Another State, Another Layer of Calling and Texting Compliance
by: Sophia Allen & Brian Schaller
The patchwork of state calling and texting laws continues to grow, with Pennsylvania significantly expanding its regulation of calls and text messages.
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro signed Senate Bill 992 on July 20, 2026 (Act No. 47 of 2026), amending the Pennsylvania Telemarketer Registration Act (TRA). Among other things, the bill adds a defined prior express written consent standard, expressly regulates text messages and ringless voicemails, shortens the permissible hours for calls and texts, prohibits covered solicitations on Sundays, expands opt out requirements, and strengthens caller ID restrictions. Pennsylvania law authorizes civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation (which likely means per each call/text), and potentially up to $3,000 for violations involving individuals 60 years of age or older; and the potential for private actions. As the Act expands its reach to additional communications and practices, these penalties, together with the potential for civil litigation, can create significant exposure.
As more states update and adopt their own telemarketing requirements, businesses face an increasingly complex compliance landscape that extends well beyond federal law. Businesses with regional or nationwide calling and texting campaigns should consider whether Pennsylvania's new requirements affect their existing compliance programs.
Below are some of the most notable changes to Pennsylvania’s law that we think anyone calling, sending text messages or leaving ringless voicemails should know.
Unclear Consent Standard Replaced with a Defined One
One of the most significant changes is the addition of a specifically defined "prior express written consent" standard.
Prior to this new amendment, a telephone solicitation call under the statute generally excluded calls made in response to an "express request" from the consumer. The statute, however, did not define what constituted an express request.
The updated statute replaces that “express request” exclusion with an exclusion for calls and messages made with prior express written consent, a term that is now specifically defined in the legislation. SB 992 details what constitutes valid written consent, including required disclosures and signature requirements.
Although the new definition provides additional clarity, it also gives businesses less flexibility to rely on broader interpretations of what constitutes consent to be called/texted.
The law also separately prohibits robocalls to residential, business, or wireless telephone lines without prior express written consent, subject to certain limited exceptions.
Because communications made with prior express written consent are excluded from the definition of “telephone solicitation,” valid consent affects the applicability of other requirements under the statute (e.g., registration and the quiet-hours restrictions).
Note that SB 992 does not eliminate the existing established business relationship exception.
Using Third Party Vendors Does Not End the Compliance Analysis
The amended statute repeatedly refers to businesses that initiate, or cause to be initiated, covered calls and text messages. As a result, businesses that use third party calling or texting vendors should not assume that the requirements and liability apply only to the vendor placing the communication. Businesses should review their vendor contracts and compliance expectations, including responsibilities relating to consent, opt out requests, and other applicable requirements.
Text Messages Are Now Expressly Covered
The prior statute defined a “telephone solicitation call” by reference to a call made for certain purposes and did not expressly address text messages. SB 992 replaces that definition with a broader definition of “telephone solicitation” that expressly includes telephone calls, voicemails, ringless voicemails, and text messages.
As a result, many of the Act’s restrictions now clearly apply to certain text message campaigns. Businesses that send text messages should carefully review their compliance practices to determine how the Act’s requirements apply to those communications.
Time of Day Restrictions
The new law significantly limits when covered calls and text messages may be made.
Previously, Pennsylvania law generally prohibited covered calls before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. or on legal holidays. The amended statute instead prohibits initiating, or causing to be initiated, a covered telephone solicitation:
before 9:00 a.m.;
after 7:00 p.m.;
at any time on Sundays;
on a legal holiday.
We previously discussed the growing litigation surrounding the timing of marketing text messages in our article, Do You Need to Stop Sending Texts at Night/Early Morning?
SB 992 Expands Opt Out Requirements
The opt out provisions are also strengthened, including expressly identifying several text message responses that recipients may use to revoke consent, including: STOP; QUIT; END; REVOKE; OPT OUT; CANCEL; UNSUBSCRIBE.
Businesses should confirm that their texting platforms recognize each of these responses and ensure that procedures are in place for what appears to be a limited safe harbor in the provision.
Expanded Caller ID Requirements
The new law also expands Pennsylvania's caller ID requirements by expressly prohibiting telemarketers from falsely identifying their name or telephone number. Businesses should review their calling and texting practices to ensure that caller ID information accurately identifies the sender and complies with applicable federal and state requirements.
Final Thoughts
SB 992 is more than a simple update to Pennsylvania's telemarketer registration requirements. It modernizes the Act by expressly addressing text messages, ringless voicemails, caller ID, consent, opt out mechanisms, and the timing of marketing communications.
With the law coming into effect this October, businesses that text or call should review their consent processes, campaign scheduling, texting platforms, caller ID practices, and determine whether updates are needed. Businesses should also review their contracts and compliance expectations with their calling/texting vendors. More broadly, SB 992 serves as another reminder that businesses can no longer focus solely on the TCPA. As more states adopt their own calling and texting requirements, multistate compliance programs should be periodically reviewed to address an increasingly complex patchwork of state laws.
Originally published by InfoLawGroup LLP. If you would like to receive regular emails from us, in which we share updates and our take on current legal news, please subscribe to InfoLawGroup’s Insights HERE. This summary does not constitute legal advice.