Keep Call Centers in America Act of 2025
The Keep Call Centers in America Act of 2025 would create federal incentives and penalties aimed at discouraging companies from moving call center operations overseas. It would require employers to give the Secretary of Labor 120 days’ notice before relocating a call center or contracting call center work abroad, and it would direct the Secretary to maintain a public list of employers that do so. Employers on that list would generally be barred for five years from receiving new federal grants or guaranteed loans, and existing grant or loan recipients could face monthly penalties, suspension of further payments, or cancellation if they remain on the list. The bill also gives agencies a preference in federal contracting to U.S. employers that have not relocated call center work overseas, and it requires federal call center work under civilian or defense contracts to be performed inside the United States.
The bill also adds disclosure requirements for customer service communications. Business entities would have to disclose at the start of a customer service interaction the physical location of the employee or agent, and if that person is outside the United States, inform the consumer that they may request transfer to a U.S.-based agent. If artificial intelligence is being used for customer service, the business must disclose that a nonhuman system is involved and offer transfer to a human operator in the United States. The bill requires annual certification to the Federal Trade Commission, directs the FTC to issue regulations, and treats violations as unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the FTC Act.
In terms of state and federal legal impact, the bill primarily affects federal procurement, grant, and loan eligibility, while also creating nationwide disclosure obligations for businesses engaged in customer service communications with consumers in the United States. It would expand the Department of Labor’s role in tracking offshore call center relocations and give the FTC new enforcement responsibilities over disclosure and transfer requirements. The bill also expressly states that it does not authorize withholding federal benefits from workers employed by companies that move operations overseas.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill’s introduction is protective of domestic service jobs and skeptical of offshoring and AI-driven customer service replacement. The measure’s title and structure suggest a pro-worker, pro-U.S.-jobs policy approach, with special attention to transparency for consumers and federal accountability for contractors and grant recipients. No committee debate or vote record is available in the provided materials, so there is no recorded opposition or support beyond the sponsors’ introduction.
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s economic and administrative burdens. Potential critics may object to the grant and loan restrictions, the public naming of employers, the mandatory U.S.-based service disclosures, and the requirement to route consumers to domestic human agents, especially for companies that rely on global call center operations or AI tools. Supporters would likely emphasize job retention, consumer transparency, and limiting federal dollars to companies that keep service work in the United States.
The bill would create new federal reporting, disclosure, and enforcement requirements affecting employers with call centers, federal contractors, and businesses that provide customer service communications to U.S. consumers. It would authorize the Department of Labor to maintain a public list of employers that relocate call center work overseas, impose notice and penalty provisions, and make listed employers generally ineligible for federal grants and guaranteed loans for a period of five years, subject to limited waivers. It would also require federal contracts for call center work to be performed in the United States and direct the FTC to regulate and enforce customer-service disclosure rules, including disclosures about offshore agents and AI use.
The bill appears to have a strongly pro-domestic-jobs and pro-consumer-transparency orientation. Its sponsors frame offshore call center relocation as a practice that should carry federal consequences, and the bill’s structure reflects concern about both outsourcing and the use of AI in customer service. Because there are no committee transcripts or votes in the provided record, there is no documented bipartisan support or opposition, but the policy direction suggests likely support from labor-oriented and domestic-industry advocates and likely resistance from businesses that use offshore service centers or automated customer service systems.
Likely points of contention include whether the federal government should condition grants, loans, and contracts on keeping call center work in the United States; whether public listing of employers is an appropriate enforcement tool; and whether the disclosure and transfer requirements are operationally feasible for businesses using global service centers or AI. Critics may argue the bill could increase compliance costs, reduce flexibility in staffing and contracting, and interfere with legitimate international business operations. Supporters are likely to argue that the bill protects U.S. jobs, improves consumer transparency, and prevents federal funds from supporting offshoring.