OpenAgreements legal reference
Non-Compete Laws by US Jurisdiction
A bottom-line comparison of how every US state and territory treats employee non-compete agreements. Each row links to the full practice note for that jurisdiction. This is legal research, not legal advice.
The bottom line for each jurisdiction is drawn from its full practice note — open a row for the statutes, cases, and quotes behind it. See our methodology for how we research and verify the content.
| Jurisdiction | Are non-competes enforceable? | Bottom line | Main law or case | Main exceptions | When the ban took effect | Can a court narrow it? | Applies to contractors? | Restriction extended during a breach? | Maximum length set by law | Last reviewed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Allowed if reasonable | Alabama voids non-competes by default but enforces an employee covenant that fits the Restrictive Covenant Act's narrow safe harbor, protects a statutory interest, and is properly signed. | Ala. Code § 8-1-190 et seq. (Restrictive Covenant Act) | Sale of business; current-customer non-solicit (18-mo); employee no-hire for uniquely essential workers; professional exemption (physicians, CPAs, veterinarians, physical therapists) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Not addressed by statute or case law | 2 years presumed reasonable (employee) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Alaska | Allowed if reasonable | Alaska has no non-compete statute; employee covenants are enforceable under common law if reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate business interest and no broader than needed. | common law (Data Mgmt., Inc. v. Greene, 757 P.2d 62 (Alaska 1988)) | — | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Silent — no Alaska authority | No statutory limit | Jun 1, 2026 |
| American Samoa | Unsettled | No non-compete statute and no on-point case law; a court would likely apply the Restatement reasonableness test, with local public policy disfavoring broad restraints. | A.S.C.A. § 1.0201 (imported common law); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 188 | — | — | Unsettled | Unclear | Silent — no statute or case law | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Arizona | Allowed if reasonable | Arizona has no general non-compete statute; an employee covenant is enforceable under common law only if reasonable and no broader than necessary to protect a legitimate business interest. | common law (Valley Medical Specialists v. Farber, 982 P.2d 1277 (Ariz. 1999)) | Broadcast-employee ban (A.R.S. § 23-494); physicians enforceable only under heightened scrutiny | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Arkansas | Allowed if reasonable | Arkansas enforces an employee non-compete that is ancillary, protects a statutory business interest, and is no broader in time and scope than necessary, with overbroad covenants reformed by the court. | Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-101 (Act 921 of 2015; amended by Act 232 of 2025) | Physician practice restrictions void (§ 4-75-101(k), 2025); Title 17 Subtitle 3 licensees excluded; non-solicits/NDAs excluded | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Open question — prospective injunctions allowed, contractual tolling unsettled | 2 years presumptively reasonable | Jun 2, 2026 |
| California | Banned | Employee non-competes and customer non-solicits are void by statute, and since 2024 entering or enforcing one is a civil violation with a private right of action. | Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600 | Sale of a business or ownership interest (§§ 16601–16602.5) | Longstanding (§ 16600); 2024 enforcement laws SB 699 / AB 1076 effective Jan 1, 2024 | No | Yes | No (covenant is void) | Not applicable — void | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Colorado | Allowed above a pay level | Colorado voids most employee non-competes and customer non-solicits, allowing a non-compete only against a highly compensated worker ($130,014 in 2026) to protect trade secrets, and banning them entirely for health-care providers. | C.R.S. § 8-2-113 | Health-care provider ban (eff. Aug 6, 2025, SB 25-083); sale-of-business; reasonable confidentiality; capped training-repayment | Aug 10, 2022 (covenants entered or renewed on/after; HB 22-1317) | Unsettled | Unclear | Open question — threshold must be met at enforcement, cutting against extension | No general duration limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Connecticut | Allowed if reasonable | Connecticut enforces employee non-competes only if reasonable under common law, but several occupation-specific statutes cap or void covenants for covered workers. | common law (Scott v. Gen. Iron & Welding Co., 171 Conn. 132 (1976)); occupation statutes | Physician/PA/APRN 1-yr & 15-mile caps; security guards; broadcast employees; homemaker-companion/home-health bans | — | Unsettled | Unclear | Silent — open question | No general statutory cap; physicians/PAs/APRNs capped at 1 year | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Delaware | Allowed if reasonable | Delaware enforces reasonable non-competes under Chancery/Supreme Court case law but increasingly refuses to blue-pencil overbroad ones, and physician practice-restricting covenants are void by statute. | common law (FP UC Holdings, LLC v. Hamilton, 2020 (Del. Ch.)); physician ban 6 Del. C. § 2707 | Physician practice covenants void (§ 2707); home-inspector trainees; sale-of-business reviewed less searchingly | — | No | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| District of Columbia | Allowed above a pay level | The District bans non-competes for most employees and permits them only for highly compensated employees (above an annually adjusted pay floor) whose covenant meets strict scope, duration, and 14-day notice requirements. | D.C. Code § 32-581.02 (Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020) | Highly compensated employees above the pay threshold ($162,164 in 2026); medical specialists ($270,274 in 2026, 730-day cap); sale-of-business; confidentiality/long-term-incentive carve-outs; broadcast employees cannot be bound; pre-Oct 1, 2022 agreements under common law | October 1, 2022 | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Open question — caps run as fixed days from separation | 365 days (non-medical highly compensated employee); 730 days (medical specialist) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Florida | Allowed if reasonable | Among the most employer-friendly states — enforceable with a legitimate business interest and reasonable terms, with a 2025 CHOICE Act high-earner track. | Fla. Stat. § 542.335 | Specialist-physician ban in monopolized counties (§ 542.336) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | Not addressed by statute | No hard cap; over 2 years presumed unreasonable for employees | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Georgia | Allowed if reasonable | Georgia enforces non-competes that are reasonable in time, area, and scope under the Restrictive Covenants Act, but only against employees who perform covered higher-level job functions. | Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act, O.C.G.A. §§ 13-8-50 to 13-8-59 | Employee-category gate (§ 13-8-53(a)); longer presumptions for distributors/franchisees (3 yr) and sellers (5 yr+) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | — | No — courts will not extend beyond expiration | 2 years for employees (rebuttable presumption) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Guam | Banned | Guam voids employee non-competes by statute — 18 GCA § 88105, a transplant of California's restraint-of-trade rule that the Supreme Court of Guam reads as a per-se ban — leaving only narrow sale-of-business and partnership-dissolution exceptions. | 18 GCA § 88105; Island Eye Ctr., Inc. v. Lombard, 2020 Guam 32 | Sale of business good will (§ 88106); partnership dissolution (§ 88107) | — | No | Unclear | Not addressed | Not applicable (employee covenant void regardless of duration) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Hawaii | Allowed if reasonable | Hawaii treats non-competes as restraints of trade under its antitrust statute, enforcing only covenants ancillary to a legitimate purpose, and flatly banning non-compete/non-solicit clauses for technology-business employees. | Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-4 | Technology-business employee ban (§ 480-4(d)); statutory categories: sale-of-business, partner-withdrawal, lease-use, trade-secret covenants | — | Unsettled | Unclear | Open question | No statutory limit (reasonable period required) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Idaho | Allowed if reasonable | Idaho enforces non-competes only against key employees or key independent contractors and only if reasonable, with an 18-month duration safe harbor and mandatory judicial modification of overbroad terms. | Idaho Code §§ 44-2701 to 44-2704 | Only key employees/independent contractors; healthcare weighed against patient access; sale-of-business reviewed less strictly | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | Unsettled — no authority | 18 months (rebuttable presumption) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Illinois | Allowed above a pay level | Illinois enforces employee non-competes only above a $75,000 earnings floor and only if they clear the Freedom to Work Act's consideration and 14-day-notice gates and the Reliable Fire reasonableness test. | Illinois Freedom to Work Act, 820 ILCS 90 (Reliable Fire Equipment Co. v. Arredondo) | Construction workers; broadcasters; temp-agency nurses; public-sector CBA; COVID-19 layoffs; certain mental-health professionals; sale of business excluded | Jan 1, 2022 (Public Act 102-358) | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Not addressed by statute — open question | No statutory maximum (duration judged for reasonableness) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| India | Banned | Post-employment non-competes are void under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 regardless of how reasonable they are, and Indian law offers no reasonableness saving for post-term restraints — leaving only the sale-of-goodwill exception, in-term covenants, confidentiality, non-solicitation, garden leave during the notice period, and cost-based employment bonds. | Indian Contract Act, 1872, § 27 | Sale of business goodwill (Exception 1 to § 27); partnership carve-outs (§§ 11(2), 36(2), 54); in-term exclusive-service covenants | Longstanding — Section 27 has been in force since 1872 | No | Yes | Not applicable — the post-term covenant is void | Not applicable — void | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Indiana | Allowed if reasonable | Indiana enforces a non-compete only if the employer proves it is reasonable in time, activity, and geography and protects a legitimate interest; courts disfavor them and use a strict eraser blue pencil. | common law (Central Indiana Podiatry, P.C. v. Krueger, 882 N.E.2d 723 (Ind. 2008)) | Physician-hospital covenants banned (SEA 475, 2025); primary-care physician non-competes banned (SEA 7, 2023); physician covenants must meet HEA 1004 | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Unsettled | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Iowa | Allowed if reasonable | Iowa enforces an employee non-compete only if it satisfies a three-prong reasonableness test, with the employer bearing the burden; courts may reform an overbroad covenant rather than void it. | common law (Revere Transducers, Inc. v. Deere & Co., 595 N.W.2d 751 (Iowa 1999)) | Mental-health professionals (§ 147.161); health-care staffing workers (§ 135Q.2); franchise nonrenewal (§ 537A.10); UIHC clinical roles (HF 2254, 2026) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | Unsettled | No statutory safe harbor (case by case) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Kansas | Allowed if reasonable | Kansas enforces an employee non-compete that is ancillary, reasonable under the four-factor Weber test, and not adverse to the public welfare, and is one of the more employer-friendly states; courts will narrow an overbroad restraint. | common law (Weber v. Tillman, 913 P.2d 84 (Kan. 1996)) | Non-competes excluded from K.S.A. 50-163 Restraint of Trade Act; non-solicit & owner safe harbors; no physician/healthcare ban | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | No — Doan declined an indefinite tolling-during-breach clause | No statutory limit for non-competes | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Kentucky | Allowed if reasonable | Kentucky enforces a non-compete only if it is supported by valid consideration and reasonable in scope; existing employees must get new consideration, and courts may blue-pencil overbroad terms. | common law (Kegel v. Tillotson, 297 S.W.3d 908 (Ky. App. 2009); Charles T. Creech, Inc. v. Brown, 433 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014)) | Temporary health-care staffing ban (KRS 216.724) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Unsettled | No statutory cap | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Louisiana | Allowed if reasonable | Louisiana voids every non-compete by default and enforces one only if it fits a narrow statutory exception with named parishes and a two-year cap, so most out-of-state templates fail. | La. R.S. 23:921 | Employee exception (subsection C, 2-yr/named parishes); sale of business; physician burn-off limits; automobile salesmen banned; intern/apprentice ban (Aug 1, 2026) | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Silent — likely barred by 2-year cap | 2 years from termination (employee covenant) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Maine | Allowed above a pay level | Maine treats non-competes as contrary to public policy and enforces them only when reasonable, and bans them entirely for employees earning at or below 400% of the federal poverty level (and for non-owner veterinarians). | 26 M.R.S. § 599-A | Veterinarian (non-owner) ban; health-care-practitioner restriction (L.D. 2200, eff. July 13, 2026); employer no-poach ban (§ 599-B) | Wage-floor ban (threshold indexed; $62,600 in 2025) | Unsettled | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory maximum (reasonable duration) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Maryland | Allowed if reasonable | Maryland enforces an ordinary employee non-compete only if it is reasonable under the Becker common-law test, but a statute voids covenants outright for low-wage, veterinary, and many health care workers. | Becker v. Bailey, 268 Md. 93 (1973); Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 3-716 | Low-wage ban (≤150% min wage); veterinary ban; health-care ≤$350k ban; high-earner clinician cap (1 yr/10 mi); client/patient-list carve-out | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Unsettled | No fixed cap for ordinary employees; 1 year for covered health-care | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Massachusetts | Allowed if reasonable | Massachusetts enforces an employee non-compete only if it meets the 2018 Noncompetition Agreement Act — paid garden leave or agreed consideration, a 12-month cap, and strict notice — and voids them entirely for physicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers, and most broadcasters. | Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 24L | Physician, nurse, psychologist, social-worker, broadcaster bans; excluded workers (FLSA-nonexempt, interns, laid-off/no-cause, age ≤18); sale-of-business & non-solicit/NDA carve-outs | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | No automatic extension; statutory misconduct trigger (up to 2 yrs) or express tolling clause | 12 months (up to 2 years on breach of fiduciary duty/taking property) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Michigan | Allowed if reasonable | Michigan enforces an employee non-compete if it protects a reasonable competitive business interest and is reasonable in duration, geography, and type of employment, with no categorical worker or profession ban. | MCL § 445.774a; St. Clair Medical, P.C. v. Borgiel, 270 Mich. App. 260 (2006) | B2B/sale-of-business covenants judged under antitrust rule of reason; no physician or profession ban | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Unsettled | No fixed numeric cap | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Minnesota | Banned | Most employee and independent-contractor non-competes signed on or after July 1, 2023 are void and unenforceable, with only sale-of-business and business-dissolution exceptions surviving. | Minn. Stat. § 181.988 | Sale of business; dissolution of business; pre-July 1, 2023 agreements under common law; NDAs/nonsolicits excluded | July 1, 2023 (prospective only) | No | Yes | — | — | May 27, 2026 |
| Mississippi | Allowed if reasonable | Mississippi enforces a non-compete only if the employer proves it is reasonable in time, territory, and activity to protect a legitimate interest, and it will not be enforced after a bad-faith firing. | common law (Texas Road Boring Co. v. Parker, 194 So. 2d 885 (Miss. 1967)) | Bad-faith-termination defense (Empiregas); minors may disaffirm; lawyers barred (R. 5.6); no health-care statutory ban | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | No judicial tolling (Frierson); express extension clause given effect (Cascio) | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Missouri | Allowed if reasonable | Missouri enforces a non-compete only to the extent it is reasonable and protects the employer's trade secrets or customer contacts, not mere competition, with the employer bearing the burden. | Healthcare Servs. of the Ozarks, Inc. v. Copeland, 198 S.W.3d 604 (Mo. banc 2006) | Employee no-hire/anti-raiding safe harbor (§ 431.202, ≤1 yr); owner/sale covenants (§ 431.204); no physician statutory cap | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory limit (~2 yrs commonly within range) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Montana | Allowed if reasonable | Montana's restraint-of-trade statute voids absolute restraints, but reasonable partial restraints survive under the Dobbins rule of reason, and covered health-care provider non-competes are now banned. | Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-703 (Dobbins, DeGuire & Tucker, P.C. v. Rutherford, 708 P.2d 577 (Mont. 1985)) | Health-care provider ban (§ 28-2-724, HB 198/HB 620, all physicians Jan 1, 2026); sale-of-goodwill (§ 28-2-704); partnership dissolution (§ 28-2-705); employer-initiated termination usually defeats enforcement (Wrigg) | — | No | Unclear | Not addressed | No general statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Nebraska | Allowed if reasonable | Nebraska enforces only narrowly tailored covenants limited to customers the employee personally served, refuses to rewrite overbroad ones, and has no general statutory ban as of 2026. | common law (Securities Acceptance Corp. v. Brown, 106 N.W.2d 456 (Neb. 1960); Polly v. Ray D. Hilderman & Co., 407 N.W.2d 751 (Neb. 1987)) | Franchise non-competes reformable by statute (§ 87-404); sale-of-business more favorable; successor enforcement by merger | — | No | Unclear | Silent | No statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Nevada | Allowed if reasonable | Nevada enforces employee non-competes that meet a four-part statutory reasonableness test, but bans them for solely hourly-wage workers and requires courts to revise overbroad covenants. | NRS 613.195 | Hourly-wage workers excluded; volunteer-customer safe harbor; layoff/RIF enforceable only while employer pays; sale-of-business antitrust carve-out (NRS 598A.040) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Silent — no authority | No statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| New Hampshire | Allowed above a pay level | New Hampshire enforces reasonable non-competes under a three-part common-law test, but voids them for low-wage employees (at or below 200% of the federal minimum wage) and requires pre-acceptance notice to new hires. | Smith, Batchelder & Rugg v. Foster, 119 N.H. 679 (1979); RSA 275:70 and RSA 275:70-a | Low-wage ban (≤200% federal min wage); pre-acceptance notice (RSA 275:70); geographic-practice bans for physicians/nurses/APRNs/podiatrists; sale-of-business | APRN health-care ban eff. Aug 23, 2025 (low-wage ban date not stated) | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Unsettled — no controlling authority | No statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| New Jersey | Allowed if reasonable | New Jersey enforces employee non-competes under the common-law Solari/Whitmyer three-part reasonableness test and readily blue-pencils overbroad covenants, though a pending bill would ban most of them. | Solari Industries, Inc. v. Malady, 55 N.J. 571 (1970); Whitmyer Bros., Inc. v. Doyle, 58 N.J. 25 (1971) | Sale-of-business more freely enforceable; physician public-interest scrutiny; psychologist rule (N.J.A.C. 13:42-10.16); attorney ban (RPC 5.6) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Yes — court may toll the restricted period during an actual breach (ADP v. Kusins) | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| New Mexico | Allowed if reasonable | New Mexico enforces ordinary employee non-competes only when reasonable and supported by valid consideration, but a statute makes covered health-care practitioner non-competes unenforceable. | Lovelace Clinic v. Murphy, 76 N.M. 645 (1966); NMSA 1978, § 24A-4-2 | Health-care practitioner ban (§ 24A-4-2); sale-of-business more lenient | — | Unsettled | — | Open question — no authority | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| New York | Allowed if reasonable | New York has no general non-compete statute; employee non-competes are enforceable only to the extent reasonable under the common-law BDO Seidman three-part test, with a statutory ban only for broadcast-industry employees. | BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg, 93 N.Y.2d 382 (1999) | Broadcast-employee ban (N.Y. Labor Law § 202-k); sale-of-business/goodwill more favorable | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Open question — no controlling authority | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| North Carolina | Allowed if reasonable | North Carolina enforces an employee non-compete only if it is in writing, supported by consideration, reasonable in time and territory, and protects a legitimate business interest. | common law (Whittaker Gen. Med. Corp. v. Daniel, 324 N.C. 523 (1989)); writing requirement N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-4 | Physician/health-care covenants face a public-policy bar (Zaldivar); pending HB 269 (<$75k) and SB 673 (hospital) not enacted | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Express tolling clauses enforced (federal courts); equitable tolling unsettled | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| North Dakota | Banned | North Dakota voids employee non-competes by statute, with exceptions only for sale-of-goodwill and owner dissolution or dissociation covenants. | N.D. Cent. Code § 9-08-06 | Sale of business goodwill; owner dissolution/dissociation; narrow employee anti-raiding non-solicits (Warner); customer non-solicits void | — | No | Unclear | Not addressed by statute | No statutory limit for the ban | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Northern Mariana Islands | Allowed if reasonable | The CNMI has no non-compete statute; a post-employment covenant is enforceable only if reasonable under Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 188, which 7 CMC § 3401 imports as Commonwealth law, and the one on-point federal order denied an injunction in a small-island healthcare context. | 7 CMC § 3401 (importing Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 188); August Healthcare Grp., LLC v. Manglona | No statutory carve-outs; small-island public-interest and hardship factors weigh heavily against healthcare/specialist covenants | — | Unsettled | Unclear | Silent — rely on an explicit tolling clause kept within § 188 reasonableness | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Ohio | Allowed if reasonable | Ohio enforces an employee non-compete only to the extent it is reasonable under the Raimonde test — no broader than needed to protect the employer, not unduly harsh on the employee, and not injurious to the public. | Raimonde v. Van Vlerah, 42 Ohio St. 2d 21 (1975) | Physician public-interest scrutiny; pending S.B. 301 (nonprofit-hospital cap) and S.B. 11 (broad ban) not enacted | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Yes — a covenant may not expire while enforceability is litigated (Homan) | No statutory cap | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Oklahoma | Banned | Oklahoma voids employee non-competes by statute, permitting only narrow carve-outs for direct customer non-solicitation, employee anti-raiding, and sale-of-business or partnership-dissolution covenants. | Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 217 | Sale of goodwill (§ 218); partnership dissolution (§ 219); direct customer non-solicit (§ 219A); employee anti-raiding (§ 219B); trade-secret clauses outside the ban | — | No | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory limit on the ban; sale covenants limited to a county and contiguous counties | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Oregon | Allowed above a pay level | An Oregon employee non-compete is void by default unless the employer meets a strict ORS 653.295 checklist — including pay above an inflation-indexed threshold ($119,541 for 2026) — or pays garden leave. | ORS 653.295 | Medical-licensee (physician/nurse) ban (ORS 653.297, 2025, retroactive); non-solicit/bonus/sale-of-business outside the checklist; garden-leave path | Salary threshold & 12-mo cap eff. Jan 1, 2022; medical-licensee ban eff. June 9, 2025 | No | Unclear | Silent — 12-month-from-termination cap cuts against tolling | 12 months from termination (excess void) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Pennsylvania | Allowed if reasonable | Pennsylvania enforces an employee non-compete only if it is ancillary to employment, supported by adequate consideration, reasonably limited in time and territory, and tied to a legitimate business interest, with a 2024 statute sharply restricting health care covenants. | Socko v. Mid-Atlantic Systems of CPA, Inc., 126 A.3d 1266 (Pa. 2015) | Health-care practitioner restrictions (Act 74 of 2024, eff. Jan 1, 2025 — voids covenants over one year and any where employer dismissed practitioner); B2B no-hire clauses unenforceable (Beemac) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Unsettled | No statutory limit (except Act 74 one-year cap for health care) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Philippines | Allowed if reasonable | The Philippines has no non-compete statute. A post-employment restraint is enforceable only if it is reasonable — limited as to time, trade, and place, tied to a legitimate business interest, and not contrary to public policy — and suing on one is a civil case for the regular courts, not the labor tribunals. | Rivera v. Solidbank Corp., G.R. No. 163269 (2006); Tiu v. Platinum Plans Phil., Inc., G.R. No. 163512 (2007) | No statutory industry carve-outs. Independent-contractor restraints are treated as ordinary civil/commercial contracts rather than labor matters (Consulta v. CA, G.R. No. 145443). A forfeiture clause can bite for competition during employment (Century Properties v. Babiano, G.R. No. 220978). | — | Unsettled | Yes | Not addressed | No statutory limit; one- and two-year restraints have been upheld when otherwise reasonable | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Puerto Rico | Allowed if reasonable | Puerto Rico has no non-compete statute; a covenant is enforceable only if it satisfies the strict three-part Arthur Young reasonableness test — capped at twelve months, supported by real consideration, and in writing — and courts void rather than rewrite any covenant that falls short. | Arthur Young & Co. v. Vega III, 136 D.P.R. 157 (1994) | Covenants ancillary to a sale of business / ownership exit (e.g. stock-redemption) judged more flexibly than the strict Arthur Young employer-employee test (Reyes Ramis) | — | No | Unclear | Silent — risky if it pushes enforcement past the 12-month ceiling | 12 months (additional time excessive and unnecessary) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Rhode Island | Allowed above a pay level | Rhode Island applies common-law reasonableness to most workers but bans non-competes for low-wage and several other worker categories (FLSA-nonexempt, student interns, age 18 or younger) and for physicians and APRNs. | R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-59-3 (Rhode Island Noncompetition Agreement Act) | Worker-category bans (low-wage, FLSA-nonexempt, interns, ≤18); physician (§ 5-37-33) and APRN (§ 5-34-50) bans with a 5-year sale-of-practice exception; non-solicits/NDAs/sale excluded from definition | Physician/APRN bans eff. June 17, 2024 (worker-category ban date not stated in note) | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | No | Not addressed | No general statutory length limit; physician/APRN sale-of-practice exception capped at 5 years | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Singapore | Allowed if reasonable | Singapore has no non-compete statute; a post-employment restraint is presumptively void and binds a former employee only if the employer proves a legitimate proprietary interest and shows the clause is reasonable between the parties and in the public interest. | Man Financial (S) Pte Ltd v Wong Bark Chuan David [2007] SGCA 53 | No statutory industry carve-outs; sale-of-business covenants are judged more leniently (CLAAS Medical Centre [2010] SGCA 3). The confidentiality over-and-above trap (Stratech [2005] SGCA 17) often defeats employment non-competes. | — | Only strikes wording | Unclear | Not addressed | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| South Carolina | Allowed if reasonable | South Carolina has no non-compete statute and enforces a covenant only if it meets all five common-law reasonableness factors, strictly construes it against the employer, and will not blue-pencil or reform an overbroad covenant. | Team IA, Inc. v. Lucas, 717 S.E.2d 103 (S.C. Ct. App. 2011) (five-factor test from Standard Register Co. v. Kerrigan) | Sale-of-business reviewed more leniently (Palmetto Mortuary); pending H.4767 physician-ban bill not enacted | — | No | Unclear | Points against it — extending past stated end date is against public policy (Stonhard) | No statutory cap | Jun 3, 2026 |
| South Dakota | Allowed if reasonable | South Dakota voids restraints on a lawful profession, trade, or business unless they fit a narrowly construed statutory exception, and SDCL 53-9-11 permits an employee non-compete only within its two-year, geographic, existing-customer, and like-business limits. | S.D. Codified Laws §§ 53-9-8 and 53-9-11 | Sale-of-goodwill (§ 53-9-9); partnership dissolution (§ 53-9-10); captive insurance agent contractors (§ 53-9-12); healthcare practitioner restrictions voidable for contracts on/after July 1, 2023 | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | No | Not addressed by statute | Two years or less for employee covenants (SDCL 53-9-11) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Tennessee | Allowed if reasonable | Tennessee enforces a non-compete that is reasonable and protects a legitimate business interest; a 2026 statute effective July 1, 2026 will void covenants against employees earning under $70,000 and add rebuttable time-reasonableness presumptions. | common law (Hasty v. Rent-A-Driver, Inc., 671 S.W.2d 471 (Tenn. 1984)); Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 50-1-210, 50-1-211 (2026 Tenn. Pub. Acts, ch. 934, eff. July 1, 2026) | Coming July 1, 2026 — $70,000 pay-threshold ban; health-care-provider safe harbor (§ 63-1-148; emergency-medicine physicians excluded, covenants void under Udom); sale-of-business longer presumption; non-solicits/NDAs preserved | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | Open question — 2026 statute silent | Rebuttable presumptions: 2 yrs employee/contractor; 3 yrs distributor; 5 yrs+ seller; health-care safe harbor 2 yrs | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Texas | Allowed if reasonable | Texas enforces non-competes that are ancillary to an otherwise enforceable agreement and reasonable in time, geography, and scope, with overbroad covenants reformed rather than voided. | Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 15.50 (Covenants Not to Compete Act) | Physician buyout/1-yr limits & good-cause rule (§ 15.50(b),(d)); dentist/nurse/PA buyout limits (§ 15.501) | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Unsettled — any extension must satisfy § 15.50(a) reasonableness | No statutory limit (1 year for covered physicians/health-care) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | Allowed if reasonable | The U.S. Virgin Islands enforces a non-compete only if it is reasonable in duration, area, and scope under a single trial-court decision, and aggressive restraints are hard to enforce in a small-island, non-at-will economy. | Arvidson v. Buchar, 2019 VI SUPER 122 (Super. Ct. V.I. 2019) (common law via 1 V.I.C. § 4) | — | — | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Unclear | Silent — no statute or case addresses tolling | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Utah | Allowed if reasonable | Utah enforces employee non-competes only if they satisfy both the common-law Rose Park reasonableness test and a hard one-year statutory cap, and it bans healthcare and veterinarian non-competes entered on or after May 6, 2026. | Utah Code § 34-51-201 (Post-Employment Restrictions Act) | Health-care worker & veterinarian bans (5% owner carve-out) from May 6, 2026; sale-of-business; reasonable severance; narrow broadcasting exception | — | No | — | No safe extension — one-year cap runs from separation; equitable tolling within the cap open | 1 year (a longer covenant is void) | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Vermont | Allowed if reasonable | Vermont has no general non-compete statute and enforces covenants under a common-law reasonableness test, though a 2025-2026 legislative overhaul (H.205, H.583) could sharply curtail them if enacted. | common law (Vt. Elec. Supply Co. v. Andrus, 132 Vt. 195 (1974); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 188) | Barber/cosmetology training covenants void (26 V.S.A. § 281(c)); attorneys (R. Prof. Conduct 5.6); sale-of-business more leeway; pending H.583 health-care ban not in force | — | Unsettled | Unclear | No equitable rewriting of the time term (Roy's Orthopedic) | No statutory limit | Jun 1, 2026 |
| Virginia | Allowed above a pay level | Virginia bans non-competes outright for statutory low-wage and FLSA non-exempt employees, while higher-paid workers remain subject to a strict common-law reasonableness test with no judicial blue-penciling. | Va. Code § 40.1-28.7:8; common law (Omniplex World Servs. Corp. v. U.S. Investigations Servs., 270 Va. 246 (2005)) | Low-wage/FLSA-non-exempt ban (commission/incentive-earner exclusion); health-care-professional ban and severance-or-disclosed-comp rule eff. July 1, 2026; NDAs/trade-secret preserved | Low-wage ban eff. July 1, 2020 (FLSA-non-exempt July 1, 2025; 2026 threshold under $1,507.01/week); health-care ban July 1, 2026 | No | Yes | Not resolved — strict construction makes an extension clause an overbreadth risk | No statutory limit | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Washington | Allowed above a pay level | Employee non-competes are void unless earnings exceed an inflation-adjusted threshold ($126,858.83 in 2026); a near-total ban takes effect June 30, 2027. | RCW ch. 49.62 (ESHB 1155 ban from 2027) | Confidentiality, trade-secret, qualifying sale-of-business and franchise covenants; narrow non-solicits | Near-total ban effective June 30, 2027 (ESHB 1155) | Yes — rewrites to reasonable | Yes | Not addressed by statute | 18 months (longer presumed unreasonable) | Jun 3, 2026 |
| West Virginia | Allowed if reasonable | West Virginia enforces employee non-competes under the common-law Reddy reasonableness test, but a facially unreasonable covenant is void with no judicial narrowing, and a physician statute caps medical covenants at one year and thirty miles. | common law (Reddy v. Cmty. Health Found. of Man, 171 W. Va. 368 (1982)) | Physician covenants capped at one year/30 road miles and void on employer termination (W. Va. Code § 47-11E); sale-of-business lesser scrutiny; non-piracy clauses less restrictive | — | No | Unclear | Open question | No general statutory limit; physician covenants capped at 1 year | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Wisconsin | Allowed if reasonable | Wisconsin enforces employee non-competes only if they are reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest under a demanding five-factor test, and an overbroad covenant is voided in full because courts will not blue-pencil it. | Wis. Stat. § 103.465 | Sale-of-business/equity covenants judged under common-law rule of reason; lawyers barred (SCR 20:5.6) | — | No | Unclear | No — an extension-during-breach clause voids the entire covenant (H&R Block v. Swenson) | No statutory limit | Jun 3, 2026 |
| Wyoming | Banned | For contracts entered into on or after July 1, 2025, Wyoming voids most employee non-competes that restrict the right to receive compensation for labor, allowing only four narrow statutory exceptions; pre-2025 covenants remain under demanding common law. | Wyo. Stat. § 1-23-108 (2025) (SF 107) | Four carve-outs: sale-of-business; trade-secret protection; tenure-capped relocation/education/training repayment; executive and management personnel. Separate physician-to-physician practice ban. | July 1, 2025 (prospective only; signed Mar 19, 2025) | No | Yes | Not addressed | No statutory limit | Apr 14, 2026 |
OpenAgreements publishes legal research, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Non-compete law changes; always confirm the current rule for your jurisdiction and consult a licensed attorney about your situation.