What federal law actually says
The headline everyone remembers from February 2024 — “FCC bans AI voices in robocalls” — is shorthand for a technical ruling. In Declaratory Ruling FCC 24-17 (February 8, 2024), the FCC confirmed that the TCPA's existing ban on “artificial or prerecorded voice” calls includes AI-generated voices, and that callers must obtain consent before making such a call. Read that carefully: the rule governs making calls. An AI receptionist that answers your inbound line isn't making a call — which is why it isn't covered by that ruling.
| Call scenario | TCPA AI-voice consent rules | State recording laws |
|---|---|---|
| Inbound AI answering your own line | Generally not triggered — you're answering, not initiating | Triggered if you record — depends on your state |
| Outbound AI marketing calls | Triggered — prior express written consent required for cell phones | Triggered if recorded |
| Outbound reminders to existing customers | Narrower FCC exemptions exist — confirm the fit with counsel before running reminder campaigns | Triggered if recorded |
| AI impersonating a person or business | Illegal under the TCPA if it's a robocall | — |
The other federal rules worth knowing, with their sources:
- Penalties are per call. TCPA private lawsuits run $500 per violation, up to $1,500 per call for willful or knowing violations (47 U.S.C. §227(b)(3) — statute text). At scale, unconsented AI-voice outbound calling gets expensive fast.
- Calling hours and DNC. Telemarketing calls only between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. local time, and national-do-not-call registrations are honored indefinitely (47 CFR §64.1200(c)).
- Recording's federal baseline is one-party consent (18 U.S.C. §2511(2)(d)) — federal law lets you record a call you're party to. The states that diverge are where the map below matters.
- No impersonating humans. The FTC's Impersonation Rule (16 CFR Part 461, effective April 1, 2024) bans impersonating businesses and people — your AI receptionist must never claim to be a named human employee.
One more piece is pending: the FCC proposed requiring callers to disclose AI-generated voices in outbound robocalls and robotexts (notice issued September 2024). As of this writing no final rule has been adopted — we'll update this page when one lands.
State recording consent: the map
This is the big one for inbound AI receptionists, because virtually every platform records calls for transcription and quality review. The commonly cited count: 13 states require all-party consent to record a conversation, plus Oregon's hybrid rule (one-party by telephone, all-party in person) and Vermont's common-law version. Everywhere else, federal-style one-party consent applies — recording a call you're on is lawful.
We pulled the statute texts while writing this guide, and we're marking which ones we verified directly — the same transparency we'd want from any vendor advising you on compliance:
| State | Rule | Statute | Text checked for this guide |
|---|---|---|---|
| California | All-party | Penal Code §632(a) | Yes |
| Connecticut | All-party, with notice options | C.G.S. §52-570d | Yes |
| Delaware | All-party (widely listed) | 11 Del. C. §1332 | Not in our review |
| Florida | All-party | Fla. Stat. §934.03(2)(d) | Yes |
| Illinois | All-party for private conversations | 720 ILCS 5/14-2(a) | Yes |
| Maryland | All-party (widely listed) | Cts. & Jud. Proc. §10-402 | Not in our review |
| Massachusetts | All-party (bans “secret” recording) | Mass. Gen. Laws c.272, §99 | Yes |
| Michigan | All-party (classification disputed) | MCL 750.539c | Not in our review |
| Montana | All-party | MCA 45-8-213 | Not in our review |
| Nevada | All-party (intent element disputed) | NRS 200.650 | Yes |
| New Hampshire | All-party | RSA 570-A:2 | Not in our review |
| Oregon | Hybrid: one-party by phone, all-party in person | ORS 165.540 | Yes |
| Pennsylvania | All-party (business exceptions exist) | 18 Pa.C.S. §5703 | Yes |
| Washington | All-party | RCW 9.73.030(1)(a) | Yes |
| Vermont | All-party under common law (no statute) | — | Classification widely reported |
Connecticut is the clearest example of what “notice” means in practice. Its statute (§52-570d) spells out the routes to lawful recording: all-party consent in writing, consent captured at the start of the recording, a verbal notification recorded at the beginning of the call, or an automatic tone repeated every fifteen seconds or so. An AI receptionist that opens with “this call may be recorded” satisfies the verbal-notification route — and that one habit also undercuts the “secret recording” wording in Massachusetts and is harmless in every one-party state.
Several all-party states also carve out exceptions for ordinary business use — but exceptions are exactly where you shouldn't wing it. If you operate in one of the states above, have counsel confirm the current statute before you standardize on recording. For our state-by-state agency pages, see the local market guides (California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Georgia, Colorado, Arizona, Washington, Pennsylvania).
AI disclosure laws: what's enacted so far
Do you have to tell callers they're talking to an AI? For inbound calls, no federal rule requires it yet — but four state laws move in that direction:
- California AB 2905 (effective January 1, 2025). Outbound robocalls using an “artificial voice” — defined as “a voice that is generated or significantly altered using artificial intelligence” — must say so in their opening announcement. Bill text. This governs calls you make, not inbound answering.
- Utah (SB 149, 2024, amended by SB 226, 2025). The broadest enacted business-interaction disclosure law: be prepared to disclose AI use when a consumer asks, and — for regulated occupations, which squarely includes law — disclose proactively at the outset. The 2025 amendment added a safe harbor for disclosing clearly at the start of the interaction, and the Act carries a July 1, 2027 sunset. Bill page.
- Colorado SB 24-205. A general duty to disclose to consumers when they're interacting with an AI system, with compliance obligations now phased in from June 30, 2026 after a delay bill (SB 25B-004) moved the date. Bill page.
- California AB 3030 (healthcare). Health facilities and physician offices using generative AI in patient communications about clinical information must disclaim it — and for audio, the disclaimer must be verbal, at both the start and end of the interaction. It names physician offices rather than dental practices, but read it as the direction of travel for any patient-facing phone AI.
Pattern to note: every enacted rule so far targets outbound calls or specific regulated settings — none bans inbound AI answering. The pragmatic read for a small business: proactive disclosure is cheap insurance, the laws are converging on it, and buyers increasingly expect it.
The six-step compliance checklist
Everything above compresses into six habits that cover the verified requirements:
- 1. Play a notice at the start of every recorded call. “This call may be recorded and may be answered by an automated assistant.” One sentence covers Connecticut's verbal-notification route, Massachusetts's secret-recording wording, and every one-party state.
- 2. Never let the AI claim to be a human. No fake names, no “this is Sarah from the front desk.” The FTC Impersonation Rule (effective April 1, 2024) plus state consumer-protection laws apply to what your AI says.
- 3. Handle patient data with a signed BAA. If your receptionist vendor creates, receives, or transmits protected health information for a covered practice, it's a business associate under HIPAA — which requires a written Business Associate Agreement (45 CFR §164.502(e), §164.504(e)). See our HIPAA glossary entry for the checklist to run before taking healthcare calls.
- 4. Treat outbound AI calls as the regulated zone. Marketing calls with AI voices to cell phones need prior express written consent; honor the do-not-call registry and the 8 a.m.–9 p.m. window; expect $500 per call, up to $1,500 willful, in private suits. Full rules in our TCPA glossary entry.
- 5. If you operate in Utah or Colorado, build disclosure in now. Disclose AI use on request (Utah), at the outset for regulated occupations, and from June 30, 2026 in Colorado consumer interactions.
- 6. Keep transcripts and consent logs. If a recording is ever questioned, your defense is evidence: the recorded notice at the start of the call, timestamps, and retention controls. The same transcripts double as your quality-assurance loop — the failure patterns we found in 55 real user reports are all visible in transcripts within days of launch.
The technical layer underneath all of this — encryption, retention windows, access controls — lives in our voice AI security & compliance guide.
What this means for buyers and agencies
If you're buying an AI receptionist for your own business: legality isn't the reason to hesitate — configuration is. Before you sign, ask any vendor three questions: Can the agent play a custom recording/AI notice at call start? Will you sign a BAA if we handle patient data? Can the agent disclose it's an assistant and transfer to a human on request? Fusion Calling answers yes to all three — disclosure and consent notices are part of standard agent configuration, BAAs are available for healthcare deployments, and every agent identifies itself as an assistant with a human handoff path. See pricing from $149/mo.
If you're an agency reselling AI receptionists: your compliance exposure is your clients' exposure, multiplied across every deployment. The six checklist items above are also your sales assets — being the agency that walks in with a recording-disclosure script, a BAA, and a state-by-state answer is why you win regulated accounts. Our state market guides cover the local-angle specifics for the ten largest agency markets, and the reseller program includes the retention and consent controls you'll need to demonstrate.
One honest caveat: this guide is a practical summary compiled from the statutes and rulings linked above — it is not legal advice, laws change, and states amend their wiretap statutes more often than you'd think. Confirm with counsel before making compliance decisions, especially in the all-party states.
