Maryland’s Stop the Spam Calls Act: What Callers Face

A business that calls or texts Maryland numbers is subject to a state statute that is stricter than the federal rules in three ways. Automated or recorded marketing needs written consent. Solicitations can’t go out after 8 p.m. in the called party’s time zone, an hour earlier than the federal cutoff. And no one may be solicited more than three times in 24 hours on one subject. A private claim backs it up. A California company with Maryland customers should check its campaigns.

What does the Maryland statute cover?

The rules are in Subtitle 45 of the Commercial Law article of the Maryland Code. The statute defines prior express written consent, and the definition shows the scope: it is a written agreement that “Clearly authorizes the person making or allowing the placement of a telephone solicitation by telephone call, text message, or voicemail” to use automated dialing, recorded or artificial voice messages, or prerecorded voicemail, per Commercial Law § 14-4501. The reference to text messages and voicemail is the reason businesses that text should treat the statute as applying to them.

The definition of “telephone solicitation” comes from another statute. Public Utilities § 8-205 defines it as “an organized activity, program, or campaign to communicate by telephone with residents of Maryland” in order to sell goods or services, offer a gift or prize, conduct a poll, or request survey information used to solicit sales. A one-off message to a customer is not the typical case. A campaign is.

What does the consent rule require?

The rule is in Commercial Law § 14-4502(a)(3): “Without the prior express written consent of the called party, a person may not make or cause to be made a telephone solicitation that involves” either “An automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers” or “The playing of a recorded message when a connection is completed to the number called.”

The consent must meet the statute’s definition in § 14-4501. It has to bear the called party’s signature, include the telephone number, and contain a clear and conspicuous disclosure that the called party “is not required to directly or indirectly” sign the agreement, or “agree to enter into the agreement as a condition of purchasing any property, goods, or services.” The same section says an electronic signature counts “to the extent that the form of signature is recognized as a valid signature under applicable federal law or State contract law.” Those elements are similar to the federal written-consent elements, so a form built for the federal rule will often satisfy the Maryland one, but I’d have it checked against the Maryland language.

The statute also defines the called party as “a person who is a regular user of a telephone number that receives a telephone solicitation,” in § 14-4501. That differs from the federal approach, which looks to the subscriber or a customary user, and it affects who can give consent.

Which messages are exempt?

Several categories, listed in § 14-4502(a)(1), including “A single telephone solicitation made to a customer or client in response to an inquiry or request from the customer or client,” a person who solicits contracts “for the maintenance or repair of goods previously purchased from the person making the solicitation,” and a business-to-business sale where the solicitor “has been lawfully operating continuously for at least 3 years under the same business name.”

Read the structure carefully. The list opens with the words “This subsection does not apply to,” and it sits in subsection (a) of § 14-4502, which contains the consent rule. The hours and frequency limits are in subsection (c). On the text, the exemptions release a caller from the consent requirement, not from the 8 p.m. cutoff or the three-call limit. A company that relies on the maintenance exemption to send automated texts without written consent should still schedule them before 8 p.m.

What are the hours and frequency limits?

Subsection (c) of § 14-4502 says a person may not make a telephone solicitation, “including a call made through automated dialing or a recorded message,” at certain times or in certain numbers. The first limit bars calls “between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. in the called party’s time zone.” The second bars solicitation “More than three times to the same called party during a 24-hour period on the same subject matter or issue, regardless of the telephone numbers used to make the call.”

The federal rule is later in the evening. The FCC’s rule at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(c)(1) bars solicitations “before the hour of 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. (local time at the called party’s location).” A system set to the federal window will send messages in the hour Maryland prohibits. The Maryland language that reaches calls made “regardless of the telephone numbers used” in § 14-4502 also means a campaign that rotates sender numbers still counts toward the three-call limit.

What are the remedies?

Under § 14-4503, a violation is “An unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice within the meaning of Title 13” of the Commercial Law article, enforceable by the state. A person who is harmed also has a private claim: “A called party who is aggrieved by a person who violates this subtitle may bring an action in accordance with § 13-408 of this article to enjoin further violations and to recover damages up to $500 or actual damages, whichever is greater.” If the court finds a willful or knowing violation, it “may award damages up to three times” that amount.

Two other provisions in the same section deserve attention. There is a “rebuttable presumption that a telephone solicitation made to any area code in the State is made to a resident,” so a Maryland area code points the statute at you even if the recipient has moved. And the requirements and remedies “may not be waived by an agreement, unless the agreement is part of a settlement of a legal dispute,” with an exception for the consent provision itself, so a terms-of-service waiver won’t help.

How should a multistate sender handle the difference?

I’d build the strictest rule into the scheduling system and apply it to every recipient with a Maryland area code, which is also the group the statute’s presumption covers. That means an 8 p.m. cutoff in the recipient’s time zone, a cap of three contacts per subject in any 24-hour window across all of your sender numbers, and a written consent record that tracks the Maryland elements. The cost is a slightly shorter sending window for a subset of the list. The benefit is that a single misconfigured campaign can’t produce a statutory claim for every recipient.

Second, keep the data to prove it. A system that stores only the send time in the sender’s time zone can’t show that a message went out before 8 p.m. in Maryland. Store the recipient’s time zone, the area code, and the subject category of each message, because the frequency limit is measured by subject, and a plaintiff will count differently from the way your marketing team labels campaigns.

What to gather if a Maryland claim arrives

1. Identify every campaign that reached a Maryland area code, with send times converted to the recipient’s time zone.
2. Pull the consent form language and compare it to the elements in § 14-4501.
3. Count the messages per recipient per 24 hours on each subject, across all sender numbers.
4. Check whether an exemption in § 14-4502(a)(1) applied and what facts support it.
5. Wait to respond to a demand letter or contact the recipient until a lawyer has reviewed the file.

The firm’s TCPA defense lawyers page describes how these claims move through court. For related reading, see the earlier posts on Texas SB 140 and on Washington’s CEMA text claims.

Questions businesses ask about the Maryland statute

Does Maryland’s law apply to a California business?

It applies to telephone solicitations to Maryland residents, and the statute presumes that a call to a Maryland area code reaches a resident. The location of the caller doesn’t remove a campaign from it.

Is a single marketing text covered?

The definition speaks of an organized activity, program, or campaign. A one-off message is less likely to fit, but I wouldn’t treat a mass text as a single message.

Do we need to stop at 8 p.m. even for customers who consented?

On the text of the statute, the hours limit in subsection (c) applies to telephone solicitations generally and isn’t one of the exemptions listed in subsection (a). I’d schedule to the stricter window.

Does the federal consent form satisfy Maryland?

Often it will, since the elements are alike. Compare the wording, and note that Maryland’s definition of the called party differs.

Defending claims under state calling statutes

If your company has been sued or received a demand letter under a state calling statute, the campaign schedule, the consent forms, and the sender-number records will decide much of the case. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents businesses defending TCPA lawsuits and class actions through its business litigation practice, including claims involving state calling and texting statutes. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a free and confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.

Sources

The Maryland statutes are Commercial Law § 14-4501, § 14-4502, and § 14-4503, and Public Utilities § 8-205. The federal rule is 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200, as published in the eCFR on May 22, 2026.

This post is general information about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related laws as of May 22, 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Courts and the FCC change the rules in this area often, and the outcome of any claim depends on its facts. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.