Is WhatsApp Marketing Legal in the US? TCPA 2026

Quick answer: Yes, with opt-in. No US law bans it, and no court we found has decided whether a WhatsApp message is a TCPA “call”. If it is, each unconsented autodialled, artificial-voice or prerecorded-voice message risks $500, up to $1,500 if wilful or knowing. Meta requires opt-in and, as at 12 October 2026, delivers no marketing templates to US numbers.

Read from the primary sources on 12 October 2026. This describes the text; it is not legal advice.

Is WhatsApp marketing legal in the US?

Yes. “WhatsApp marketing” here means a business sending promotional messages to a person’s WhatsApp account, identified by their phone number but delivered over WhatsApp’s internet service rather than the carrier SMS network. No federal statute names WhatsApp or bans promotional messages to people who agreed to receive them.

The boundary is the hard part. Four sets of rules could apply, with very different certainty: the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. 227, and the FCC’s rules in 47 CFR 64.1200, which clearly reach SMS; CAN-SPAM, built around email addresses; the Florida and Oklahoma mini-TCPAs, which name “text message” without defining it; and Meta’s WhatsApp Business Messaging Policy, a contract rather than a law, but the only rule that certainly applies to every message.

Voice calls follow different, settled rules, covered in our guide to whether AI cold calling is legal in the US under the TCPA; the cross-jurisdiction view is in our AI outreach compliance guide to the Spam Act, TCPA and GDPR.

The US WhatsApp exposure table

Inclusion rule: a row is listed if its text could plausibly apply to a promotional WhatsApp message to a US number; the second column says only what a court, the regulator or the rule’s own wording has said, and “unsettled” where nobody has decided.

Rule	Does it reach a WhatsApp message?	What triggers liability	Penalty or consequence
TCPA 227(b)(1)(A)(iii): calls to mobile numbers	Unsettled. Courts and the FCC treat SMS as a “call”; no reported decision we found on WhatsApp or other app-to-app messages	A “call” made using an autodialler (random or sequential number generator) or an artificial or prerecorded voice, without prior express consent (written if telemarketing, nonprofit and HIPAA exceptions aside), not for emergency purposes	$500 per violation or actual loss if greater; a court may raise it to up to 3 times ($1,500) if wilful or knowing (227(b)(3))
TCPA 227(c)(5): Do Not Call private right of action	Unlikely in the Seventh Circuit, which held in July 2026 that it does not cover even SMS; undecided elsewhere and untested for WhatsApp	More than one “telephone call” in 12 months by or for the same entity in breach of the Do Not Call rules	Up to $500 per violation, up to 3 times if wilful or knowing; defence for reasonable procedures implemented with due care
TCPA 227(g): state attorney general action	Same uncertainty as the provision enforced	A pattern or practice of calls or other transmissions to state residents in breach of 227	$500 per violation, up to 3 times if wilful or knowing
47 CFR 64.1200(a)(10): revocation of consent	Written for “calls or text messages”; unsettled for WhatsApp	Sending after a person revokes consent by any reasonable method, including replying “stop”, “quit”, “end”, “revoke”, “opt out”, “cancel” or “unsubscribe”	Revocation must be honoured within 10 business days; continued messages lose their consent defence
CAN-SPAM (15 U.S.C. 7702, 7706)	Probably not: it covers messages sent to an “electronic mail address”, defined by a user name plus an Internet domain; no FTC or court application to WhatsApp found	A commercial electronic mail message (primary purpose is advertising or promotion) that breaks the Act’s requirements	Enforced by the FTC as a rule violation; the FTC’s maximum civil penalty under 15 U.S.C. 45(m)(1)(A) is $53,088 per violation (16 CFR 1.98(d)); state attorneys general and internet access providers can also sue (7706(f), (g))
Florida Telephone Solicitation Act, s. 501.059(8)(a)	Unsettled: “telephonic sales call” includes a “text message”, which the statute does not define	An unsolicited sales message about consumer goods or services, involving an automated system for the selection and dialling of numbers or a recorded message, without prior express written consent; separately, any unsolicited sales message to a number on Florida’s no-sales-solicitation list (s. 501.059(4))	Actual damages or $500, up to 3 times if wilful or knowing; prevailing-party attorney fees; for texts, the recipient must first reply “STOP” and wait 15 days
Oklahoma Telephone Solicitation Act of 2022, 15 O.S. 775C.3	Unsettled: “commercial telephonic sales call” is undefined, but the consent definition names “text message”	A commercial telephonic sales call involving an automated system for the selection or dialling of numbers or a recorded message, without prior express written consent; 26 exempt categories	Actual damages or $500, up to 3 times if wilful or knowing
Meta WhatsApp Business Messaging Policy	Yes, every message (contract)	Messaging someone without their number or username and opt-in; ignoring opt-outs; business-initiated messages that are not approved templates; automation without an escalation path	Meta may limit or remove access, limit sending, and after termination bar the business from all future WhatsApp products

Read the table as a stack, not a menu: Meta’s policy certainly applies, the federal and state statutes might, and where they apply the damages are counted per message.

Is a WhatsApp message a “call” under the TCPA?

Nobody has decided. The TCPA’s consent rule in 227(b)(1)(A) covers “any call … using any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice” to a mobile number.

The case for coverage:

• The FCC. FCC 15-72 (2015, paragraph 107) reiterated that SMS gets the same protection as voice calls; FCC 23-21 (2023) says “for the purposes of the TCPA, texts are included in the term ‘call.’” Paragraph 115 of FCC 15-72 called internet-originated texts “functionally equivalent” to phone-to-phone texts “from the recipient’s perspective”, and said treating them differently “would elevate form over substance.”
• The Ninth Circuit, January 2026. Howard v. Republican National Committee (No. 23-3826) held “that a text message is properly deemed to be a ‘call’”, because an arriving text “usually results in an immediate intrusion in the form of a display of a preview of the text on the phone’s screen (even if locked), a sound, a vibration”. A WhatsApp notification does all three.

The case against:

• The Supreme Court has only assumed it. Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez (2016) said a text to a mobile “it is undisputed, qualifies as a ‘call’”; Facebook v. Duguid (2021, footnote 2) would “assume that it does without considering or resolving that issue.”
• The Seventh Circuit, July 2026. Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services (No. 25-2398, decided 14 July 2026) held that 227(c)(5) “does not permit plaintiffs to sue for the receipt of unwanted texts”: in 1991 a “telephone call” meant “communication via sound”, and “[t]ext messages do not reproduce sounds.” It is limited to 227(c)(5) and binds only Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.
• Congress drew the line once. Defining “text message” for the caller-ID spoofing subsection in 2018 (227(e)(8)(C)), it included SMS and MMS but excluded “a message sent over an IP-enabled messaging service to another user of the same messaging service”, which describes WhatsApp-to-WhatsApp messaging. That definition applies “for purposes of this subsection” (and two subsections that borrow it), not to 227(b).
• The FCC’s app ruling stops at interconnected services. FCC 15-72, paragraph 116, required consent for “text messaging apps that enable entities to send text messages to all or substantially all text-capable U.S. telephone numbers”. WhatsApp reaches only WhatsApp users, so it is outside that description, though the paragraph does not exempt it either. The FCC’s 2023 text-blocking rules “apply to text messaging originating from NANP numbers that use the wireless networks, e.g., Short Message Service (SMS) and Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS).”

A CourtListener search on 12 October 2026 for WhatsApp, iMessage and Facebook Messenger with the TCPA found no decision on app-to-app messages (the same search for “text message” returned 188 TCPA opinions; district-court coverage is incomplete). A WhatsApp message to a US number is arguably a “call” on the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning and arguably not one on the Seventh’s, and no court has said either about WhatsApp.

Does the TCPA autodialler rule reach a WhatsApp campaign after Facebook v. Duguid?

Usually not, even if the message is a “call”. An autodialler is equipment with the capacity “to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and to dial such numbers” (227(a)(1)). Facebook v. Duguid (1 April 2021) held that “a device must have the capacity either to store a telephone number using a random or sequential generator or to produce a telephone number using a random or sequential number generator”; Facebook’s login-alert system, messaging numbers stored against accounts, was not one. A campaign messaging opted-in CRM contacts generates no numbers, so the live limb is an artificial or prerecorded voice:

• Voice notes and videos. In Howard the Ninth Circuit held, 2–1, that a text carrying a video with a prerecorded voice did not breach 227(b), because the recipient had to choose to press play. An AI voice note the recipient must tap is close to those facts; one that auto-plays is not.
• WhatsApp calls by an AI voice agent. Declaratory Ruling FCC 24-17 (released 8 February 2024) says the “artificial or prerecorded voice” restrictions “encompass current AI technologies that generate human voices”, and Meta’s policy recommends “a separate opt-in to initiate a call to a user”. See our WhatsApp Calling API setup guide for AI voice agents.

Florida narrowed its rule in chapter 2023-150 (in force 25 May 2023): it now needs an automated system for the selection and dialling of numbers. Oklahoma’s still says selection or dialling.

Do the FCC’s text-message rules apply to WhatsApp?

They are written for “text messages” and none defines the term to include or exclude apps. Three cost nothing to honour on WhatsApp anyway:

• Revocation, 64.1200(a)(10). Consent to “calls or text messages” can be revoked by “any reasonable method”. “Stop”, “quit”, “end”, “revoke”, “opt out”, “cancel” or “unsubscribe” is a per se revocation, other wording counts if a reasonable person would read it as one, you may not designate an exclusive means, and you must honour it “within a reasonable time not to exceed ten business days”. Meta requires you to respect opt-outs made “either on or off WhatsApp”.
• Prior express written consent, 64.1200(a)(2) and (f)(9). Needed for telemarketing by autodialler or artificial or prerecorded voice to mobiles (tax-exempt nonprofits and HIPAA health care messages aside): a signed agreement, e-signatures included, that authorises the seller’s messages, names the number, and discloses that signing authorises them and is not a condition of purchase.
• Do Not Call, 64.1200(e). Since the FCC’s December 2023 order (89 FR 5098) it covers “telephone solicitations or telemarketing calls or text messages to wireless telephone numbers”. After Steidinger, private suits over texts under 227(c)(5) are closed in the Seventh Circuit and unsettled elsewhere, where district courts have gone both ways.

For conversations the customer starts, FCC 15-72 (paragraph 106) found that a text sent in response to a consumer’s request does not violate the TCPA if it (1) was requested by the consumer, (2) is a one-time message sent immediately in response, and (3) contains only the information requested, with no other marketing. That covers the first reply, not a whole sales thread.

Does CAN-SPAM cover WhatsApp messages?

Probably not. CAN-SPAM governs commercial “electronic mail” messages, and an electronic mail address is “a destination, commonly expressed as a string of characters, consisting of a unique user name or mailbox … and a reference to an Internet domain …, whether or not displayed” (15 U.S.C. 7702(5), (6)). A WhatsApp message is addressed to a phone number on WhatsApp, and we found no FTC statement or court decision applying CAN-SPAM to one; the “whether or not displayed” clause is why the answer is “probably”. If it did apply, the FTC enforces it as a trade regulation rule violation (15 U.S.C. 7706(a)), and its maximum civil penalty under 15 U.S.C. 45(m)(1)(A) is $53,088 per violation (16 CFR 1.98(d)); state attorneys general and internet access providers can also sue (15 U.S.C. 7706(f), (g)).

Florida and Oklahoma: the state laws that name text messages

Florida, s. 501.059. A “telephonic sales call” is “a telephone call, text message, or voicemail transmission to a consumer for the purpose of soliciting a sale of any consumer goods or services”, or credit for them, or gathering information for such a solicitation. “Text message” is undefined, so whether a WhatsApp message is one is untested.

• Consent, (8)(a): no unsolicited telephonic sales call that “involves an automated system for the selection and dialing of telephone numbers or the playing of a recorded message when a connection is completed to a number called” without prior express written consent. A “signature” includes “responding affirmatively to receiving text messages”.
• Not “unsolicited”, (1)(k): a response to the person’s express request; a message mainly about an uncompleted debt or contract; one to a person with a prior or existing business relationship; one by a newspaper publisher. Only consumer goods or services (personal, family or household use) are covered.
• Remedy, (10) and (11): actual damages or $500, up to three times if wilful or knowing, plus prevailing-party attorney fees. For text message solicitations the recipient must first reply “STOP” and may sue only if messages continue 15 days later. The state can also seek a Class IV penalty, for which s. 570.971 says “a fine of $10,000 or more may be imposed”.
• State no-sales-solicitation list, (4): no unsolicited telephonic sales call to a number on the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ current quarterly “no sales solicitation calls” listing, whether or not the system is automated.
• Do not re-contact, (5): no outbound call, text message or voicemail by or for the seller (or a charity seeking donations) to anyone who has said they do not want one.

Oklahoma, Telephone Solicitation Act of 2022 (15 O.S. 775C.1 to 775C.6, enacted by HB 3168, effective 1 November 2022). Section 775C.3(A) bars a “commercial telephonic sales call” that “involves an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers or the playing of a recorded message when a connection is completed to a number called without the prior express written consent of the called party.” That term is undefined, but the consent definition covers authorisation “by telephone call, text message, or voicemail transmission”. Section 775C.4 adds an 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. window and a cap of three solicitation calls to a person in 24 hours on the same subject; 775C.5 lists 26 exemptions, including existing customers, licensed insurance and real-estate agents, and supervised financial institutions; 775C.6 gives $500 or actual damages, up to three times if wilful or knowing. Read from the enrolled bill; the codified OSCN text would not load for us, so check it for later amendments.

Meta’s rules are the ones that bind every message

Meta’s WhatsApp Business Messaging Policy (last updated 23 September 2026) applies to every business message, whatever courts decide:

• Opt-in first. “You may only contact people on WhatsApp if: (a) they have given you their mobile phone number or username; and (b) you have received opt-in permission from the recipient confirming that they wish to receive subsequent messages or calls from you.” Meta’s developer guide says the opt-in “can be general and not specifically for WhatsApp, as long as businesses comply with all local laws”, but must say the person is opting in and name the business. The policy leaves the law to you: “You are solely responsible for determining the method of opt-in”.
• Templates to start, free-form inside 24 hours. Businesses may start conversations only with approved Message Templates; free-form replies are allowed within the 24-hour customer service window, which opens and resets with each user message.
• AI replies need a human exit. “You may use automation when responding during the 24-hour window, but must also have available prompt, clear, and direct escalation paths”; Meta’s listed examples are in-chat human agent transfer, phone number, email, web support, in-store visits, or a support form.
• Utility templates cannot sell. A utility template “must be non-promotional”; mixed content counts as marketing.
• No marketing templates to US numbers. Meta’s developer documentation, read 12 October 2026: “WhatsApp does not currently deliver marketing template messages to WhatsApp users with United States phone numbers (numbers composed of a +1 dialing code and a US area code).” No resumption date is given.
• Enforcement. Meta “may limit or remove your access to or use of WhatsApp for Business, or limit your ability to send messages, if you receive significant amounts of negative feedback, cause harm to WhatsApp or our users, violate or encourage others to violate our terms or policies, or to maintain a high quality experience on WhatsApp”, and after a termination may bar the organisation “from all future use of WhatsApp products and services.” If it has happened, see our guide to fixing a restricted WhatsApp Business account.

Because Meta does not deliver marketing templates to +1 US numbers, US WhatsApp marketing in practice starts with the customer. A Click to WhatsApp ad, a chat button or a QR code invites them to message you; their message opens the 24-hour window, inside which free-form replies, including an AI agent’s, are allowed. What those replies cost is in our breakdown of WhatsApp Business API cost per message.

Running WhatsApp follow-up with an AI agent? Zian’s agents work across WhatsApp, SMS, email, voice, Instagram DMs and Facebook Messenger, and connect to HubSpot, Salesforce, HighLevel and Zapier, where consent fields live. Zian is in partnership-application beta.

Apply For Partnership

The treat-it-as-SMS rule: what to do for each kind of WhatsApp message

The decision rule we use: for any promotional WhatsApp message to a US number, collect the consent you would need if it were an SMS, because a court may decide it is one, and the cost of that consent is a checkbox while the cost of being wrong is $500 to $1,500 per message.

Message	Meta requires	Consent to collect under the treat-it-as-SMS rule	Exposure if a court treats WhatsApp as SMS
Customer messages you first (ad, site button, QR code); your agent replies within 24 hours	Free-form allowed; escalation path to a human if automated	None beyond the customer’s own message for the first reply; keep the reply to what they asked	Low if the reply is a one-time message sent immediately with only the requested information, which is not a violation (FCC 15-72, paragraph 106); a reply hours later falls outside that ruling
Utility template: confirmation or reminder for an appointment they booked	Opt-in; template must be non-promotional	Prior express consent (need not be written) for a non-marketing message	Low if the template has no promotional content; a promotional line makes it marketing for Meta and can make it an advertisement needing written consent under 64.1200(a)(2)
Marketing template to a +1 US number	Not delivered by Meta as at 12 October 2026	Not applicable while Meta blocks delivery	None, because the message does not arrive; design for SMS or email instead
Promotional free-form message inside a window the customer opened	Allowed inside 24 hours	Prior express written consent if the message is sent by an automated system, plus honour any opt-out	Narrow under 227(b) after Duguid unless a voice is used; Florida and Oklahoma claims turn on whether the system selects and/or dials automatically
AI voice note or WhatsApp call with an AI voice	Opt-in; Meta recommends a separate opt-in to call	Prior express written consent for sales content, as for an artificial-voice call	Highest: the artificial-voice limb needs no autodialler; $500 to $1,500 per message if it is a “call”
Any message after “stop” or a block	Must respect opt-outs “on or off WhatsApp”	None possible: revocation ends consent	Per-message damages wherever the TCPA or Florida applies; Meta enforcement regardless

A worked example with illustrative inputs. An AI agent sends promotional WhatsApp voice notes to 300 US numbers whose consent cannot be produced, twice each: 300 × 2 = 600 messages. If a court treats each as an artificial-voice “call” to a mobile, statutory damages are 600 × $500 = $300,000, and up to 600 × $1,500 = $900,000 if wilful or knowing. If WhatsApp messages are not “calls”, the TCPA figure is zero, though Florida or Oklahoma recipients could still claim under state law. One unresolved question separates $0 from $300,000 in TCPA damages, which is why the rule says collect the consent.

Doing this yourself is workable: a consent checkbox carrying the 64.1200(f)(9) disclosures, a timestamp and phone number stored in your CRM, an opt-out keyword list matching 64.1200(a)(10), and a rule that nothing business-initiated goes out except as an approved template. The cost is discipline at volume: every new lead source needs its consent wording checked, and every free-text opt-out (“please stop messaging me”) has to be caught, by a person or an agent that reads intent, within 10 business days.

When this is a question for counsel

• AI voice notes or WhatsApp calls to US numbers, given FCC 24-17 on AI voices;
• Florida or Oklahoma recipients, where “text message” is undefined, damages are counted per message, and Florida shifts attorney fees to the winner;
• treating Meta’s “general” opt-in as prior express written consent, which Meta says is your responsibility.

Frequently asked questions

Is WhatsApp marketing legal in the US?

Yes, with opt-in. No federal law bans it. Meta requires opt-in before any business message, and the TCPA may apply if a court treats a WhatsApp message as a “call”, as courts treat SMS. If it does, an unconsented autodialled, artificial-voice or prerecorded-voice message carries $500 in statutory damages, up to $1,500 if wilful or knowing.

Does the TCPA apply to WhatsApp messages?

Unsettled. The FCC and the Ninth Circuit treat SMS as a “call”, and the Seventh Circuit held in July 2026 that texts are not “telephone calls” under 227(c)(5). We found no court decision on WhatsApp or other app-to-app messages as at 12 October 2026. Plan as if it applies.

Can I send WhatsApp marketing messages to US phone numbers?

Not as marketing templates. Meta’s developer documentation, read 12 October 2026, says WhatsApp “does not currently deliver marketing template messages to WhatsApp users with United States phone numbers”, and attempts return an error. You can still reply, including with an AI agent, inside a 24-hour window the customer opens by messaging you.

Do I need written consent to message customers on WhatsApp?

Meta requires opt-in that names your business, which can be general rather than WhatsApp-specific. If the TCPA applies, telemarketing by autodialler or artificial or prerecorded voice needs prior express written consent under 47 CFR 64.1200(a)(2) and (f)(9), with nonprofit and HIPAA health care exceptions: a signed agreement that authorises the messages, names the number and states that signing is not a condition of purchase.

Does CAN-SPAM cover WhatsApp?

Probably not. CAN-SPAM covers messages sent to an “electronic mail address”, defined as a user name or mailbox plus a reference to an Internet domain, whether or not displayed. A WhatsApp message is addressed to a phone number, and we found no FTC or court ruling applying CAN-SPAM to WhatsApp.

Do Florida’s and Oklahoma’s telemarketing laws cover WhatsApp?

Possibly. Both write “text message” into their consent rules without defining it. Florida’s rule turns on an automated system that selects and dials numbers, or a recorded message; Oklahoma’s on one that selects or dials, or a recorded message. Each allows $500 per violation, trebled if wilful or knowing, and Florida requires a “STOP” reply and 15 days before a text-message suit.

Want follow-up that works from the opt-in you already hold? Zian’s SmartReach AI™ orchestrates message, channel and timing for each follow-up, and Zian’s agents work from your CRM records. Zian is in partnership-application beta.

Apply For Partnership

Where every figure on this page comes from

Figure	Who published it	Link	Date read
$500 per violation, up to 3 times if wilful or knowing (227(b)(3)); up to $500 and more than one call in 12 months (227(c)(5)); $500 state AG damages (227(g)); autodialler definition; 227(e)(8)(C) text message definition	US Congress (47 U.S.C. 227), via Cornell LII	law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227	12 October 2026
Text to a mobile “it is undisputed” a call (2016)	Supreme Court of the United States, Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez	law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-857	12 October 2026
Autodialler needs a random or sequential number generator; texts assumed, not decided (1 April 2021)	Supreme Court of the United States, Facebook v. Duguid	law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/19-511	12 October 2026
Text message is a “call”; video needing a press of play not a prerecorded-voice call (13 January 2026)	US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Howard v. RNC, No. 23-3826	cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov (23-3826.pdf)	12 October 2026
227(c)(5) does not cover texts (decided 14 July 2026)	US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, No. 25-2398	media.ca7.uscourts.gov (No. 25-2398)	12 October 2026
Paragraphs 106, 107, 115, 116 (on-demand texts, SMS as calls, functional equivalence, apps reaching all US numbers)	Federal Communications Commission, FCC 15-72 (released 10 July 2015)	docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-15-72A1.pdf	12 October 2026
AI-generated voices are “artificial” under the TCPA (adopted 2 February 2024, released 8 February 2024)	Federal Communications Commission, Declaratory Ruling FCC 24-17	docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-17A1.pdf	12 October 2026
Text-blocking rules apply to SMS and MMS on wireless networks; texts are a “call”	Federal Communications Commission, FCC 23-21, 88 FR 21497	federalregister.gov/d/2023-07405	12 October 2026
Do Not Call protections codified for text messages	Federal Communications Commission, 89 FR 5098	federalregister.gov/d/2023-28832	12 October 2026
Revocation within 10 business days; prior express written consent; Do Not Call for texts (64.1200(a)(2), (a)(10), (e), (f)(9))	Federal Communications Commission, 47 CFR 64.1200 (eCFR, Title 47 current to 8 October 2026)	ecfr.gov 47 CFR 64.1200	12 October 2026
CAN-SPAM definitions of electronic mail address and message	US Congress (15 U.S.C. 7702), via Cornell LII	law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7702	12 October 2026
CAN-SPAM enforced as an FTC rule violation	US Congress (15 U.S.C. 7706), via Cornell LII	law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7706	12 October 2026
$53,088 maximum FTC civil penalty per violation under 45(m)(1)(A)	Federal Trade Commission, 16 CFR 1.98(d)	ecfr.gov 16 CFR 1.98	12 October 2026
Florida: $500, up to 3 times; STOP plus 15 days; four “unsolicited” exceptions; definition of telephonic sales call; state no-sales-solicitation list (4)	Florida Legislature, 2026 Florida Statutes s. 501.059	leg.state.fl.us s. 501.059	12 October 2026
Florida 2023 amendment (“selection and dialing”), effective 25 May 2023	Florida Legislature, Laws of Florida ch. 2023-150	laws.flrules.org/2023/150	12 October 2026
Florida Class IV fine “$10,000 or more” per violation	Florida Legislature, s. 570.971	leg.state.fl.us s. 570.971	12 October 2026
Oklahoma: $500, up to 3 times; 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; three calls in 24 hours; 26 exemptions; effective 1 November 2022	Oklahoma Legislature, Enrolled HB 3168 (2022)	oklegislature.gov HB3168 ENR	12 October 2026
Opt-in condition, 24-hour window, six listed escalation paths, enforcement; last updated 23 September 2026	WhatsApp (Meta), WhatsApp Business Messaging Policy	business.whatsapp.com/policy	12 October 2026
Opt-in can be general, must name the business	Meta for Developers, Get opt-in for WhatsApp	developers.facebook.com getting-opt-in	12 October 2026
No marketing templates delivered to +1 US numbers	Meta for Developers, Per-user marketing template message limits	developers.facebook.com per-user-limits	12 October 2026
Utility templates must be non-promotional; mixed content is marketing	Meta for Developers, Template categorization	developers.facebook.com template-categorization	12 October 2026
188 TCPA “text message” opinions; no WhatsApp, iMessage or Messenger TCPA decision found	Zian search of CourtListener (Free Law Project) opinion database	courtlistener.com	12 October 2026
Worked example: 600 messages, $300,000 and $900,000	Zian calculation from 227(b)(3), illustrative inputs	This page	12 October 2026