Telecom compliance is changing faster than expected rate!
Due to new communication technologies and global calling activity, robocalls are increasing day-by-day. Now regulators are more alert and responding to this situation by reviewing, revising and rolling back the rules governing contact centers and outbound calling. Businesses that are operating in telecom, performance marketing, or contact centers; it’s very important for them to understand these changes early.
In this blog, we focus on the policy and regulatory side of telecom compliance. We will specifically discuss what regulators are proposing, what rules may change, and what signals agencies like the FCC are sending for the coming years.
Read More: Legal Requirements for AI Calls: TCPA, FCC Rules, and Disclosure Obligations (2026)
How the FCC’s 9th FNPRM Shapes Telecom Compliance
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, the FCC goes through a “notice and comment” process during which it adopts a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. In this process, FCC takes public comments and feedback from businesses and industry stakeholders that would be directly affected by these rules and reply to these comments, if any. It also reviews the record before taking steps toward any final regulations.
In the ninth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (9th NPRM) from the Federal Communications Commission, it has proposed the following rulemakings and will seek, is seeking, or has sought public comment on these notices and the proposals and questions within them.
The important proposals within rulemaking (9th NPRM) regarding policy and regulations about telecom compliance are:
- International Caller ID Mandates, which would require foreign-originated calls to be labeled
- STIR/SHAKEN and Rich Call Data (RCD) requirements tied to caller identity verification
- Robocall rule simplification and rollbacks such as abandoned call message requirements
The 9th NPRM reflects that FCC is thinking about both regulation and deregulation of telecom compliance regulations and policies. Therefore it’s important for businesses to understand not just what is being proposed, but how regulators are thinking about telecom compliance overall.
Let’s discuss these proposals one by one:
1. International Caller ID Proposal
International caller identification means that if there is a foreign-originated call; even if it’s using a U.S. phone number; that call would have to be identified through some type of label, such as an overseas calling phone number or an “international call” indicator via caller ID.
Under one interpretation, this proposal could prohibit foreign companies from originating calls to U.S. consumers using U.S. numbers solely because their operations are located outside the United States, even if they have no physical presence in the U.S. .
Why the FCC Is Proposing International Call Labeling
The Federal Communications Commission has stated that the majority of scam calls it sees are being originated from overseas.
The purpose of this ruling is to give consumers more transparency and control. So when someone’s phone rings, they would immediately recognize where the call is coming from and they can therefore avoid potentially suspicious calls
Impact of this potential regulation
International caller identification is probably one of the most problematic proposals being put out as a potential rulemaking.
The problem is that there are many international call centers working for major corporations that would be affected by this proposal. This is because these call centers working for major businesses would be restricted from using U.S. numbers. As a result, their legitimate operations could face several problems:
- Lower answer rates because calls labeled as “international” will have more chances to be ignored, even if they are legitimate.
- Increased operating costs because companies might have to restructure call routing, acquire new infrastructure, or consider relocating operations without any financial incentive to do so.
- Disrupted customer experience because customers may hesitate to answer support or service calls they believe are coming from overseas.
For the sake of addressing a few bad actors, the proposal could significantly change the environment for businesses that have globalized operations over the past ten to twenty years.
Implementation Feasibility Concerns
From an implementation standpoint, while acknowledging that many problematic calls originate overseas, this proposal is not viewed as a solution that would be easy to implement or operationalize.
There is uncertainty around which trade organizations are currently assisting with the submission of comments on this issue, but help is being offered to any parties interested in engaging in the comment process.
Explore More About: What Is TCPA 1:1 Consent and How Does It Affect Lead Generation?
2. STIR/SHAKEN and Rich Call Data (RCD) Update
Caller identification and verified identity primarily refers to verified caller name and number that are shown on the phone screens of the recipient to make sure a call is real and trustworthy.
The caller ID information is authenticated through STIR/SHAKEN. It is a framework that confirms that the caller ID information has not been spoofed or altered.
Rich Call Data refers to a long-discussed industry concept that allows additional information to be transmitted through caller ID. This can include a logo or more detailed information about the company placing the call. The goal is to help people recognize legitimate calls more easily and feel more confident answering them.
From a practical standpoint, Rich Call Data is viewed as an advancement of the Federal Communications Commission’s STIR/SHAKEN initiative, with the goal of sending verified information to recipients.
However, in real-world use, the system isn’t perfect. Many call centers make calls for multiple brands or clients, which makes verification more complex. Because of this, it is not clear that requiring Rich Call Data would significantly improve contact rates, though it may not necessarily harm them either.
Limitations in Addressing Illegal Robocalls
Dialing platforms already do a lot of checking before allowing businesses to place calls. They verify customers, review their use cases, and make sure caller IDs are being used properly.
Adding extra checks for things like logos, banners, or branding used in Rich Call Data is something platforms can handle. It’s not overly difficult from an operational point of view.
It is not necessarily a solution that helps consumers or meaningfully addresses the illegal robocall problem. Because of this, there is some hesitation around these proposals because RCD does not directly address the illegal call problem in the robocall ecosystem.
One consistent concern raised is cost. Implementing Rich Call Data is expensive, and many organizations using it report that the information is often stripped out before reaching the call recipient due to technical limitations. While the goal is greater identity verification, inconsistent carrier support and technology gaps reduce its practical effectiveness.
3. FCC Rule Rollbacks (Abandoned Call Message and Simplification)
Abandoned Call Message and Simplification refers to the FCC’s effort to make outdated robocall rules easier and more practical, especially rules that apply when a call is answered but no live agent is available.
When using a predictive dialer, multiple telephone lines are dialed at once. Inevitably, there will be times when not enough operators are available to handle all the calls if they are answered simultaneously. Predictive analytics are not always perfect, which can result in calls being dropped or abandoned. Under current FCC rules, when this happens:
- A recorded abandoned call message must be played
- The total abandoned call rate cannot exceed 3% over a 30-day period
Simplification means the FCC is reviewing whether these rules still make sense today. The agency is considering eliminating or revising the abandoned call message requirement because:
- Predictive dialing technology is imperfect by nature
- Some requirements are considered outdated
- The rules may add complexity without significantly protecting consumers
The FCC and the FTC both regulate telemarketing, but they have overlapping authority
In the U.S., the telemarketing environment is regulated by the FCC and Federal Trade Commission. If the FCC rolls back certain rules, that does not remove the FTC’s power. The FTC can still take action against companies for abusive telemarketing practices. Therefore, businesses are not suggested to relax their compliance programs or lower their compliance standards.
FAQs about Regulatory & Policy Changes Shaping Telecom Compliance
1. How could international caller ID mandates affect global call centers?
International caller ID mandates could require foreign-originated calls to be labeled as “international,” even when using U.S. phone numbers. The problem is that call centers working for major businesses would be restricted from using U.S. numbers. As a result, their legitimate operations could face several problems like lower answer rates because calls labeled as “international” will have more chances to be ignored, even if they are legitimate. Moreover, there will be increased operating costs and disrupted customer experience.
2. What is the role of STIR/SHAKEN and Rich Call Data (RCD) in telecom compliance?
Rich Call Data refers to an industry concept that allows additional information to be transmitted through caller ID. This can include a logo or more detailed information about the company placing the call. The goal is to help people recognize legitimate calls more easily and feel more confident answering them. RCD is viewed as an advancement of the Federal Communications Commission’s STIR/SHAKEN initiative, with the goal of sending verified information to recipients.
3. What does abandoned call message simplification mean for businesses?
Abandoned Call Message and Simplification refers to the FCC’s effort to make outdated robocall rules easier and more practical, especially rules that apply when a call is answered but no live agent is available. The agency is considering eliminating or revising the abandoned call message requirement because predictive dialing technology is imperfect by nature, some requirements are considered outdated, and the rules may add complexity without significantly protecting consumers
4. If the FCC rolls back robocall rules, does telecom compliance risk go away?
No. The FCC and the FTC both regulate telemarketing, but they have overlapping authority. In the U.S., the telemarketing environment is regulated by the FCC and Federal Trade Commission. If the FCC rolls back certain rules, that does not remove the FTC’s power. The FTC can still take action against companies for abusive telemarketing practices. Therefore, businesses are not suggested to relax their compliance programs or lower their compliance standards.
