The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC” or “Commission”), under the leadership Chairman Brendan Carr, has been engaged in effort to simplify, streamline or eliminate regulatory requirements in all areas of the agency’s jurisdiction. Last week, the agency released a draft Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“FNPRM”) that is part of an ongoing FCC effort to modernize consumer protection frameworks, reduce unnecessary burdens on lawful business communications, and strengthen tools against unlawful robocalls. If adopted, the proposal could materially reshape key compliance obligations under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) and Do Not Call (“DNC”) rules.
For TCPA and DNC purposes, the FCC proposal addresses “older rules that might no longer be necessary” and “more recent rules that might harm consumers.” An overview of the key proposed changes and potential impacts include the following:
1. Company-Specific DNC Lists Requirements (Para. 97-101)
- Currently, callers must maintain their own company-specific DNC lists in addition to scrubbing against the National DNC Registry.
- The FCC is considering eliminating or streamlining the company-specific requirement, reasoning that the National Registry and consent obligations may already provide sufficient protection.
- This could reduce administrative burdens but raises questions about whether consumers would lose the ability to manage unwanted calls at a more granular level.
2. Opt-Out Mechanisms for Artificial Voice and Prerecorded Calls (Para. 100)
- Current rules require that artificial voice and prerecorded telemarketing calls include automated opt-out mechanisms.
- The FCC is seeking input on whether this remains necessary or should be streamlined to reflect modern consumer expectations.
3. Caller Identification Requirements (Para. 102)
- Outdated rules currently require artificial and prerecorded voice callers to provide a callback number “other than a 900 number.”
- The proposal would modernize this requirement, instead mandating that callers provide a working, verifiable number that identifies the caller and accepts opt-out requests—better aligning with how consumers rely on caller ID today.
4. Consent Revocation (Para. 103-106)
- Current Rule (Set to take effect April 11, 2026): If a consumer opts out of one type of call or text, that revocation applies to all communications from that caller, regardless of subject matter.
- Proposed Change: Pursuant to the “Delete, Delete, Delete” petition (In Re: Delete, Delete, Delete, GN Docket No. 25-133, Public Notice, DA 25-219, 2025 WL 820901 (Mar. 12, 2025)), the FCC is considering eliminating or narrowing this “all-or-nothing” rule, recognizing that it may inadvertently prevent consumers from receiving desired communications (e.g., pharmacy reminders, bank alerts, or service-specific calls).
- Key Questions FCC seeks to resolve: Should revocations apply by call type, business unit, or location? Is the current rule too burdensome for callers?
- Methods of Revocation: The FCC also proposes revising §64.1200(a)(10), which currently requires callers to honor revocations made through any “reasonable means.” Some industry commenters argue that businesses should be permitted to designate a single revocation method. The FCC seeks comment on whether less restrictive alternatives exist, what methods should be required or prohibited, how disclosures should be made clear, and whether complex procedures risk deterring consumer revocations.
Why These Potential Changes Matter
The FCC’s final actions could materially shift the TCPA compliance paradigm, especially with internal DNC and national DNC compliance. If adopted, the changes may reduce compliance burdens, provide clearer standards, and potentially limit opportunistic TCPA litigation, particularly those class actions based on “gotcha” revocation theories, as we have seen.
Timetable?
The draft FNPRM is set to be addressed at the FCC’s October 28, 2025 Open Meeting. A 60-day public comment period would follow the final FNPRM’s publication in the Federal Register. Once that comment period opens, we’ll keep you posted on developments.
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this article is accurate, neither its authors nor Squire Patton Boggs accepts responsibility for any errors or omissions. The content of this article is for general information only, and is not intended to constitute or be relied upon as legal advice.