DO NOT Call Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6449
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Commerce
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-04: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-13T09:05:26Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This legislation aims to strengthen enforcement against unwanted and illegal telephone communications, such as robocalls and spam texts, by introducing criminal penalties and increasing fines under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1993 (TCPA). It seeks to deter "obnoxious, nefarious, and outrageous" calls that harass consumers.
Key Provisions
- Criminal Penalties (New Section 227(k) of the Communications Act of 1934):
- Any person who willfully and knowingly violates the TCPA faces up to 1 year in prison, a fine (as defined under U.S. criminal code), or both.
- Aggravated offenses carry up to 3 years in prison, a fine, or both if the violation involves:
- A prior conviction under this section.
- High-volume calling: over 100,000 calls in 24 hours, 1,000,000 in 30 days, or 10,000,000 in 1 year.
- Intent to further a felony or conspiracy to commit one.
- Financial loss of $5,000 or more to one or more people in a 1-year period.
- Definitions:
- "Call" includes automated or prerecorded voice messages to phone numbers (including emergency lines) or unsolicited text messages to mobile phones (except with consent or for emergencies).
- "Initiate" means sending, making, or transmitting the call.
- Increased Civil Penalties for Spoofing (Section 227(e)(5)):
- Doubles the fine for providing inaccurate caller identification information (e.g., caller ID spoofing) from $10,000 to $20,000 per violation.
- For repeat or intentional violations, the maximum fine per day also increases from $10,000 to $20,000.
- Technical Update:
- Amends references in the law to align with the new criminal penalty section.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- The TCPA previously focused mainly on civil penalties enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with no criminal sanctions. This bill adds federal criminal penalties for willful violations, shifting some enforcement to criminal courts and potentially the Department of Justice.
- It expands the scope of punishable actions to include high-volume automated calls and texts, and clarifies definitions to cover modern communication methods like texts to mobile devices.
- Doubles existing fines for caller ID spoofing, making penalties more severe for deceptive practices.
Potential Impacts
- On Citizens: Enhances protection from intrusive robocalls, spam texts, and scams, potentially reducing harassment and financial losses for individuals. Victims may see stronger recourse through criminal prosecutions.
- On Government Agencies: The FCC gains tools for harsher civil enforcement, while law enforcement agencies (e.g., FBI or U.S. Attorneys) could pursue criminal cases, increasing workload but improving deterrence. No direct international impacts, though it applies to calls within the North American Numbering Plan (covering the U.S., Canada, and parts of the Caribbean).
- On Businesses and Telemarketers: Legitimate companies using automated systems must comply more rigorously to avoid criminal risks, possibly leading to stricter internal policies and higher compliance costs.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Consumers: Primary beneficiaries, as they face fewer unwanted calls and stronger legal protections.
- Violators (e.g., Robocallers, Scammers, Telemarketers): Face escalated risks of imprisonment and higher fines, particularly repeat or large-scale offenders.
- Telecommunications Industry: Providers and businesses using autodialers or caller ID services may need to invest in compliance technology to avoid liability.
- Government Entities: FCC for civil enforcement; Department of Justice and courts for criminal prosecutions.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Introduces criminal liability to a law that was previously civil-only, which could lead to more federal prosecutions but requires proving "willful and knowing" intent (a higher bar than negligence). The bill's definitions broaden TCPA coverage without altering core prohibitions on unsolicited calls.
- Constitutional: Potential scrutiny under the First Amendment for restrictions on speech, but courts have upheld TCPA limits on commercial robocalls as they target intrusive, non-expressive conduct rather than protected speech. No major constitutional challenges are evident from the text.
- Political: Bipartisan support (introduced by members from both parties) reflects widespread public frustration with robocalls. It could set a precedent for criminalizing other digital nuisances, influencing future telecom regulations amid rising scam concerns.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (12)
Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Fleischmann, Charles J. "Chuck" [R-TN-3], Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1], Rep. Perez, Marie Gluesenkamp [D-WA-3], Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19], Rep. Strong, Dale W. [R-AL-5], Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19], Rep. McDonald Rivet, Kristen [D-MI-8], Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7], Rep. Gillen, Laura [D-NY-4], Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3]
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-04: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 2025-12-04: Introduced in House
- 2025-12-04: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Deter Obnoxious, Nefarious, and Outrageous Telephone Calls Act of 2025 — issued 2025-12-04 — PDF (4 pages)