Can a Lead Form Hide a TCPA Disclosure Behind an Expandable Link?

​Federal regulations implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) set a high bar for companies seeking prior express written consent to send marketing communications using an automated telephone dialing system or prerecorded/artificial voice.

It is a demanding, formality-heavy standard that requires a written agreement bearing the consumer’s signature that clearly and conspicuously discloses that the consumer is agreeing to receive marketing calls or texts using an autodialer and/or prerecorded/artificial voice. The agreement must also identify the seller(s) on whose behalf calls or texts will be made and specify the telephone number the consumer is authorizing to be contacted.

Finally, the agreement must also state that consent is not a condition of purchase, so consumers are not forced to agree as a prerequisite for obtaining goods or services. It must also be obtained before any covered marketing communication is sent, and in a manner that allows the consumer to understand the scope and nature of what they are agreeing to.

With a bar this high, many consent disclosures devolve into a lengthy, convoluted mess drowning in legalese that few consumers will understand, much less agree to. Therefore, website operators are always looking for a short cut that allows them to display the required verbiage without losing conversions. One such method is to only show the first line of the disclosure while hiding the remainder behind an expandable “read more” link.

What is a TCPA Disclosure Expandable Link?

An expandable link is a common website element, often called an accordion or expandable/collapsible section, that reveals hidden content only when the user clicks on a specific link, button, or heading, and is often used to reduce page clutter for easier content navigation. Expandable links are frequently used in FAQs, navigation menus, product descriptions, and long-form articles to improve user experience. Common examples include "Read More" links, "+", or arrow icons next to headlines.

In light of how common they are, is it acceptable for a website operator to utilize an expandable link to reduce the size and impact of a TCPA disclosure?

The short answer is no — this practice carries significant legal risk and likely fails the "clear and conspicuous" standard required by the FCC’s TCPA regulations. While no court has issued a bright-line prohibition on every conceivable "click to expand" design, the weight of regulatory guidance and case law strongly disfavors hiding material consent disclosures behind truncated text boxes, expandable sections, or similar mechanisms that require an additional consumer action to reveal the full terms.

The "Clear and Conspicuous" TCPA Standard

The FCC's regulations define "clear and conspicuous" disclosure as "a notice that would be apparent to the reasonable consumer, separate and distinguishable from the advertising copy or other disclosures." 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(f)(3). The burden of proving that a clear and conspicuous disclosure was provided — and that unambiguous consent was obtained — falls on the telemarketer or seller, not the consumer.

Prior express written consent requires an agreement, in writing, bearing the signature of the person called, that clearly authorizes the seller to deliver marketing messages using an ATDS or prerecorded voice. Critically, the disclosure informing the consumer what they are consenting to must be presented in a manner that is actually apparent to a reasonable person before they sign (click).

FTC Guidance on Scrolling and Click-Through Disclosures

Although the FTC's .com Disclosures guide (2013) addresses advertising disclosures under the FTC Act rather than TCPA consent specifically, courts regularly look to its framework when evaluating whether online disclosures are "clear and conspicuous." The FTC guidance is highly instructive and provides several principles that cut directly against truncated or hidden TCPA disclosures.

For example, website operators are encouraged to design web pages so that scrolling is not required to locate a disclosure. When scrolling is required, they are to use text or visual cues to encourage it. Simply making the disclosure available somewhere on the page, where some consumers might find it, does not meet the clear and conspicuous standard.

The FTC also advises that disclosures that are integral to a claim should not be communicated through a hyperlink and should instead appear on the same page, immediately adjacent to the claim, with sufficient prominence so both are read simultaneously. The FTC’s guidance singles out cost information and health & safety disclosures as examples, but TCPA consent language authorizing automated marketing calls is arguably equally integral to the consumer's decision.

TCPA Case Law Reinforcing Visibility Requirements

Several federal court decisions have rejected TCPA consent where disclosure language was insufficiently visible — and the reasoning applies directly to truncated or expandable text:

Barrera v. Guaranteed Rate, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2017): The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss where the TCPA consent language was in "barely legible font" placed below the "Get your free quote" button. The court concluded "the placement of the disclosures and the use of a tiny font made it unlikely that [the plaintiff] knew, when he clicked on the quote button that he was actually opening the door to a barrage of autodialed telemarketing calls."

Sullivan v. All Web Leads, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2017): The court refused to enforce consent where the disclosure was placed in small print below the submit button, the webpage was "silent on phone solicitations," and the consent disclosures were "unreasonably camouflaged in the context of the webpage." The court found these allegations stated a plausible claim that the disclosure was not "clear and conspicuous."

Dahdah v. Rocket Mortgage (E.D. Mich. 2024): The court found disclosures were not "clear and conspicuous" because: (1) the text was in "hard-to-read," "tiny" gray font; (2) the webpage used "distracting" visuals; (3) the page focused on payment rather than the disclosure; (4) **consumers needed to scroll to view the full disclosure**; and (5) there was too much distance between the "agree and subscribe" button and the disclosure's hyperlink.[8]

Gaker v. Citizens Bank (D. Mass. 2023): The court held that even where the consent language appeared in full on a webpage (not behind a hyperlink), it still failed the "clear and conspicuous" standard because it was overwhelmed by visual distractions — a "supposed opportunity to win free money dominating the page" — and placed where a user who "scrolled to the confirm button and clicked on it would never have seen it."

Why Expandable Links Are Particularly Problematic

A design that shows only one line of a multi-sentence TCPA disclosure — requiring the consumer to click, tap, or scroll within a small, embedded text box to see the rest — amplifies the risks identified in every source above:

1. The consumer never sees the full disclosure before acting. The entire purpose of the "clear and conspicuous" requirement is to ensure the consumer is actually informed before they consent. If the critical language (e.g., "you agree to receive automated marketing calls and texts," "consent is not a condition of purchase," etc.) is hidden below the fold of a truncated box, a reasonable consumer may never read it.

2. It is the functional equivalent of placing a disclosure below the submit button. Courts in Sullivan and Barrerarejected disclosures placed in locations where the natural user flow bypassed them. A truncated text box that shows only an innocuous first line produces the same result — the consumer sees a partial statement and moves on.

3. It shifts the burden to the consumer to seek out the disclosure. The FTC's guidance and TCPA case law are consistent: the advertiser/marketer bears responsibility for ensuring the disclosure is actually communicated, not merely available. A design that requires an affirmative click to reveal the rest of the disclosure treats the full text as "available" rather than "communicated".

4. It undermines the "signature" requirement. The consumer's electronic signature (checking a box or clicking a button) is supposed to confirm they have read and agreed to the disclosed terms. If the full terms were never visible without an extra action, the defendant will struggle to prove the consumer knowingly authorized the contacts.

The Hyperlink Distinction

Courts have generally upheld TCPA consent where the primary disclosure language is displayed in full near the checkbox/button, and supplementary terms (like a full SMS Terms of Service or a Privacy Policy) are accessible via a clearly labeled hyperlink. This is different from truncating the core consent disclosure itself.

For example, in Lundbom v. Schwan Home Service, Inc. (D. Oregon, 2020) the court found consent valid where the disclosure text was visible in full on the page and the hyperlinked "mobile messaging terms and conditions" provided additional detail — not where the primary consent language was hidden.

Practical Recommendations

For lead generation webforms, the safest approach is to display the entire TCPA disclosure in full, immediately adjacent to (and preferably above) the checkbox or submit button, in a font size and color at least as prominent as the surrounding text. Avoid scroll boxes, truncated text, expandable sections, or "click to read more" for the core consent language. If the disclosure is long, consider shortening it or restructuring it, rather than hiding it.

Hyperlinks are acceptable for supplementary documents (SMS Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, partner lists) — but label them clearly and specifically (e.g., "View our marketing partners" rather than "click here"). Also, be certain to test across devices. A disclosure visible on desktop may require scrolling on mobile — and if consumers must scroll past the submit button to find it, that is a problem.

The Bottom Line

While the TCPA and its associated rules do not explicitly prohibit expandable disclosure designs by name, the "clear and conspicuous" standard — as interpreted by courts and informed by FTC guidance — effectively requires that the full consent disclosure be visible, legible, and apparent to a reasonable consumer before they take the action that constitutes their signature.

Truncating a required disclosure to a single line and requiring an additional click to reveal the rest is a design choice that is very likely to be challenged — and very likely to lose.