State Mini-TCPA Laws: Florida's Amended Statute, Oklahoma's Copy and Maryland's Version

What Makes a State Law a Mini-TCPA

"Mini-TCPA" is a label, not a statutory term. It is used for state laws that regulate the same conduct as the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, usually automated or prerecorded sales calls and texts, and that give the called party a private damages claim. The federal statute expressly allows them. Under 47 U.S.C. § 227(f)(1), apart from the do-not-call standards in subsection (d), nothing in § 227 preempts "any State law that imposes more restrictive intrastate requirements or regulations on, or which prohibits" the use of automatic telephone dialing systems, artificial or prerecorded voice messages, or the making of telephone solicitations.

This post charts three statutes, each read from the enacting state's official statute text: Florida, Oklahoma and Maryland. Other states have telemarketing laws of their own, and several may fit the label; they are not described here because their texts were not reviewed for this post, and nothing below should be read as a statement about them. The federal rules the three statutes sit beside are covered in the TCPA consent guide.

Florida's Telephone Solicitation Act and the 2023 Amendment

Florida's statute, § 501.059, predates the federal law in part, but its current shape comes from two recent bills. Comparing the codified text the Florida Legislature publishes for 2020, 2022 and 2026 shows what each changed.

2021: CS/SB 1120, chapter 2021-185, effective July 1, 2021. According to the Florida Senate bill page, the bill prohibited certain sales calls without the called party's prior express written consent and created a cause of action. The 2020 text had flatly barred sales calls involving "an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers" or a recorded message, with exceptions in a separate paragraph. The 2022 text instead barred them "without the prior express written consent of the called party," defined that consent as a signed written agreement naming the number and disclosing that signing is not a condition of purchase, added a rebuttable presumption that a call to a Florida area code is made to a Florida resident or a person in Florida, and gave an aggrieved called party a claim for an injunction and actual damages or $500, whichever is greater.

2023: CS/CS/HB 761, chapter 2023-150, effective May 25, 2023. The bill page summarises it as prohibiting certain telephonic sales calls and setting conditions for text-message suits. Against the 2022 text, the current statute makes four changes:

• The equipment phrase in § 501.059(8)(a) and in the consent definition now reads "an automated system for the selection and dialing of telephone numbers," where it previously read selection or dialing
• Subsection (8)(a) now reaches an "unsolicited telephonic sales call," a defined term that excludes calls made at the person's express request, calls primarily about an existing unpaid debt or incomplete contract, calls to a person with a prior or existing business relationship, and calls by a newspaper publisher
• "Signature" now includes "an act that demonstrates express consent, including, but not limited to, checking a box indicating consent or responding affirmatively to receiving text messages"
• New § 501.059(10)(c) requires that, before suing over text-message solicitations, the called party reply "STOP"; the solicitor then has 15 days to stop, and suit is available only if messages continue after that period

The history note on the 2026 Florida Statutes version of § 501.059 ends with "s. 1, ch. 2023-150," so the 2023 amendment is the most recent change to the section as published.

Oklahoma's Telephone Solicitation Act

Oklahoma enacted the Telephone Solicitation Act of 2022 as HB 3168, Laws 2022, chapter 290, effective November 1, 2022, codified at 15 O.S. § 775C.1 through § 775C.6. The historical data on each section, as published by the Oklahoma State Courts Network, shows no amendment since enactment.

Its core provisions read almost word for word like Florida's 2021 text. Section 775C.3(A) bars a "commercial telephonic sales call" involving "an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers" or a recorded message without prior express written consent, and § 775C.3(D) presumes that a call to an Oklahoma area code reaches an Oklahoma resident or a person in the state. Three differences from Florida's current law stand out:

• Oklahoma kept selection or dialing; it did not follow Florida's 2023 change
• Section 775C.2 defines four terms (called party, caller identification service, prior express written consent and signature); "commercial telephonic sales call" is not among them, and the signature definition has no check-box language
• Section 775C.5 exempts 26 categories, among them isolated transactions, religious, charitable, political or educational solicitation, supervised financial institutions, licensed insurance and real estate licensees, calls to consumers with an existing business relationship, and, as paragraph 13, "a commercial telephone seller"

Maryland's Stop the Spam Calls Act

Maryland enacted the Stop the Spam Calls Act of 2023 as HB 37 and SB 90 (chapters 414 and 413), effective January 1, 2024, according to the General Assembly's bill page. It is codified at Md. Code, Commercial Law §§ 14-4501 to 14-4503.

Maryland borrowed the Florida structure but not its definitions. Section 14-4501(f) takes "telephone solicitation" from Public Utilities § 8-205: "an organized activity, program, or campaign to communicate by telephone with residents of Maryland" to sell, lease or rent goods or services, offer a prize, conduct a poll, or gather survey information used for solicitation. Section 14-4502(a)(3) bars such a solicitation involving "an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers" or a recorded message without prior express written consent, subject to seven exemptions, including isolated transactions, qualifying nonprofit calls, certain business-to-business sales and public opinion research.

Autodialer Definitions Broader Than Facebook v. Duguid

The federal definition of an automatic telephone dialing system, in § 227(a)(1), is equipment with the capacity "to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator" and to dial them. In Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (2021), the Supreme Court held that "a device must have the capacity either to store a telephone number using a random or sequential number generator, or to produce a telephone number using a random or sequential number generator," which excluded Facebook's login-notification system.

None of the three state statutes contains the random or sequential number generator language. Each instead refers to an automated system for the selection of numbers and the dialing of them, with the connective as the variable:

How courts have applied these phrases to particular dialing platforms is not charted here: no state or federal opinion construing them was reviewed for this post, and the statutory text alone does not say what counts as an automated system for selection.

Call Time and Frequency Limits

The federal rule, 47 CFR 64.1200(c)(1), bars telephone solicitations to residential subscribers before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. at the called party's location. All three states end the window an hour earlier and add a frequency cap, though they differ on whom the limits bind.

• Florida, § 501.616(6), added by the 2021 law: a commercial telephone seller or salesperson may not call before 8 a.m. or after 8 p.m. in the called person's time zone, or make more than three commercial telephone solicitation calls to a person over 24 hours on the same subject, regardless of the number used. Section 501.603(2) excludes from "commercial telephone seller" anyone exempted by § 501.604 or filing a valid affidavit of exemption.
• Oklahoma, § 775C.4(A): the same two limits, in the same words, applied to a commercial telephone seller or salesperson.
• Maryland, § 14-4502(c): the limits apply to "a person" making a telephone solicitation, with no hours between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. in the called party's time zone and no more than three calls to the same called party in 24 hours on the same subject matter.

Private Rights of Action and Cure Notices

Florida's fee clause runs to the "prevailing party" and states that the party "shall receive" reasonable fees and costs after judgment and exhaustion of appeals, so on its terms it can favor either side. Maryland's § 14-4503(d) adds that the subtitle's requirements and remedies may not be waived by agreement unless the agreement is part of a settlement, with an exception for the written-consent provision in § 14-4502(a)(3).

The federal claim remains available alongside these. Under § 227(b)(3) a person may sue in state court for actual loss or $500 per violation, with discretionary trebling for willful or knowing violations: the same $500 figure the three state statutes use. Federal consent mechanics that interact with these claims, including revocation, are covered in the post on the FCC's revocation rule and the post on the vacated one-to-one consent rule.

Frequently Asked Questions