An Unwanted Ring: The FTC’s FY2025 Do Not Call Data Book Shows Calls Still Haunt Americans

What the FTC released and why the FY2025 Data Book matters

The Federal Trade Commission has published its annual Do Not Call Registry Data Book for fiscal year 2025. The release offers a snapshot of how many people are reporting unwanted calls, what kinds of calls bother them most, and how the problem is changing over time.

This matters because the Data Book is one of the clearest public records about nuisance calls, robocalls and telemarketing complaints. Journalists, consumer groups, and policy makers use it to track trends and to justify enforcement moves. For the public, it helps explain whether progress is being made — or whether your phone will keep ringing with pitches, scams, and automated messages.

Main takeaways from the Data Book: complaints are up and unwanted calls remain common

The FTC’s summary emphasizes two broad themes: complaints about unwanted calls rose in the most recent fiscal year, and millions of Americans still report receiving unsolicited calls. The agency pointed to continued strength in certain complaint categories, especially calls that appear to be scams or automated robocalls.

The release also highlights that particular kinds of calls — like those impersonating government agencies or offering phony prizes — remain a big source of complaints. At the same time, there are signs that some older forms of telemarketing are shrinking, while scam-style approaches using spoofed numbers and automation are climbing.

Beyond the general trends, the headline language in the press release paints a picture of a problem that is far from solved: enforcement and technical fixes have not erased nuisance calls. The tone suggests steady pressure on bad actors, but also that the sheer scale of calls keeps the issue in public view.

Numbers to verify in the full report — and where the press release leaves things fuzzy

The press release gives a strong directional read — more complaints, still lots of calls — but it leaves several specific items that reporters and readers should check in the full Data Book:

• Exact complaint counts and how they are measured. The summary cites increases, but it’s important to confirm whether those are raw complaint totals or adjusted figures (for population, survey coverage, or other factors).
• Year-over-year percentage changes. The release may highlight increases or decreases without showing the base numbers or the time window used for comparison. Confirm which fiscal years are compared.
• How the report separates types of calls. Look for tables that break complaints into categories such as robocalls, impersonation scams, debt-collection calls, and telemarketing. The press release may group items in ways that obscure shifts inside those categories.
• Population coverage. The Data Book should show whether figures are counts of complaints, share of the registered population, or share of the broader population. Those distinctions matter for how big the problem appears.
• Top offender categories or phone-number sources. The summary may list broad culprits. Verify whether the full data identify specific industries, spoofing sources, or recurring phone number patterns.

Until you can see the full tables and notes, avoid quoting exact percentages or ranks pulled from the press release without confirming the underlying data.

How these findings matter for people, regulators and industry players

For consumers, the takeaway is blunt: nuisance calls are still common, and certain scams remain persistent. That means the problem affects everyday life — wasted minutes, privacy concerns, and increased risk of fraud for vulnerable people.

For regulators and consumer-rights groups, the Data Book provides ammunition. Rising complaints put pressure on agencies to act with new enforcement or rulemaking. The report can also shape public debate about tougher rules on number spoofing and on what carriers must do to block suspicious traffic.

For industry players — telecom carriers, call-blocking firms and legitimate telemarketers — the trends are a mix of challenge and opportunity. Carriers face demands to improve defenses and give customers better tools. Firms that build call-identification and filtering services can point to the data as a reason for wider adoption. At the same time, legitimate businesses that rely on phone outreach risk being lumped in with scammers, which can raise compliance costs and reduce call effectiveness.

What to watch in the methodology and follow-up angles for reporters

The Data Book typically includes methodological notes that are essential for interpreting the results. Reporters should look for how the FTC counts complaints (raw calls to its tipline, registered complaints, or survey data), the timeframes used, and whether any changes in data collection happened between years.

Suggested follow-ups: check whether the FTC links complaints to enforcement actions taken in the same year; compare the Data Book’s figures with carrier or industry reports; and seek reactions from consumer groups and telecommunication companies about steps they plan next. Also watch for any signs the FTC will pair the Data Book with new rule proposals or court filings aimed at spoofing and scam operations.

In short, the FY2025 Data Book gives a clear message: nuisance calls are still a big public headache. The full report will be needed to sort nuance from sound bite, but the broad picture is one of persistent trouble and continuing pressure on regulators and industry to do more.