat call is the result of a good faith error, and is not the result of an intentional or systematic disregard of the prohibition under this subsection."

The rule sets no expiration for a company-specific request.

10. Contract, payment and cancellation rules

• Payment authorization. "No seller in a telephone transaction may obtain or submit for payment any check, draft, or other negotiable instrument drawn on a consumer's account without that consumer's express, verifiable authorization" (ATCP 127.10). Verifiable means written, tape-recorded oral, or confirmed in writing before submission. ATCP 127.12 bars credit card laundering.
• Oral-disclosure cancellation right. If the seller relies on oral pre-sale disclosures, one option is to confirm them in writing and disclose that the consumer may cancel after first delivery for a full refund. The seller may set a deadline only if "the deadline is at least 7 days after the first delivery" (ATCP 127.06(2)(b)2.).
• Consumer approval transactions. For transactions that qualify under the Wisconsin Consumer Act, the seller must give and honor the statutory cancellation notice (ATCP 127.16(6)). The official note explains that "a consumer may cancel a consumer approval transaction until midnight of the 3rd business day after the seller gives the consumer a required written notice of cancellation rights under s. 423.203, Stats."
• Prize promotions. Prize promotions in telephone transactions must comply with § 100.171 and may not misrepresent material terms (ATCP 127.08).
• Records. A seller in telephone transactions must keep scripts, prize records, customer purchase records, caller identity records and payment authorizations "for at least 2 years after the seller creates that record" (ATCP 127.18(2)(a)). Persons covered by the do-not-call subchapter must keep their solicitation numbers and written prerecorded-call agreements "for at least 3 years after the seller creates that record" (ATCP 127.84(2)(a)).
• Assisting violations. "No person may knowingly assist any seller to engage in any activity or practice in violation of this subchapter" (ATCP 127.20). ATCP 127.83(2)(d) similarly bars anyone from requiring, instructing, authorizing or knowingly facilitating a do-not-call violation.

11. Exemptions

Statutory exceptions. The registry ban and the business mail opt-out in § 100.52(4)(a)2. and 3. do not apply to two kinds of calls:

• calls made "in response to the recipient's request for the telephone solicitation"; and
• calls to "a current client of the person selling the property, goods, or services."

The current-client exception does not extend to affiliates: it "does not apply if the recipient is a current client of an affiliate of such a person, but is not a current client of such a person" (§ 100.52(6)(am)). Nonprofits and their employees and contractors are outside the "telephone solicitor" definition. Home-based businesses are outside the "residential customer" definition.

Rule exclusions. ATCP 127.80(10) excludes the following from "telephone solicitation" for subchapter V:

• calls or texts selling a nonprofit's goods, if the nonprofit complies with charitable solicitation law and the proceeds are tax-exempt;
• "A telephone call or text message made by an individual acting on his or her own behalf, and not as an employee or agent for any other person." This does not cover someone selling for another person, such as a self-employed insurance agent selling an insurer's policies;
• "A telephone call or text message made in response to the recipient's affirmative request for that call or text message". The note adds: "A failure to respond to a negative option (we will call unless you say no) is not an affirmative request under par. (c)";
• "A telephone call or text message made to a current client";
• "A telephone call or text message made to a number listed in the current local business telephone directory";
• "One telephone call or text message to determine whether a former client mistakenly allowed a contractual relationship to lapse";
• satisfaction calls, "unless the call or text message is part of a plan or scheme to encourage the former client to purchase property, goods, or services"; and
• "A telephone call or text message, made to a party to an existing contract, that is necessary to complete the contract."

Subchapter II carve-out. For subchapter II, the "Seller" definition excludes "a bank, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, insurance company, public utility, or telecommunications carrier engaged in exempt activities under s. 93.01 (1m), Stats." (ATCP 127.01(21)). These entities are therefore outside the disclosure, hours and misrepresentation rules when engaged in exempt activities. The statute and subchapter V do not contain the same carve-out.

12. Private right of action, damages and limitations

Section 100.52 does not itself create a private right of action. It provides for DATCP enforcement and forfeitures payable to the state.

The private remedy comes from § 100.20(5): "Any person suffering pecuniary loss because of a violation by any other person of s. 100.70 or any order issued under this section may sue for damages therefor in any court of competent jurisdiction and shall recover twice the amount of such pecuniary loss, together with costs, including a reasonable attorney fee." The official cross-reference to § 100.20 lists ch. ATCP 127 among the rules issued under that section. ATCP 127.82(2) expressly refers to recovery under § 100.20(5).

The do-not-call rule limits the remedy for registry violations: "A telephone solicitation made in violation of this subsection does not, by itself, result in a monetary loss for which a current telephone customer may seek recovery under s. 100.20 (5), Stats., unless that customer sustains an actual monetary loss as a result of another violation of this chapter" (ATCP 127.82(2)). The official annotation to § 100.20 likewise notes: "To sue for double damages, costs, and attorney's fees under sub. (5), a party must establish a pecuniary loss because of a violation." Another annotation states: "An attorney fee award under sub. (5) is mandatory on successful claims."

In practice, a Wisconsin consumer has a damages claim when a violation of ATCP 127 causes an actual pecuniary loss. Examples include:

• a purchase induced by a misrepresentation;
• a payment taken without verifiable authorization;
• a refused cancellation.

The recovery is twice that loss, plus fees. A consumer with no money lost has no state statutory damages for unwanted calls or texts. That consumer must rely on DATCP enforcement or on the federal TCPA.

Limitations. Neither § 100.52 nor § 100.20 states a limitations period. The official annotations to § 100.20 report that claims under another ATCP rule adopted under § 100.20 are "governed by the discovery rule and the six-year statute of limitations under s. 893.93 (1) (b) [now s. 893.93 (1m) (b)]." It is likely, but not confirmed, that the same period applies to § 100.20(5) claims based on ATCP 127. The limitations period for state forfeiture actions was not verified. For comparison, federal TCPA claims are generally subject to the four-year federal catch-all period.

13. Attorney General and agency enforcement

DATCP. DATCP "shall investigate violations of this section and may bring an action for temporary or permanent injunctive or other relief for any violation of this section" (§ 100.52(9)(b)). It has the same authority under § 100.523(5). DATCP must also "publicize the procedures for a residential customer to add a telephone number to the national do-not-call registry" (§ 100.52(9)(a)). Under § 100.20(6), DATCP may seek injunctions against violations of ATCP orders, with restitution of "any pecuniary loss suffered because of the acts or practices involved in the action." The Department of Justice may also file complaints with DATCP under § 100.20(4).

Forfeitures under § 100.52(10).

• General. "Except as provided in par. (b) or (c), a person who violates this section may be required to forfeit $100 for each violation."
• Telephone solicitors. A telephone solicitor that violates the prerecorded, registry, business opt-out, registration or identification provisions "may be required to forfeit not more than $100 for each violation."
• Caller ID. A telephone solicitor that blocks caller ID or transmits misleading caller ID "shall forfeit not less than $100 nor more than $10,000 for each violation."
• Spoofing. Section 100.523(6) sets the same $100 to $10,000 range for fraudulent spoofing by anyone.

Forfeitures for rule violations. Under § 100.26(6), DATCP or a district attorney may sue "to recover a civil forfeiture to the state of not less than $100 nor more than $10,000 for each violation of an order issued under s. 100.20." Intentional refusal, neglect or failure to obey a rule issued under § 100.20 can also be prosecuted criminally. Under § 100.26(3), the penalty is a fine of "not less than $25 nor more than $5,000, or imprisoned in the county jail for not more than one year or both."

Add-ons.

• Courts must add a consumer protection surcharge "in an amount equal to 25 percent of the fine or forfeiture imposed" (§ 100.261(1)).
• A supplemental forfeiture of up to $10,000 per violation is available for violations of § 100.52 and related rules perpetrated against an elderly or disabled person (§ 100.264(2)).
• Courts may also award DATCP its investigation costs and the Department of Justice its prosecution expenses (§ 100.263).

Counting violations. In State v. Going Places Travel Corp. (Wis. Ct. App. 2015), the court held that each misrepresentation to each consumer was a separate violation of a Direct Marketing rule. That approach can multiply forfeitures quickly (see Case law).

How Wisconsin law differs from federal law

The federal baseline consists of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) at 47 U.S.C. § 227, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) at 16 C.F.R. Part 310.

Where Wisconsin is stricter.

• Registration. Wisconsin charges for registration, requires the registrant's federal registry account number, and requires callers to give the registration number on request.
• Prerecorded calls. The prerecorded-call rule demands a signed written agreement, with specific disclosures, before any prerecorded sales call. It applies to business customers as well.
• Business lines. Businesses can opt out of solicitations with a mailed or emailed notice, a protection with no general federal counterpart.
• Texts. Texts are expressly covered by state law. In the Seventh Circuit, federal statutory damages for do-not-call texts are unavailable after Steidinger.
• Disclosure timing. Opening disclosures must come before any question, not just promptly.
• Caller ID. Caller ID blocking is barred outright, with forfeitures of up to $10,000 per violation.
• Penalty multipliers. Surcharges, elderly-victim forfeitures and per-consumer counting of rule violations can make public penalties large.

Where Wisconsin is the same.

• The 8 to 9 calling window.
• The 31-day registry scrub.
• The definition of the do-not-call list itself, which is the federal registry.
• Express verifiable authorization for check payments.

Where Wisconsin is looser or silent.

• Private damages. There are no statutory damages for unwanted calls, and the § 100.20(5) remedy requires a pecuniary loss.
• Autodialers. There is no autodialer rule.
• Opt-out duration. Company-specific opt-outs have no stated duration, while the federal period is five years.
• Exemptions. The current-client, business-directory and individual-seller exclusions are broader than their federal counterparts.

Case law

• State v. Going Places Travel Corp., 2015 WI App 42 (Wis. Ct. App. 2015). In a State enforcement action over travel club sales, the court affirmed a judgment of $3,803,562 in restitution and $841,599.50 in forfeitures. The rule at issue was the mail-transaction misrepresentation rule, ATCP 127.44(15), which parallels the telephone-transaction rule in ATCP 127.14(15). The court reasoned that § 100.26(6) authorizes a forfeiture for each violation of the rule, and it held that "each misrepresentation to an individual would constitute a separate violation." That produced 3,536 violations: four misrepresentations multiplied by 884 consumers. The same reasoning would likely apply to the parallel telephone-transaction rules, which also target statements made to individual consumers.
• Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, No. 25-2398 (7th Cir. July 14, 2026). In an appeal from the Central District of Illinois, the Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of TCPA do-not-call claims based on marketing texts. It held that "Repeated, unwanted text messages are undoubtedly a nuisance. But they do not fall within the private right of action created by § 227(c)(5)." The court noted that such messages "may be curbed through agency action pursuant to other provisions of § 227." The decision binds federal courts in Wisconsin, which sits in the Seventh Circuit. Courts in other circuits have not necessarily agreed, and this page does not survey them. It makes Wisconsin's express state-law coverage of texts, enforced by DATCP, more significant in practice.

No published Wisconsin appellate decision construing § 100.52 or ATCP 127 subchapter V was located in the official court and federal sources searched.

Recent amendments

• 2023 Wis. Act 243 (2023 Senate Bill 531). "Date of enactment: March 27, 2024"; published March 28, 2024. The act takes effect "on the first day of the 13th month beginning after publication," which works out to April 1, 2025. It created the caller ID definition and the blocking and misleading caller ID prohibitions in § 100.52(1)(bd) and (4)(a)4. and 5., the law enforcement exception in § 100.52(6)(c), and the $100 to $10,000 forfeiture in § 100.52(10)(c). It also created the general spoofing statute, § 100.523.
• 2015 rule revision (CR 14-050, effective May 1, 2015). According to the official history notes, it repealed and recreated ATCP 127.82 (the current registry and 31-day scrub provision), recreated the registry account number requirement in ATCP 127.81(2)(j), and amended the prerecorded-call and business opt-out provisions in ATCP 127.83.
• 2013 rule revision (CR 12-036, effective June 1, 2013). Added texts and SMS to the subchapter V definitions and added ATCP 127.14(16) on misleading caller ID.
• Earlier statutory history. Section 100.52 was amended in 2007, 2011 (Act 197) and 2013 (Act 234). The current § 100.52(1m) refers to the former state "nonsolicitation directory" as defined in the 2011 statutes.

Compliance checklist

1. Before calling or texting Wisconsin consumers, register with DATCP under ATCP 127.81. Do this unless a seller's registration covers you or an exclusion clearly applies. Include your federal registry account number, pay the quarterly fee installments, renew before the November 30 expiration, and give your registration number to any call recipient who asks.
2. Download the Wisconsin portion of the National Do Not Call Registry at least every 31 days. Suppress those numbers for both calls and texts, and obtain the registry only through the federal system.
3. Keep a company-specific do-not-call list. Adopt written procedures, train staff, and honor requests without an end date to preserve the ATCP 127.16(4) safe harbor.
4. Do not send any prerecorded sales message, to consumers or businesses, without a signed written agreement. The agreement must show the number to be called and state that signing is not a condition of purchase.
5. Call only between 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM at the consumer's residence, and apply the same window to texts as a precaution.
6. Open each call with the principal seller's name, the caller's name, the sales purpose and the nature of the product, before any question. Give full pre-sale disclosures in writing or confirm them in writing.
7. Transmit accurate caller ID on every call and text, never block it, and use only the seller's name and a staffed customer service number that accepts do-not-call requests.
8. Honor mailed or emailed opt-outs from business lines, and provide a mailing or email address within 10 days when asked.
9. Get express verifiable authorization before submitting checks or drafts, and honor cancellation rights, including the three-business-day right in consumer approval transactions.
10. Keep telephone transaction records for at least 2 years and do-not-call program records, including prerecorded-call agreements, for at least 3 years.

References

• Wis. Stat. § 100.52 and § 100.523: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/100.52
• Wis. Stat. § 100.20: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/100.20
• Wis. Stat. §§ 100.26, 100.261, 100.263, 100.264: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/100.26(6)
• Wis. Admin. Code ch. ATCP 127: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/atcp/090/127
• Wis. Admin. Code §§ ATCP 127.01 to 127.10: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/administrativecode/ATCP%20127.04
• Wis. Admin. Code §§ ATCP 127.10 to 127.20: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/administrativecode/ATCP%20127.14
• Wis. Admin. Code §§ ATCP 127.80 to 127.81: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/administrativecode/ATCP%20127.80
• Wis. Admin. Code §§ ATCP 127.81 to 127.84: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/administrativecode/ATCP%20127.82
• 2023 Wisconsin Act 243: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2023/related/acts/243
• State v. Going Places Travel Corp., 2015 WI App 42: https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=139846
• Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services (7th Cir. 2026): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca7-25-02398/pdf/USCOURTS-ca7-25-02398-0.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.