Spam calls by area code: FTC complaint statistics

Spam and robocall complaints by U.S. area code and state, built from the FTC's public Do Not Call data — state rankings normalized per 100,000 residents, the most-reported area codes, embeddable cards, and a full methodology. Refreshed monthly.

This is the FTC's Do Not Call complaint data made browsable by area code and state — the numbers the government publishes only as an annual PDF, updated monthly and normalized per 100,000 residents so states are actually comparable. Remember the twist: because scammers spoof local numbers, these rankings show where calls are reported, not where scammers sit.Updated July 4, 2026
306,021FTC complaints (rolling window)
46,266phone numbers reported
355geographic area codes
51states & DC ranked

The FTC receives millions of Do Not Call complaints a year but publishes the geographic breakdown only inside an annual PDF data book. This page turns the underlying public "Reported Calls" files into a live, sortable picture: which states generate the most complaints per resident, and which area codes show up most on caller ID — refreshed every month and free to embed.

What these numbers are — and aren't. They count consumer complaints in the U.S. FTC's Do Not Call database — unverified reports, not proof of wrongdoing. Because most scam calls spoof a real number or a local area code, a high count means an area code or state is being imitated and reported often, not that its residents are scammers. State rates also reflect how readily people report. areacode.fyi is not a consumer reporting agency and this data is not for any FCRA purpose (employment, credit, tenant, or insurance screening). Report unwanted calls at DoNotCall.gov.

Spam-call complaints by state (per 100,000 residents)

Every state and DC with at least one reported number, ranked by FTC Do Not Call complaints per 100,000 residents (2024 Census population). Per-capita normalization is what makes a small state comparable to a large one. Each row links to that state's area codes.

#StateFTC complaintsPer 100k residents
1District of Columbia5,344761
2Virginia12,386141
3New York19,41098
4Illinois12,38397
5Kentucky4,13690
6Delaware58255
7Wyoming32555
8New Jersey5,01953
9Colorado3,09352
10Connecticut1,80249
11Ohio5,80849
12Florida11,40749
13Kansas1,29444
14Nevada1,41943
15Georgia4,78243
16West Virginia71440
17California15,43239
18Idaho73937
19Maryland2,21135
20Arizona2,65235
21Utah1,20834
22Washington2,70434
23Michigan3,31033
24Oklahoma1,32632
25New Hampshire45132
26Massachusetts2,25532
27Alabama1,55830
28Arkansas92330
29Minnesota1,71930
30Pennsylvania3,85930
31Louisiana1,34129
32North Carolina3,16629
33South Carolina1,55728
34Wisconsin1,69228
35Nebraska54127
36Texas8,10226
37Tennessee1,79225
38Missouri1,46623
39Indiana1,62123
40Rhode Island25323
41Iowa72022
42Mississippi60821
43Oregon83319
44North Dakota15519
45Hawaii25918
46New Mexico37718
47Maine24818
48Vermont11317
49Montana18917
50South Dakota14015
51Alaska9212

Most-reported geographic area codes

Raw complaint counts — no per-capita rate here on purpose (see the FAQ). These are true geographic codes; the toll-free prefixes that dominate raw volume live on scam & spam area codes. Each links to its area-code scam page.

#Area codeRegionFTC complaints
1434Charlottesville, Virginia6,851
2315Syracuse, New York6,295
3217Champaign-Urbana, Illinois4,603
4202Washington, District of Columbia3,311
5540Roanoke, Virginia3,289
6502Louisville, Kentucky2,509
7407Orlando, Florida2,261
8771Washington, District of Columbia2,033
9309Peoria, Illinois1,648
10470Atlanta, Georgia1,451
11585Rochester, New York1,341
12201Hackensack, New Jersey1,311
13224Arlington Heights, Illinois1,196
14321Cocoa, Florida1,122
15213Los Angeles, California1,108
16440Hillcrest, Ohio1,098
17206Seattle, Washington1,074
18949Irvine, California1,073
19614Columbus, Ohio1,019
20209Stockton, California1,009

How this compares with the FTC's headline figures

Our rolling-window tally covers 306,021 complaints against the 46,266 most-reported numbers — those reported three or more times. The FTC's full annual Do Not Call complaint volume is higher (about 2.6 million in FY2025) because it counts every one-off report too. So use these figures to compare states and area codes to each other, not as the FTC's national headline total. The direction of travel matches the FTC's published data books: toll-free debt-relief and imposter robocalls dominate volume, while spoofing spreads the geographic reports across every area code.

Methodology & sources

Complaint data. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission publishes its Do Not Call "Reported Calls" as daily CSV files. We aggregate a rolling window of roughly the last 12 months, keeping numbers reported three or more times, and group each by the area code shown on caller ID. Counts are refreshed monthly; the "updated" date above reflects the current data (July 4, 2026).

State rates. State complaint totals sum the geographic area codes assigned to each state in the official NANPA numbering database, then divide by that state's resident population (U.S. Census Bureau, Vintage 2024, July 1 2024 estimate) to give complaints per 100,000 residents. Toll-free and other non-geographic prefixes are excluded from the state rankings because they aren't tied to a place. Canada is excluded — the FTC data is U.S.-only.

What the counts mean. These are unverified consumer complaints, not confirmed scams. Caller ID is easily spoofed, so the area code on a complaint is where the call appeared to come from, not necessarily its origin. A high count reflects reported volume and reporting propensity — treat it as a relative signal, not an accusation against any number, person, or place. There is intentionally no per-capita rate for individual area codes (overlays and toll-free prefixes make it meaningless).

Sources

Embed this data

Free to reuse (CC0). Drop the national card on any page with this snippet — it stays current as the data refreshes, and carries a link back for attribution:

<iframe src="https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats-national.html" width="100%" height="340" style="border:0;max-width:520px" title="U.S. spam-call complaints — areacode.fyi" loading="lazy"></iframe>

For a single state, point the same iframe at https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/district-of-columbia.html instead — one card exists for every ranked state and DC. The cards are self-contained (no tracking, no site chrome) and set to noindex, so the credit flows through the visible attribution link.

All state embed URLs
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/district-of-columbia.html — District of Columbia
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/virginia.html — Virginia
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/new-york.html — New York
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/illinois.html — Illinois
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/kentucky.html — Kentucky
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/delaware.html — Delaware
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/wyoming.html — Wyoming
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/new-jersey.html — New Jersey
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/colorado.html — Colorado
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/connecticut.html — Connecticut
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/ohio.html — Ohio
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/florida.html — Florida
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/kansas.html — Kansas
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/nevada.html — Nevada
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/georgia.html — Georgia
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/west-virginia.html — West Virginia
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/california.html — California
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/idaho.html — Idaho
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/maryland.html — Maryland
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/arizona.html — Arizona
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/utah.html — Utah
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/washington.html — Washington
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/michigan.html — Michigan
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/oklahoma.html — Oklahoma
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/new-hampshire.html — New Hampshire
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/massachusetts.html — Massachusetts
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/alabama.html — Alabama
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/arkansas.html — Arkansas
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/minnesota.html — Minnesota
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/pennsylvania.html — Pennsylvania
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/louisiana.html — Louisiana
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/north-carolina.html — North Carolina
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/south-carolina.html — South Carolina
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/wisconsin.html — Wisconsin
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/nebraska.html — Nebraska
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/texas.html — Texas
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/tennessee.html — Tennessee
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/missouri.html — Missouri
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/indiana.html — Indiana
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/rhode-island.html — Rhode Island
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/iowa.html — Iowa
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/mississippi.html — Mississippi
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/oregon.html — Oregon
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/north-dakota.html — North Dakota
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/hawaii.html — Hawaii
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/new-mexico.html — New Mexico
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/maine.html — Maine
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/vermont.html — Vermont
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/montana.html — Montana
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/south-dakota.html — South Dakota
  • https://areacode.fyi/embed/spam-stats/alaska.html — Alaska

Keep exploring

Frequently asked questions

How are spam calls counted by area code and state?

We tally consumer complaints in the FTC's public Do Not Call "Reported Calls" data over a rolling ~12-month window (numbers reported three or more times), grouped by the area code shown on caller ID. State totals add up the geographic area codes assigned to each state and are then divided by that state's 2024 Census population to get complaints per 100,000 residents.

Does a high per-100k rate mean a state has the most scammers?

No. The rate reflects where numbers are displayed and how often residents report — not where callers actually are. Because most scam calls spoof a local number, a high rate usually means a state's area codes are imitated often, and that its residents report diligently. It is a signal of reported call volume, not of local wrongdoing.

Why is there no per-capita rate for individual area codes?

Population doesn't map cleanly to a single area code. Overlays stack two or more codes over the same region, new codes have few active lines, and non-geographic (toll-free) prefixes have no population at all. A per-100k rate at the area-code level would be misleading, so we publish raw complaint counts per area code and reserve per-capita normalization for states.

Can I embed or reuse this data?

Yes. The data is free and released under a CC0 public-domain dedication. Copy the iframe snippet in the "Embed this data" section for a national or single-state card, or link to this page. Attribution to areacode.fyi is appreciated and is built into every embed card.

How often is this updated?

Monthly. The figures recompute from the latest FTC Do Not Call files each time the dataset is refreshed, and the "updated" date on this page reflects the current data.

Sourced from the official NANPA (North American Numbering Plan Administrator) numbering database, current as of July 4, 2026. Refreshed monthly.