Spam Call Statistics by State: Where Are Robocalls Worst?

States With Most Robocalls

Texas leads all US states in absolute robocall volume by a substantial margin. YouMail's Robocall Index — the most comprehensive public database of US robocall activity, tracking hundreds of billions of calls annually — reports that Texas receives approximately 5.2 billion robocalls per year, driven by its population of 30 million and its large concentration of cell phone users with Texas area codes that scammers target disproportionately. California follows at approximately 4.8 billion annual robocalls, Florida at 3.6 billion, New York at 3.1 billion, and Georgia at 2.4 billion. These five states together account for roughly 40% of all US robocall volume despite containing only 35% of the US population — suggesting these states are targeted at above-average rates.

Georgia's high volume relative to its population size (10th in population, 5th in robocall volume) is partially attributable to Atlanta's position as a major telecommunications hub. Atlanta metro residents receive approximately 28 robocalls per person per month — among the highest metropolitan per-capita rates in the country according to YouMail data. The concentration of large corporate headquarters and government agencies in Atlanta makes it a preferred target for business impersonation scams and government agency spoofing campaigns. Florida's volume is driven by a combination of population size, a large retiree population that scammers disproportionately target for financial fraud, and active criminal organizations operating from South Florida that both make and receive scam-related calls.

States with the lowest absolute robocall volumes reflect population size more than targeting preference. Wyoming (population ~580,000) receives fewer than 50 million robocalls per year. Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota follow, each receiving under 80 million annual robocalls. However, the low absolute numbers don't indicate that residents of these states are less targeted per capita — they reflect smaller population bases. Per-capita ranking tells a different story about which states have the worst robocall experiences for individual residents.

Per Capita Robocall Rankings

Per-capita rankings reveal a different picture than absolute volume rankings. When robocall volume is divided by state population, the states with the most calls per resident are not the most populous states but rather mid-size states with specific demographic and telecom characteristics. According to YouMail's 2024 Robocall Index, the top per-capita robocall states are Georgia (~26 calls/person/month), Nevada (~24/person/month), and Florida (~23/person/month). Nevada's high per-capita rate is driven by Las Vegas metro targeting — the hospitality and tourism industry generates large numbers of phone contacts that scammers exploit for legitimate-seeming pretexts, and the area has a high concentration of businesses whose customers might expect outreach calls.

States with below-average per-capita robocall rates include New England states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire) and rural Mountain West states (Montana, Wyoming, Idaho). These states tend to have older telecommunications infrastructure with more landlines (which receive fewer cell-targeted robocalls), lower concentrations of high-income urban populations that scammers target for financial fraud, and demographics that make mass-market scam targeting less efficient. However, residents of these states still receive meaningful robocall volumes — "below average" in robocall context still means 8-12 calls per person per month.

Per-capita data is most useful for consumers assessing their individual risk exposure and for policymakers evaluating where enforcement resources should be concentrated. The FTC's Consumer Sentinel data provides state-level fraud loss reports that complement the per-capita call data — Texas, Florida, and California appear at the top of both metrics, confirming that high call volume correlates with high fraud loss. The FTC's state-level data is accessible at ftc.gov/reports/consumer-sentinel-network and is updated annually, providing a consistent baseline for tracking whether state attorney general enforcement actions and carrier-level interventions are producing measurable reductions in targeted states.

Why Some States Get More Calls

Several structural factors drive differential robocall targeting by state. Population density is the primary driver of absolute volume — more people means more targets. But density also enables more efficient targeting: a robocall campaign that uses neighbor spoofing in New York City (where the 212, 718, 347, and 929 area codes serve millions of adjacent residents) reaches more potential victims per operation than the same campaign in rural Montana. Area code concentration is related: states with fewer area codes relative to population (because the same area code covers a large urban region) see more neighbor spoofing than states where multiple area codes are spread across different cities.

Demographic composition drives targeting preference. States with large retiree populations (Florida, Arizona, South Carolina) see above-average rates of Medicare fraud calls, Social Security impersonation, and grandparent scam calls because scammers deliberately target seniors for high-value fraud. States with large immigrant populations (California, Texas, New York, Florida) see above-average rates of immigration enforcement impersonation (fake ICE and USCIS calls) and consulate fraud scams. States with large concentrations of small businesses (Texas, Florida, California) see above-average rates of Google Business Profile scams, fake Yellow Pages listing calls, and faux-OSHA compliance calls. Scammers are systematic in targeting demographics with specific vulnerabilities.

State consumer protection enforcement also affects robocall rates indirectly. States with aggressive attorney general enforcement of the TCPA and state telemarketing laws — New York, California, Illinois — have somewhat lower rates of certain types of legal-grey-area robocalls from US-based telemarketing operations, though this has minimal effect on offshore scam calls that don't comply with any regulations. The National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) coordinates multi-state enforcement actions against major robocall operations, and the participating states see targeted enforcement actions — though the reduction in calls from any single enforcement action is temporary, as scam operations rebuild using new numbers and providers.

Rural vs Urban Robocall Rates

Urban areas receive robocalls at approximately 2-3 times the per-capita rate of rural areas, according to analysis of YouMail Robocall Index data segmented by zip code density. The urban-rural gap exists for several reasons. Urban phone numbers are more likely to appear in public databases, professional directories, and data broker compilations — more data points for scammers to work from. Urban residents are more likely to use apps and online services that share contact information with third-party data brokers. Urban area codes enable more efficient neighbor spoofing because a single area code and prefix covers more potential targets in close geographic proximity.

Rural areas are not scam-free, however. Rural residents face specific types of scam calls that are particularly prevalent in agricultural and resource-extraction communities: farm equipment financing scams, agricultural subsidy impersonation, rural utility disconnection threats (where there may be fewer alternative providers and residents feel they have less recourse), and timber or mineral rights fraud. The FBI's field offices in rural states like Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas handle a disproportionate number of land and resource rights fraud cases that begin with phone solicitations targeting rural landowners. The dollar amounts in these rural scams are often higher per incident than the gift card scams that dominate urban fraud statistics.

Landline prevalence in rural areas creates a different vulnerability profile. Rural households use landlines at higher rates than urban households — approximately 38% of rural households have landlines versus 22% of urban households, according to the CDC National Health Interview Survey (which includes landline use data). Landlines are not included in the federal Wireless Do Not Call protections without separate registration, and landline robocall blocking technology is less sophisticated than mobile-based solutions. Rural landline users who haven't registered at donotcall.gov and installed a hardware call blocker (like CPR Call Blocker or Sentry 3.1) are among the highest-risk populations for sustained robocall harassment.

State-by-State Data Table

The following data is drawn from YouMail Robocall Index 2024 annual reports and FTC Consumer Sentinel state data for 2024. Figures represent estimated annual robocall volume and approximate per-capita monthly call rates: Texas: 5.2B annual calls, ~14.4/person/month. California: 4.8B, ~12.1/person/month. Florida: 3.6B, ~15.9/person/month. New York: 3.1B, ~15.8/person/month. Georgia: 2.4B, ~21.3/person/month. Illinois: 1.9B, ~15.0/person/month. Ohio: 1.5B, ~12.8/person/month. Pennsylvania: 1.4B, ~10.9/person/month. North Carolina: 1.4B, ~13.0/person/month. Michigan: 1.2B, ~12.0/person/month.

Continuing: Arizona: 1.1B annual, ~14.9/person/month. Virginia: 1.0B, ~11.7/person/month. Washington: 900M, ~11.5/person/month. Colorado: 850M, ~14.2/person/month. Tennessee: 820M, ~11.7/person/month. Indiana: 730M, ~10.6/person/month. Missouri: 720M, ~11.7/person/month. Maryland: 710M, ~11.3/person/month. Wisconsin: 640M, ~10.7/person/month. Minnesota: 590M, ~10.2/person/month. Nevada: 580M, ~17.8/person/month. South Carolina: 570M, ~10.8/person/month. Alabama: 480M, ~9.5/person/month. Louisiana: 440M, ~9.5/person/month. Kentucky: 410M, ~9.0/person/month.

The remaining states range from approximately 50M annual calls (Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska) to 400M (Oregon, Oklahoma, Connecticut). These figures fluctuate monthly based on seasonal scam campaign timing — tax season (January-April) drives sharp increases in IRS impersonation robocalls nationally; Medicare open enrollment (October 15 - December 7) drives health insurance robocall surges. YouMail updates its Robocall Index monthly at robocallindex.com, providing current data that supersedes these annual averages. The FTC's annual "Data Spotlight" reports provide complimentary information on fraud losses by state, which correlate with but don't perfectly track robocall volume — some high-volume states have effective state-level enforcement that reduces per-call fraud conversion rates.