On this page
Under federal law, a party to a call may record it. In the 50-state review behind this page, 35 states are one-party, 9 (California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington) are all-party, and 6 are mixed or unsettled. Because callers can be anywhere, many businesses play a recording notice on every call. This is general information, not legal advice.
Key takeaways
- Thirty-five states are one-party, nine are all-party and six are mixed or unsettled in the data we reviewed in October 2026.
- Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon and Vermont do not fit a single label.
- Consent often comes from a recorded notice at the start of the call, and Washington and Connecticut say how in the statute.
- The strictest state a caller might be in is the safe rule for a business line.
- AI receptionists and call-tracking numbers that record or transcribe need the same notice.
Read this first
This page sorts the 50 states by how their statutes treat recording a phone call. It is general information, not legal advice. We read each linked statute in October 2026 and re-opened a sample against the legislature's own site for this page. Courts read some of these laws differently from the plain text, and states amend them. Confirm with a lawyer licensed in the state before you build a recording or call-tracking setup on this table.
The federal baseline is in 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d): a party to a call, or anyone with one party's prior consent, may record it unless the purpose is criminal or tortious. States can be stricter. Our plain-language guide to recording business calls explains the concepts. This page is the 50-state lookup.
Which states are one-party, all-party or mixed?
By the plain reading of each statute, 35 states are one-party, 9 are all-party and 6 are mixed or unsettled. The groups below follow the data we reviewed in October 2026.
- All-party (9): California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington.
- Mixed or unsettled (6): Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont.
- One-party (35): Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Call recording rules for all 50 states
"Mixed" means the state's statutes point in different directions, treat phone calls and in-person talk differently, or have no clear text. Each state name links to our start-a-business page for that state, and each statute links to the legislature or the code host we read.
| State | Rule | Statute | What to know |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | One-party | Ala. Code § 13A-11-30 | Offense is recording private talk of others without any participant's consent. |
| Alaska | One-party | Alaska Stat. § 42.20.310 | AS 42.20.310 turns on consent of one party, in person or by phone. |
| Arizona | One-party | A.R.S. § 13-3012 | Participant consent exempts you. Intercepting a call you are not on is a felony. |
| Arkansas | One-party | Ark. Code § 5-60-120 | Unlawful unless you are a party or one party gave prior consent. |
| California | All-party | Cal. Penal Code § 632 (text via FindLaw) | Confidential calls need everyone's consent. Fine up to $2,500 per violation, $10,000 after a prior conviction. |
| Colorado | One-party | C.R.S. § 18-9-303 (text via FindLaw) | A crime only without the consent of a sender or receiver. |
| Connecticut | Mixed | Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-570d | Private phone calls: written or recorded consent, a recorded notice, or a repeating tone. Civil suits allowed. |
| Delaware | Mixed | 11 Del. C. § 1335 and § 2402 | Wiretap act reads one-party. Privacy statute 1335(a)(4) reads all-party. Treat as all-party. |
| Florida | All-party | Fla. Stat. § 934.03 | Lawful only with prior consent of all parties. Third-degree felony for violations. |
| Georgia | One-party | O.C.G.A. § 16-11-66 (text via FindLaw) | A participant, or someone with a party's prior consent, may record. |
| Hawaii | One-party | Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 803-42 | Participant may record unless the purpose is criminal or tortious. |
| Idaho | One-party | Idaho Code § 18-6702 | Prior consent of one party makes interception lawful. |
| Illinois | All-party | 720 ILCS 5/14-2 | Eavesdropping covers private conversations recorded without all parties' consent. |
| Indiana | One-party | Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176 | Illegal interception means recording without a sender's or receiver's consent. |
| Iowa | One-party | Iowa Code § 808B.2 | Party or one-party consent lawful, unless for a criminal or tortious act. |
| Kansas | One-party | K.S.A. 21-6101 | Breach of privacy to intercept a phone message unless sender or receiver agrees. |
| Kentucky | One-party | KRS 526.010 | Eavesdropping needs no consent from at least one party. |
| Louisiana | One-party | La. R.S. 15:1303 | Someone on the call may record, unless the purpose is criminal, tortious or injurious. |
| Maine | One-party | 15 MRSA § 709 | Interception means recording by a non-party without prior authority from a party. |
| Maryland | All-party | Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402 | Party may record only with all parties' prior consent. Felony: up to 5 years or $10,000. |
| Massachusetts | All-party | M.G.L. c. 272, § 99 | Secret recording needs prior authority of all parties. Up to 5 years in state prison or a $10,000 fine. |
| Michigan | Mixed | MCL 750.539c | Text says all parties. A 1982 appeals court case excluded participants. Supreme Court has not settled it. |
| Minnesota | One-party | Minn. Stat. § 626A.02, subd. 2(d) | Private person may record a call they take part in, absent criminal or tortious purpose. |
| Mississippi | One-party | Miss. Code Ann. § 41-29-531(e) | Private person may record a call with a party's consent, absent criminal or tortious purpose. |
| Missouri | One-party | RSMo 542.402 | Lawful if you are a party or any party agrees, absent a crime or tort. |
| Montana | All-party | MCA 45-8-213 | Hidden-device recording needs all parties' knowledge. A warning from one person lets either side record. Fine up to $500, up to 6 months. |
| Nebraska | One-party | Neb. Rev. Stat. 86-290 | Party or one-party consent lawful, unless for a criminal or tortious act. |
| Nevada | Mixed | NRS 200.620 | Phones: Lane v. Allstate (Nev. 1998) read the statute as all-party. In-person talk is one-party under NRS 200.650. Treat calls as all-party. |
| New Hampshire | All-party | N.H. RSA 570-A:2 | Class B felony without all parties' consent. A participant who records alone commits a misdemeanor. |
| New Jersey | One-party | N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-4 | Party or prior participant consent lawful, unless to commit a criminal or tortious act. |
| New Mexico | One-party | N.M. Stat. § 30-12-1 | Misdemeanor to take a phone message without a sender's or recipient's consent. |
| New York | One-party | N.Y. Penal Law § 250.00 and § 250.05 | Wiretapping applies to non-participants. If you are on the call, you may record. |
| North Carolina | One-party | N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-287 | Felony only when no party consented. |
| North Dakota | One-party | N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02 | Interception is a felony, with a defense for a party or prior one-party consent. |
| Ohio | One-party | Ohio Rev. Code § 2933.52 | Participant or prior consent of one participant, absent criminal or tortious purpose. |
| Oklahoma | One-party | Okla. Stat. tit. 13, § 176.4 | Lawful if you take part or one participant consented beforehand. |
| Oregon | Mixed | ORS 165.540 | Phone calls: one participant's consent. In-person and video: all participants must be informed. |
| Pennsylvania | All-party | 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703 and § 5704 | Third-degree felony. The consent exception needs every party's prior consent. |
| Rhode Island | One-party | R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21 | Participant or one-party prior consent, unless to commit a crime or tort. |
| South Carolina | One-party | S.C. Code § 17-30-30 | Lawful if you are on the call or one participant agreed in advance. |
| South Dakota | One-party | S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20 | Class 5 felony to record by eavesdropping device without a party's consent. |
| Tennessee | One-party | Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601 | Interception lawful for a participant or with a participant's prior consent. |
| Texas | One-party | Tex. Penal Code § 16.02 | Defense when you are a party or one party consented, absent an unlawful purpose. |
| Utah | One-party | Utah Code § 77-23a-4 | Non-government person may intercept if a participant or with one participant's agreement. |
| Vermont | Mixed | 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (federal Wiretap Act) | No state consent statute found in Vermont Statutes Online. Federal rule applies. Announce. |
| Virginia | One-party | Va. Code § 19.2-62 | Not an offense when you are a party or one party consented beforehand. |
| Washington | All-party | RCW 9.73.030 | Private calls need every participant's consent. An announcement counts, and it must be recorded. |
| West Virginia | One-party | W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3 | Lawful for a participant or with a participant's prior consent. |
| Wisconsin | One-party | Wis. Stat. § 968.31 | Interception lawful for someone on the call or with advance consent of one. |
| Wyoming | One-party | Wyo. Stat. § 7-3-702 | Someone in the conversation, or with one participant's permission, may intercept. |
How to read the table
One-party means you can record a call you are part of. All-party means every person on the call must consent first. In practice, consent often comes from a recorded notice at the start of the call, and the caller who stays on the line has been told. Washington writes that into the statute: RCW 9.73.030 treats consent as obtained when one party announces to the others, in a reasonably effective way, that the call is about to be recorded, and the announcement itself must be on the recording. Connecticut is more specific for phone calls: § 52-570d accepts written or recorded consent at the start, a recorded verbal notice at the start, or an automatic tone that repeats about every fifteen seconds.
The table shows the rule for the state named. It does not say who wins when two states disagree. Your caller's state, your state and the state where the recording is stored can all be different.
Where the table can mislead you
Several states do not fit a single label, and the differences are practical.
- Same state, two answers. Delaware's wiretap law lets a party record, but 11 Del. C. § 1335(a)(4) reaches an interception made without the consent of all parties. Michigan's text says all parties, yet a 1982 appeals court case read it to leave out a participant who records their own call.
- Phone versus in person. Oregon needs one participant's consent for telecommunications, but ORS 165.540(1)(c) requires that all participants in a conversation be specifically informed, and the statute treats video conferencing as a conversation. That matters for video estimates and site visits.
- A statute that narrows with its wording. California's § 632 covers confidential communications, meaning circumstances that reasonably suggest a party wants the call kept between the participants. Montana's 45-8-213 covers hidden recording devices, and persons given warning are exempt. Both reward a clear notice.
- Felony in some states, civil exposure in others. Maryland makes a violation a felony with up to 5 years or a $10,000 fine, Massachusetts up to 5 years in state prison or a $10,000 fine, and Florida a third-degree felony. Connecticut's statute also allows private suits.
- No clear text. We did not find a Vermont statute setting a consent rule for phone calls. Federal law still applies, and a notice is the simple answer.
A state marked one-party can still be reached by a stricter state's law when the caller is there. The California Supreme Court applied California's all-party rule in Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney (2006) to calls recorded from a Georgia office. Our guide covers that case.
What if you work in more than one state?
Home-service companies near a state line, or with customers who own property in one state and live in another, take calls from everyone. Do not try to work out each caller's state in real time. Pick the strictest rule you might meet and apply it to every recorded line. The all-party group above is short enough to design for: a spoken notice at the start of the call, captured on the recording, and a way for the caller to decline.
The same logic applies to phone numbers. A business line with a local area code can ring from a customer who now lives somewhere else, and a cell phone can be anywhere. If your team uses a business number with call tracking, see how to set up call tracking. Tracking numbers that record calls need the notice as much as any other line.
What this means for phone systems and AI receptionists
An AI receptionist answers, records or transcribes, and often stores the audio. Treat that as recording in every state in the table. Put the notice in the first sentence of the greeting, before the assistant collects a name or an address, and keep the recording of the notice itself. Our greeting and script ideas include recording wording. For ordinary lines, a business phone system can play the same notice before it connects the call.
Outbound calls from technicians' phones are easy to forget. If your office records them, the notice has to be said or played there too. Text messages follow different rules, covered in the TCPA guide.
What to check before you act on this table
- Open the statute for your state and any state where many customers call from. Read the exceptions, not just the headline rule.
- Decide whether you record at all. A written call summary in your CRM avoids storing audio.
- Add the notice to every greeting, every automated assistant and every outbound recorded line.
- Record the notice and keep it, so you can show callers were told.
- Set a retention period and limit who can listen.
- Have a lawyer in your state review the setup, then re-check the table once a year. This is general information, and state laws change.
Frequently asked questions
Which states require all parties to consent to a call recording?
In the data behind this page: California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Several have exceptions or wording that narrows the rule, so read the statute linked in the table.
Is a state's rule decided by where my business is?
Not always. A caller in a stricter state can bring that state's law into play, and the California Supreme Court did that in Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney (2006). A notice on every call avoids the question.
Does a recording notice satisfy an all-party state?
Often it is how consent is given, because the caller can continue or hang up. Washington and Connecticut describe acceptable methods in their statutes. Confirm the details for your state with a lawyer.
How often should I re-check these rules?
At least once a year, and before you add a new recorded line, call tracking or an AI receptionist. We read the statutes in October 2026.
Sources
- 18 U.S.C. § 2511, Cornell Legal Information Institute
- California Penal Code § 632 (text via FindLaw)
- Florida Statutes § 934.03 (2025), Florida Senate
- Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-402, Maryland General Assembly
- M.G.L. c. 272, § 99, Massachusetts Legislature
- Montana Code 45-8-213, Montana Legislature
- N.H. RSA 570-A:2, New Hampshire General Court
- 18 Pa.C.S. § 5704, Pennsylvania General Assembly
- RCW 9.73.030, Washington State Legislature
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-570d, Connecticut General Assembly
- 11 Del. C. § 1335, Delaware Code Online
- ORS 165.540, Oregon Legislature
- Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 39 Cal. 4th 95 (2006), SCOCAL, Stanford Law School
- Ala. Code § 13A-11-30, Alabama
- Alaska Stat. § 42.20.310, Alaska
- A.R.S. § 13-3012, Arizona
- Ark. Code § 5-60-120, Arkansas
- C.R.S. § 18-9-303 (text via FindLaw), Colorado
- O.C.G.A. § 16-11-66 (text via FindLaw), Georgia
- Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 803-42, Hawaii
- Idaho Code § 18-6702, Idaho
- 720 ILCS 5/14-2, Illinois
- Ind. Code § 35-31.5-2-176, Indiana
- Iowa Code § 808B.2, Iowa
- K.S.A. 21-6101, Kansas
- KRS 526.010, Kentucky
- La. R.S. 15:1303, Louisiana
- 15 MRSA § 709, Maine
- MCL 750.539c, Michigan
- Minn. Stat. § 626A.02, subd. 2(d), Minnesota
- Miss. Code Ann. § 41-29-531(e), Mississippi
- RSMo 542.402, Missouri
- Neb. Rev. Stat. 86-290, Nebraska
- NRS 200.620, Nevada
- N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-4, New Jersey
- N.M. Stat. § 30-12-1, New Mexico
- N.Y. Penal Law § 250.00 and § 250.05, New York
- N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-287, North Carolina
- N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02, North Dakota
- Ohio Rev. Code § 2933.52, Ohio
- Okla. Stat. tit. 13, § 176.4, Oklahoma
- R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21, Rhode Island
- S.C. Code § 17-30-30, South Carolina
- S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20, South Dakota
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601, Tennessee
- Tex. Penal Code § 16.02, Texas
- Utah Code § 77-23a-4, Utah
- 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (federal Wiretap Act), Vermont
- Va. Code § 19.2-62, Virginia
- W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3, West Virginia
- Wis. Stat. § 968.31, Wisconsin
- Wyo. Stat. § 7-3-702, Wyoming
General information for service-business owners, not legal, tax or financial advice. Rules vary by state; check with a qualified professional for your situation.