For those monitoring the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) continued battle against robocalls and unsolicited text messages, you may have heard about a stricter “one-to-one” standard. This new requirement declares that a single written consent form can authorize only one distinct business—or, as the FCC phrases it, “one identified seller.” Businesses initially braced for this mandate to be enforced by January 2025, concerned about the financial and operational challenges of updating their outreach methods.
However, in an unexpected turn of events, the FCC recently pushed back the start date to January 26, 2026, unless a federal court steps in sooner. Effectively, the existing rules remain in force, providing companies an extended runway to transition. Below, we’ll explore how this shift affects both businesses and consumers under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Background: Why the FCC Made Changes
Overview of the TCPA
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), enacted in 1991, was designed to safeguard consumers from unwanted marketing calls and texts. Under this law, businesses must secure “prior express written consent” before delivering automated or pre-recorded messages to recipients. Put simply, the aim is to give people more control over who can contact them for promotional purposes.
The “One-to-One” Rule
Building on the TCPA’s foundation, the FCC introduced a new clause mandating that each individual seller obtain separate, explicit consent. Previously, a single opt-in might cover an entire group of advertisers, opening the door to a flood of unsolicited calls. Under the “one-to-one” requirement, each company must independently acquire permission, enhancing transparency and empowering consumers to decide exactly which businesses can reach them by call or text.
Reasoning Behind the Revision
Consumer protection groups and average phone users have long voiced frustrations over “blanket consent” forms, which could grant multiple advertisers the right to contact you through a single click. By instituting the one-to-one consent mechanism, the FCC hopes to limit excessive marketing messages and provide a clearer choice for consumers. The intended result: fewer calls originating from an ever-growing list of “marketing partners.”
Postponed Implementation Date
Originally slated for January 27, 2025, the one-to-one rule is now on hold pending the outcome of a legal dispute. A federal court challenge by the Insurance Marketing Coalition (IMC) led the FCC to postpone the rule’s effective date until January 26, 2026, or an earlier date if the court makes a determination before then. During this interim, the previous consent guidelines under the TCPA remain active, meaning businesses must still follow current telemarketing regulations but won’t yet be bound by the more stringent one-to-one provision.
Ongoing Legal Proceedings
The IMC’s case, presented to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in December 2024, contends that the new requirement places an undue burden on businesses. Because the court has yet to issue a final verdict, the FCC opted to avert confusion by putting the updated rules on pause. Citing the Administrative Procedure Act, the agency delayed enactment to avoid forcing businesses to overhaul their compliance programs—only to possibly revert to old practices if the court disagrees with the new mandate.
Impact on Businesses
For companies, this delay means continued use of the existing “prior express written consent” standard that predates 2025. Many organizations had begun adjusting their scripts, opt-in forms, and databases to accommodate one-to-one consent. Now, they have a reprieve to plan further, monitor the litigation, and adapt only if and when the rule is ultimately upheld.
Though the revised regulation is on hold, overall TCPA compliance remains crucial. Substantial penalties can still be levied for unauthorized calls or texts. In other words, organizations must not ignore existing telemarketing restrictions. Instead, they should stay prepared for a possible expedited start date if the court rules in favor of the FCC sooner than anticipated.
Why the FCC Chose to Delay
- Preventing Uncertainty
If companies had to meet the new standard immediately and the court later invalidated it, confusion and wasteful efforts would be inevitable. By postponing, the FCC aims to avoid unnecessary upheaval in compliance strategies. - Addressing High Costs
Transitioning to one-to-one consent isn’t as simple as flipping a switch. Many businesses would need to overhaul internal systems, implement new databases, and modify scripts, all of which come with a hefty price tag. - Reducing Legal Exposure
Suppose the rule came into force and was then struck down. Organizations operating under the rule might suddenly face legal repercussions without warning. The postponement helps mitigate this risky scenario.
Consumer Perspective: What Stays the Same, What Might Change
Despite the delay in the one-to-one requirement, consumers are still protected by the longstanding TCPA provisions. These include:
- National Do-Not-Call Registry
You can still enroll at donotcall.gov to limit telemarketing. - Opt-Out Mechanisms
Text “STOP” to opt out of unwanted messages or use other clearly provided ways to end calls or texts. - Complaint Resources
If you suspect a violation of TCPA rules, you may report it to the FCC or your state Attorney General.
If the FCC’s updated rule eventually takes effect, consumers could see fewer calls from broad “marketing partner” lists, as individual businesses would need to secure explicit permission. Until then, it’s a good idea to scrutinize online forms, app disclosures, and sign-up pages to ensure you understand what you’re agreeing to.
Possible Outcomes
The fate of the new rule largely rests with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Depending on its decision (and any subsequent appeals), several scenarios might unfold:
- Court Upholds the Rule
If the judges side entirely with the FCC, the regulation could go into force on or before January 26, 2026. - Partial Approval
The court might require changes or clarifications. The FCC would then likely revise the language and announce a fresh deadline. - Full Reversal
A complete rejection by the court means the prior version of TCPA consent rules would remain indefinitely. - Further Legal Delays
Appeals can prolong the uncertainty, making the ultimate timeline unpredictable.
Regardless, the continuing evolution of telemarketing regulations underscores the need for vigilance among both companies and consumers.
Strategies to Maintain Compliance During the Delay
While the one-to-one rule is in limbo, it’s wise for businesses to keep refining their telemarketing and text messaging practices. A proactive stance now can ease any future transition. Consider these measures:
- Clear Unsubscribe Methods
Simplify opt-outs, for example, “Press 2 to be removed” during calls or “Text STOP to cancel” for SMS. - Plain-Language Consent
Replace dense legal clauses with direct statements like “By checking this box, you agree to receive marketing messages from [Company].” - Organized Databases
Properly labeling and sorting leads by consent type allows for quick updates if regulations shift. - Prompt Complaint Response
Tackle any allegations of improper contact head-on. Quickly resolving issues can prevent further scrutiny and fines.
In Summary
Although the FCC’s ambitious one-to-one consent rule has been postponed until January 26, 2026, it might still be activated sooner if the ongoing court case is resolved quickly. For now, businesses can adhere to pre-2025 TCPA guidelines, but they should remain alert to the evolving legal landscape. From a consumer standpoint, existing TCPA protections remain firmly in place—ensuring that unwanted telemarketing calls or texts can still be reported or blocked.
Ultimately, this delay offers companies more time to organize their strategies and technological systems. For individuals, it highlights the importance of reading all opt-in language carefully. Whether the rule is upheld or adjusted, respecting consumer preference and privacy will remain a core objective of federal telemarketing policy.
