# US pay-question laws for private employers: legal reference

Status: current as of 10 November 2026. All URLs below were read on 10 November 2026 unless a different date is given (Wayback Machine snapshots carry their own date).

This is a research file for the match.dev article on what US engineering application forms ask about pay. It is not legal advice.

## How to read this file

- "Primary" means the statute or ordinance text on the legislature's or city's own site, the session law, or an official agency guidance page. Everything in the tables comes from primary sources unless the cell says otherwise.
- A date or fact marked **†** could only be confirmed in a secondary source. Each † is explained in the "Secondary only" section with the source named.
- "Expectations" column: the exact words of the statute or official guidance that expressly allow asking about salary expectations or desired pay. "silent" means the text read says nothing about it. Silence does not mean forbidden or allowed; it means the law does not say.
- Several official sites could not be read from here (Cloudflare challenges, 403s or connection timeouts): leginfo.legislature.ca.gov, malegislature.gov, ilga.gov, oregonlegislature.gov, rilegislature.gov and dlt.ri.gov, leg.state.nv.us (Nevada), pub.njleg.gov (New Jersey), data.capitol.hawaii.gov, and the commercial code publishers (amlegal, municode, ecode360). Where that happened, the agency's guidance was used instead, or the gap is marked.

## Table 1. Salary history bans that cover private employers

### 1a. Statewide (and DC)

| Jurisdiction | Citation | Effective | What is prohibited | Voluntary, unprompted disclosure | Expectations expressly allowed? (exact words) | Primary source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Ala. Code § 25-1-30(c) (Clarke-Figures Equal Pay Act, Act 2019-519) | Sept. 1, 2019 † | Does **not** bar asking. Bars refusing to "interview, hire, promote, or employ an applicant for employment, or retaliate against an applicant for employment because the applicant does not provide wage history." | Not addressed | silent | https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/code-of-alabama?section=25-1-30 (text read through the site's own data service) |
| California | Lab. Code § 432.3 | Jan. 1, 2018 †; pay-scale definition amended eff. Jan. 1, 2026 † | Relying on salary history to decide whether to hire or what to pay; seeking it "orally or in writing, personally or through an agent" (statute (a), (b)). Does not cover pay disclosable to the public under public-records laws (f). | Applicant may volunteer it; employer may then consider it in setting pay (statute (h), (i); DIR FAQ 67, 71). Prior salary cannot justify a sex, race or ethnicity pay gap. | **Yes.** DIR FAQ 67: "Likewise, nothing in the statute prohibits an employer from asking an applicant about their salary expectation" (for the position applied for). Statute (j), read on a mirror: "Nothing in this section shall prohibit an employer from asking an applicant about the applicant's salary expectation" | Labor Commissioner FAQ: https://dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm (page dated Aug. 24, 2026). Statute page leginfo blocked; statute text read on mirror https://california.public.law/codes/labor_code_section_432.3 (secondary) |
| Colorado | C.R.S. § 8-5-102(2) (SB 19-085) | Jan. 1, 2021 (Act § 9) | "SEEK THE WAGE RATE HISTORY OF A PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEE OR RELY ON THE WAGE RATE HISTORY ... TO DETERMINE A WAGE RATE"; retaliating for not disclosing it. CDLE: employers "must not ask an applicant, or require them to disclose, their wage history". | silent | silent | Signed act: https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2019a_085_signed.pdf ; CDLE INFO #9 (Apr. 8, 2026): https://cdle.colorado.gov/sites/cdle/files/info_%239_hiring_%26_screening_laws_summary_4.8.2026.pdf |
| Connecticut | Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-40z(b)(5) (P.A. 18-8; re-enacted by P.A. 26-12) | Jan. 1, 2019 (official history note) | "Inquire or direct a third party to inquire about a prospective employee's wage and salary history unless a prospective employee has voluntarily disclosed such information" | Inquiry allowed once the applicant has volunteered it (same clause). | silent on expectations. Related clause: may inquire "about other elements of a prospective employee's compensation structure, as long as such employer does not inquire about the value of the elements" | https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_557.htm ; P.A. 26-12: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2026/ACT/PA/PDF/2026PA-00012-R00HB-05003-PA.PDF |
| Delaware | 19 Del. C. § 709B (81 Del. Laws c. 41) | Dec. 14, 2017 † | Screening on compensation history, incl. minimum or maximum criteria; seeking it "from the applicant or a current or former employer" | Not addressed. May seek history "after an offer of employment with terms of compensation has been extended to the applicant and accepted", only to confirm (e). | **Yes.** (d): "Nothing in this section prohibits an employer or an employer's agent and an applicant from discussing and negotiating compensation expectations ..." (provided history is not requested) | https://delcode.delaware.gov/title19/c007/sc01/index.html |
| District of Columbia | D.C. Code § 32-1452(4)-(5) (D.C. Law 25-138) | D.C. Law 25-138 dated Mar. 5, 2024; applied from June 30, 2024 † | Screening on wage history, incl. "requesting or requiring as a condition of being interviewed or as a condition of continuing to be considered for an offer" that the applicant disclose it; seeking it from a prior employer. Excludes DC and federal government as employers. | silent | silent | https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/titles/32/chapters/14A/index.full.html ; AG advisory (July 23, 2025): https://oag.dc.gov/release/attorney-general-schwalb-issues-business-advisory |
| Hawaii | HRS § 378-2.4 (L 2018, c 108) | 2019 (DLIR FAQ: "Since 2019"); exact day Jan. 1, 2019 † | Inquiring about salary history; relying on it. "Inquire" includes communicating with the applicant or prior employer, and to "Conduct a search of publicly available records or reports". | Employer "may consider salary history ... and may verify" it. | **Yes.** (b): "without inquiring about salary history, may engage in discussions with an applicant for employment about the applicant's expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation" | https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol07_Ch0346-0398/HRS0378/HRS_0378-0002_0004.htm ; DLIR FAQ: https://labor.hawaii.gov/hcrc/files/2023/11/Act-203-Pay-Transparency-FAQs.pdf |
| Illinois | 820 ILCS 112/10 (Equal Pay Act; salary history added by P.A. 101-0177 †) | Sept. 29, 2019 † | IDOL: unlawful "to request or require a wage or salary history from a job applicant as a condition of" consideration; also from former employers in reference checks. Does not apply if the history is a matter of public record. | Applicant may volunteer, but IDOL says the employer "shall not consider or rely on the voluntary disclosures" in hiring or pay. | **Yes.** IDOL FAQ 10: "The employer can also engage in discussions with an applicant about the applicant's expectations with respect to wage or salary, benefits, and/or other compensation." | IDOL FAQ: https://labor.illinois.gov/faqs/equal-pay-act-salary-history-ban-faq.html (statute site ilga.gov unreachable) |
| Maine | 26 M.R.S. § 628-A (PL 2019, c. 35) | Sept. 2019 † | "may not use or inquire about the compensation history of a prospective employee" from the applicant or a current or former employer, until an offer "that includes all terms of compensation has been negotiated and made" | Not addressed. After the full offer, employer may inquire or confirm. | silent | https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec628-A.html |
| Maryland | Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 3-304.2(d) | Oct. 1, 2020 † | Relying on wage history in screening or setting pay; seeking it "orally, in writing, or through an employee or an agent or from a current or former employer"; retaliating for not providing it | After an initial offer with compensation, employer may rely on or confirm wage history "voluntarily provided" to support a higher offer (d)(2); (e) applicant may share voluntarily. | silent | https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gle&section=3-304.2&enactments=false |
| Massachusetts | G.L. c. 149, § 105A(c)(2) (St. 2016, c. 177) | July 1, 2018 † | Seeking wage or salary history "from the prospective employee or a current or former employer"; requiring that it "meet certain criteria". AG: employers may not ask applicants to volunteer it. Public sources: "MEPA does not prohibit employers from learning of an employee's wage or salary history through public sources." | May confirm history the applicant voluntarily disclosed; may seek it after an offer with compensation. | **Yes.** AG guidance: "Nothing in MEPA prohibits an employer from asking a prospective employee about his or her compensation needs or expectations." Warns against follow-ups like "what is that expectation or need based on". | AG guidance PDF: https://www.mass.gov/doc/ago-equal-pay-act-guidance-5-2-18/download (statute text quoted inside it; malegislature.gov unreachable) |
| Minnesota | Minn. Stat. § 363A.08, subd. 8 (2023 c 52 art 19) | Jan. 1, 2024 (session law) | May not "inquire into, consider, or require disclosure from any source the pay history of an applicant". Public-record exception, unless the employer sought the records to get pay history. | Volunteered "without asking, encouraging, or prompting" history may be used "to support a wage or salary higher than initially offered". | **Yes.** (e)(2): "inquiring about or otherwise engaging in discussions with an applicant about the applicant's expectations or requests with respect to wages, salary, benefits, or other compensation" | https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/363A.08 ; session law: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/2023/0/Session+Law/Chapter/52/ |
| Nevada | NRS 613.133 † (SB 293, 2021) † | Oct. 1, 2021 † | Secondary only: may not seek or rely on wage or salary history. | Not confirmed | Not confirmed (see secondary note) | leg.state.nv.us blocked (Cloudflare). **Primary not read.** |
| New Jersey | N.J.S.A. 10:5-12.12 (LAD); N.J.S.A. 34:6B-20 (P.L. 2019, c. 199) | Jan. 1, 2020 (official LAD compilation) | Confirmed: "to screen a job applicant based on the applicant's salary history" or to require it to "satisfy any minimum or maximum criteria" (10:5-12.12). The inquiry ban in 34:6B-20 is secondary only. | Not confirmed from primary | silent in 10:5-12.12; 34:6B-20 not read | NJ AG LAD compilation: https://njoag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/LAD-2024.pdf (pub.njleg.gov unreachable) |
| New York State | N.Y. Labor Law § 194-a | Jan. 6, 2020 † | Relying on salary history to decide whether to hire or what to pay; seeking it "from an applicant or current employee" as a condition of interview, offer or promotion; seeking it from a current or former employer | Applicant may "voluntarily, and without prompting" disclose or verify it (2). Employer may confirm only after an offer, if the applicant cites history to support a higher wage (3). | silent | https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/LAB/194-A |
| Oregon | ORS 659A.357; OAR 839-008 | Oct. 6, 2017 † | BOLI: employers may not ask for pay history before an offer; may confirm only after a conditional offer that includes compensation | BOLI: "an employer may not consider salary history even if an applicant voluntarily discloses it." | **Yes.** BOLI FAQ: "Asking a job applicant for their preferred salary is not prohibited under the law." | BOLI: https://www.oregon.gov/boli/workers/pages/equal-pay.aspx (statute site unreachable) |
| Rhode Island | R.I. Gen. Laws § 28-6-22 † | Jan. 1, 2023 † | Secondary only: may not seek or rely on wage history. | Not confirmed | Not confirmed (see secondary note) | rilegislature.gov and dlt.ri.gov blocked. **Primary not read.** |
| Vermont | 21 V.S.A. § 495m (2017, No. 126) | July 1, 2018 † | Inquiring about current or past compensation from the applicant or a current or former employer; requiring minimum or maximum criteria; deciding whether to interview based on it | If volunteered, employer may confirm it after an offer with compensation (b). | **Yes.** (c)(1): "inquiring about a prospective employee's salary expectations or requirements" | https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/21/005/00495m |
| Virginia (new) | Va. Code § 40.1-28.7:12 (2026 Acts cc. 996, 1063) | July 1, 2026 (DOLI) | "Seek the wage or salary history of a prospective employee"; relying on it for hiring or pay; retaliating for not providing it | Volunteered "without the employer's prompting" history may be used only to support a higher offer than the initial one (D). | silent | https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title40.1/chapter3/section40.1-28.7:12/ ; DOLI: https://doli.virginia.gov/2026/07/01/employment-law-updates-new-legislation-protecting-virginia-workers-applies-beginning-july-1-2026/ |
| Washington | RCW 49.58.100 (2019 c 345 § 2) | July 28, 2019 † | "Seek the wage or salary history of an applicant for employment from the applicant or a current or former employer"; requiring it to meet criteria. L&I: "Employers cannot ask about a job applicant's salary history in a job application, even if the question is optional." | May confirm if "the applicant has voluntarily disclosed" it, or after an offer with compensation. | silent | https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.100 ; L&I ES.E.1 (rev. Feb. 18, 2026): https://lni.wa.gov/workers-rights/_docs/ese1.pdf |

Not counted: Puerto Rico (Act 16-2017) is listed by HR Dive as covering private employers; its text was not read. Mississippi's Equal Pay Act (HB 770, 2022) is **not** a ban: it lists "The salary history ... demonstrated by the employee" as an allowed "factor other than sex" (https://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2022/html/HB/0700-0799/HB0770SG.htm).

### 1b. Local laws that cover private employers

The local rows rest on the enacted ordinances. The codified versions on amlegal, municode and ecode360 could not be read, so later renumbering is unverified.

| Jurisdiction | Citation | Effective | Size | What is prohibited | Voluntary disclosure | Expectations expressly allowed? (exact words) | Primary source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York City | Admin. Code § 8-107(25) (Local Law 67 of 2017) | Oct. 31, 2017 | Any size | Asking the applicant or prior employer; "to conduct a search of publicly available records or reports for the purpose of obtaining an applicant's salary history"; relying on it. CCHR: forms may not ask, even if marked voluntary. | Employer may consider and verify if volunteered "without prompting". | **Yes.** Law: "may, without inquiring about salary history, engage in discussion with the applicant about their expectations with respect to salary, benefits and other compensation". CCHR FAQ: "A job application can request information about applicants' compensation expectations or demands" | https://www.nyc.gov/assets/cchr/downloads/pdf/amendments/LocalLaw67.pdf ; https://www.nyc.gov/site/cchr/media/salary-history-frequently-asked-questions.page |
| San Francisco | Police Code Art. 33J (Ord. 142-17) | July 1, 2018 | Employers required to register to do business in SF | "An Employer shall not Inquire about an Applicant's Salary History."; considering or relying on it. Public-records searches: statute silent. | Employer may consider volunteered history (§ 3300J.4(f)). | **Yes.** § 3300J.4(g): "An Employer may, without inquiring about Salary History, engage in discussion with the Applicant about the Applicant's expectations with respect to Salary" | https://sanfrancisco.legistar1.com/sanfrancisco/attachments/113343.pdf ; notice: https://media.api.sf.gov/documents/Parity_in_Pay_Poster_November2025.pdf |
| Philadelphia | Phila. Code § 9-1131 (Bill 160840); Amended Reg. No. 7 | Enforced from Sept. 1, 2020, after the Third Circuit upheld it (949 F.3d 116, 2020) | 1+ employees, positions in Philadelphia | Asking "in writing or otherwise"; conditioning on it; relying on it. Reg 7.4(a): forms may not ask even if optional. Public records: not prohibited. | Reliance allowed if the applicant "knowingly and willingly disclosed" it. | **Yes.** Reg 7.4(b): "An Employer may ask a Prospective Employee other questions relevant to the setting of a future salary, such as questions about: the applicant's salary requirements or expectations" | https://www.phila.gov/media/20210423162145/Wage-equity-ordinance-bill-160840.pdf ; https://www.phila.gov/media/20210423162134/Wage-equity-ordinance-amended-regulation-7.pdf |
| Kansas City, MO | Code § 38-102 (Ord. 190380) | Oct. 31, 2019 | 6+ employees (private only) | Asking, incl. "to conduct a search of publicly available records or reports"; screening; relying; retaliating | "A voluntary and unprompted disclosure" is excepted. | **Yes.** "may, without inquiring about salary history, engage in discussion with the applicant about the expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation" | https://kansascity.legistar1.com/kansascity/attachments/b151c384-396f-4f2f-aed6-f989a4344112.pdf |
| Cincinnati | Code ch. 804 (Ord. 83-2019) | 365 days after becoming law (March 2020 †) | 15+ in the city | Asking (incl. public records), screening, relying, retaliating | Excepted | **Yes.** § 804-03(b): "may, without inquiring about salary history, engage in discussion with the applicant about their expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation" | https://cincinnatioh.legistar1.com/cincinnatioh/attachments/5d8b9764-faf5-4787-a5ca-efafd137ca72.pdf |
| Toledo | Mun. Code ch. 768 (O-173-19) | 365 days after becoming law (June 2020 †) | 15+ in the city | Asking (incl. public records), screening, relying, retaliating | Excepted | **Yes.** § 768.02(b): "may, without inquiring about Salary History, engage in discussions with the Applicant about their expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation" | Legistar matter text (introduced version): webapi.legistar.com/v1/toledo/matters/32769/texts/18664 |
| Columbus, OH | City Code ch. 2335 (Ord. 0709-2023) | March 1, 2024 | 15+ in Columbus | Asking (incl. public records), screening, relying "solely", retaliating | Excepted | **Yes.** § 2335.03(B): "may, without inquiring about salary history, engage in discussion with the applicant about their expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation" | webapi.legistar.com/v1/columbus/matters/125830 |
| Cleveland | Codified Ord. ch. 669 (Ord. 104-2025) | ~Oct. 27, 2025 (180 days after Apr. 30, 2025) | 15+ in Cleveland | Asking (any "direct or indirect statement, question, prompting", incl. public records), screening, relying solely, retaliating | Excepted | **Yes.** § 669.02(b): "may, without inquiring about Salary History, engage in discussions with the Applicant about their expectations with respect to Salary" | City Record May 9, 2025: https://www.clevelandcitycouncil.gov/sites/default/files/2025-05/City%20Record%205-9-25.pdf |
| Westchester County, NY | Laws of Westchester § 700.03(a)(9) (LL 2018-1; restated by LL 2023-107) | 90 days after April 2018 adoption | Since 2023: "all employers except for the County itself" | Relying on wage history; requiring disclosure as a condition of interview or offer; seeking it from prior employers. A plain voluntary question is not expressly banned. Public records: silent. | May rely on volunteered history "to support a wage higher than the wage offered" | silent | https://westchestercountyny.legistar1.com/westchestercountyny/attachments/9753e3ac-554f-4e4e-ab1b-acc116787bcf.pdf |
| Albany County, NY | Local Law P of 2016 (adopted Oct. 10, 2017) | 30 days after filing (Dec. 17, 2017 †) | Not stated in text (4+ †) | Screening on it; requiring it "as a condition of being interviewed, or as a condition of continuing to be considered"; seeking it from prior employers before an offer | silent | silent | Wayback snapshot of 2018-04-30: http://web.archive.org/web/20180430194839/http://albanycounty.com:80/Libraries/County_Executive/20171030-PH-16-LL_P.sflb.ashx |
| Suffolk County, NY | Code § 528-7 † | June 30, 2019 † | 4+ (agency page) | Agency page: bars "inquiring about or relying on a job applicant's compensation history ... at any stage during the hiring process" | Not confirmed | Not confirmed | Agency description only: https://hrc.suffolkcountyny.gov/About (statute text blocked) |
| Lehigh County, PA | Ord. 2024-106 | June 1, 2024 or 30 days after enactment, whichever later | 1+ | "An employer may not ask a job applicant what their salary is or was from any current or previous employment." | silent | silent | https://allentownpa.legistar1.com/allentownpa/attachments/e59caed3-fe24-4d3e-8faf-fb062ad52dcc.pdf |
| Allentown, PA (new) | Ord. 16140 (City Code ch. 27) | Signed June 9, 2025 | 1+ | Same sentence as Lehigh County | silent | silent | https://allentownpa.legistar1.com/allentownpa/attachments/39e3eb24-cc7c-4d8f-a0ac-e6d5c4da3d99.pdf |

**Confirmed to cover only the local government, not private employers:** Montgomery County, MD (Bill 4-19, Code § 33-25: applies to County merit-system applicants); Louisville, KY (O-071-18: "Louisville Metro shall not..."); Columbia, SC (Ord. 2019-098: "Employer means the City of Columbia"). Sources: https://montgomerycountymd.gov/council/Resources/Files/agenda/col/2019/20190305/20190305_4A.pdf ; webapi.legistar.com/v1/louisville/matters/45886 ; https://citycouncil.columbiasc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Ordinance_2019_098_Amending_Chapter_2_Article_VII_Sec.2-352_Definitions_Employer.pdf . The same applies to Atlanta, Chicago, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City, St. Louis and others on HR Dive's list; those were not re-checked.

### 1c. States that bar or may bar local salary history rules (preemption)

| State | Citation | Effective | Clause | Primary source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wisconsin | Wis. Stat. § 103.36 (2017 Wis. Act 327) | Apr. 18, 2018 (inferred from publication date) | "No city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance prohibiting an employer from soliciting information regarding the salary history of prospective employees." The act also says: "An employer may solicit information regarding the salary history of prospective employees." | https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2017/related/acts/327 (Wayback copy of Mar. 16, 2026) |
| Michigan | MCL 123.1384 (2015 PA 105; am. 2018 PA 84) | Amendment June 24, 2018 | Localities may not regulate "information an employer or potential employer must request, require, or exclude on an application for employment or during the interview process" | https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-123-1384 (Wayback copy of June 22, 2025) |
| Iowa | Iowa Code § 364.3(12)(a), § 331.304(12)(a) | Mar. 30, 2017 | Bars local rules on "hiring practices"; whether that reaches salary history is an inference | https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/364.3.pdf |
| Texas | Tex. Labor Code § 1.005 (HB 2127, 2023) | Sept. 1, 2023 | Occupied field "includes employment leave, hiring practices, breaks, employment benefits, scheduling practices, and any other terms of employment" | https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB02127F.htm |
| Tennessee | Tenn. Code § 7-51-1802(d) (2016 Pub. Ch. 606) and (g) (2026 Pub. Ch. 552, new) | 2016; Mar. 2026 | (d): may not, as a condition of doing business or contracting, "prohibit an employer from requesting any information on an application for employment". (g), 2026: "The general assembly preempts and occupies the entire field of regulating the terms and conditions of employment." | https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/acts/109/pub/pc0606.pdf ; https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/acts/114/pub/pc0552.pdf |
| Mississippi | 2014 Miss. Laws ch. 340 (SB 2689) | July 1, 2014 | Bars local rules that "interfere with an employers' ability to become fully informed about the background of an employee or potential employee"; untested for salary history | https://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2014/html/SB/2600-2699/SB2689SG.htm |
| North Carolina | G.S. § 95-25.1(d) | Amended by S.L. 2023-134 | Partial: preempts local rules "pertaining to compensation of employees", not hiring questions | https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_95/GS_95-25.1.html (Wayback copy of May 8, 2026) |

Only Wisconsin names salary history. Michigan reaches application and interview questions in general. The others reach it only through broad wording, and no court has applied them to a salary history ban.

## Table 2. Pay range in job postings, in force for private employers on 10 November 2026

| Jurisdiction | Citation | Effective | Employer size | Remote roles that could be filled from the state | Primary source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colorado | C.R.S. § 8-5-201(2) | Jan. 1, 2021 | 1+ employee in Colorado | **Yes.** CDLE: "Remote work performable in Colorado or elsewhere for a covered employer must comply", even if the posting says Coloradans won't be considered. Jobs performable only outside Colorado are excluded. | CDLE INFO #9 (2023): https://cdle.colorado.gov/sites/cdle/files/info_%239_the_equal_pay_for_equal_work_act_part_1_%26_part_2_07.2023.pdf ; INFO #9A: https://cdle.colorado.gov/sites/cdle/files/info_%239a_transparency_in_pay_and_job_opportunities_the_colorado_epewa_part_2_05.29.2024.pdf |
| Washington | RCW 49.58.110 (2022 c 242; am. 2025 c 383) | Jan. 1, 2023; amendment July 27, 2025 | 15+ (counts out-of-state staff if 1+ is Washington-based) | **Yes.** L&I ES.E.2: required "on postings for remote work that could be performed by a Washington-based employee"; cannot be avoided by saying Washington applicants won't be accepted. | https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110 ; ES.E.2 (Dec. 3, 2025): https://lni.wa.gov/workers-rights/_docs/ES.E.2.pdf |
| California | Lab. Code § 432.3(c)(3) | Jan. 1, 2023 † | 15+ (at least one in California) | **Yes.** Labor Commissioner: applies if the position "may ever be filled in California, either in-person or remotely." | https://dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm |
| New York City | Admin. Code § 8-107(32) (LL 32 and 59 of 2022) | Nov. 1, 2022 | 4+ (only one needs to work in NYC) | **Yes.** CCHR: positions performed "in whole or in part, in New York City, whether from an office, in the field, or remotely from the employee's home." | https://www.nyc.gov/assets/cchr/downloads/pdf/publications/Salary-Transparency-Factsheet.pdf ; https://intro.nyc/local-laws/2022-59 |
| New York State | Labor Law § 194-b | Sept. 17, 2023 (DOL FAQ) | 4+ | **Partly.** Covers jobs performed at least in part in NY, and jobs outside NY that report "to a supervisor, office, or other work site in New York". A remote role with no NY supervisor or office is not covered. | https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/LAB/194-B ; https://dol.ny.gov/pay-transparency-act-frequently-asked-questions |
| Jersey City, NJ | Mun. Code § 148-4.1 (Ord. 22-026, am. 22-045) | 2022 | 5+ per city page (22-045, not read) | silent in 22-026 | https://jerseycitynj.gov/residentresources/Inclusion/paytransparency |
| Ithaca, NY | City Code § 215-3(F) (Ord. 2022-03) | Sept. 1, 2022 | 4+ whose standard work location is in the city | Only where "the standard work location will be in the City of Ithaca" | https://cityofithaca.org/FAQ.aspx?QID=262 |
| Westchester County, NY | Laws of Westchester § 700.03 (LL 2022-119; restated by LL 2023-107) | 180 days after May 9, 2022 (Nov. 6, 2022 †) | All employers except the County (since 2023) | **Yes.** "whether from an office, in the field, or remotely from the employee's home" | https://westchestercountyny.legistar1.com/westchestercountyny/attachments/9753e3ac-554f-4e4e-ab1b-acc116787bcf.pdf |
| Hawaii | New section of HRS ch. 378 added by Act 203 (SLH 2023); codified section number not confirmed | Jan. 1, 2024 | 50+ (DLIR: "The law does not specify the location of the fifty or more employees.") | silent | DLIR FAQ: https://labor.hawaii.gov/hcrc/files/2023/11/Act-203-Pay-Transparency-FAQs.pdf ; https://labor.hawaii.gov/hcrc/files/2023/11/Act-203-Pay-Transparency-Equal-Pay.pdf |
| District of Columbia | D.C. Code § 32-1453.01 (D.C. Law 25-138) | June 30, 2024 † | 1+ employee in DC | silent in statute. AG: covers all postings seeking employees in DC "regardless of how or where the employer creates and shares that job posting." | https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/titles/32/chapters/14A/index.full.html ; https://oag.dc.gov/release/attorney-general-schwalb-issues-business-advisory |
| Maryland | Lab. & Empl. § 3-304.2(a) | Oct. 1, 2024 † | No minimum in the definition read | **Partly.** Applies "only with respect to a position for work that will be physically performed, at least in part, in the State." | https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gle&section=3-304.2&enactments=false |
| Illinois | 820 ILCS 112/10(b-25) (P.A. 103-0539) | Jan. 1, 2025 (IDOL) | 15+ (employees anywhere count) | **Yes, if foreseeable.** IDOL: only if the employer could "reasonably foresee" the work would be done "at least in part, in Illinois, or would report to a supervisor, office, or other work site in Illinois." | https://labor.illinois.gov/faqs/equal-pay-act-salary-transparency-faq.html |
| Minnesota | Minn. Stat. § 181.173 (2024 c 110 art 7 s 2) | Jan. 1, 2025 (session law) | 30+ "at one or more sites in Minnesota" | silent | https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/181.173 ; https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/2024/0/Session+Law/Chapter/110/ |
| New Jersey | N.J.S.A. 34:6B-23 (P.L. 2024, c. 91) | June 1, 2025 (NJDOL) | 10+ over 20 calendar weeks, and does business, employs or takes applications in NJ | **Yes, per proposed rules (non-binding).** NJDOL lists as covered "A business based outside of NJ that takes job applications from NJ residents, where the job would allow the applicant to perform work remotely from NJ." Rules N.J.A.C. 12:74 not yet adopted. | https://www.nj.gov/labor/myworkrights/wages/pay-transparency/ |
| Vermont | 21 V.S.A. § 495p (2023, No. 155) | July 1, 2025 | 5+ | **Partly.** Covers a remote position "that will predominantly perform work for an office or work location that is physically located in Vermont." | https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/21/005/00495p |
| Massachusetts | G.L. c. 149, § 105F (St. 2024, Wage Transparency Act) | Oct. 29, 2025 | 25+ with primary place of work in MA | **Partly.** AG: covers positions "where the primary place of work is Massachusetts", including "positions that can be performed remotely to a Massachusetts worksite". | https://www.mass.gov/info-details/pay-transparency-in-massachusetts |
| Cleveland | Codified Ord. § 669.02(c) (Ord. 104-2025) | ~Oct. 27, 2025 | 15+ in Cleveland | Only for work "to be performed within the geographic boundaries of the City of Cleveland"; nothing specific on remote | https://www.clevelandcitycouncil.gov/sites/default/files/2025-05/City%20Record%205-9-25.pdf |
| Virginia (new) | Va. Code § 40.1-28.7:12(B)(5) | July 1, 2026 | No threshold in the section | silent | https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title40.1/chapter3/section40.1-28.7:12/ ; https://doli.virginia.gov/2026/07/01/employment-law-updates-new-legislation-protecting-virginia-workers-applies-beginning-july-1-2026/ |
| Maine (new) | 26 M.R.S. § 622-A (PL 2025, c. 771) | July 29, 2026 † | 10+ | silent | https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec622-A.html |
| Connecticut (new posting rule) | Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-40z(b)(10), (f) (P.A. 26-12, approved May 11, 2026) | Oct. 1, 2026 | 1+ | **Partly.** (f): applies to positions performed in CT, or performed outside CT but requiring the employee "to report directly to a supervisor, office or other worksite located within the state." | https://www.cga.ct.gov/2026/ACT/PA/PDF/2026PA-00012-R00HB-05003-PA.PDF |

**Adopted but not yet enforced, or not yet in force:**

- **Columbus, OH:** posting rule (Ord. 2898-2025, signed Nov. 4, 2025), § 2335.03(C): "shall not be enforced until January 1, 2027." Source: webapi.legistar.com/v1/columbus/matters/135291
- **Delaware:** 19 Del. C. § 709C, "[Effective Sept. 26, 2027]" per the official code page. Source: https://delcode.delaware.gov/title19/c007/sc01/index.html

**Range only on request or at a later stage, not in postings (not counted):** Rhode Island (§ 28-6-22 †), Nevada (after an interview †), Cincinnati (§ 804-03(c), after a conditional offer, on request), Toledo (§ 768.02(c), same). Connecticut was in this group until Oct. 1, 2026.

## What changed in 2025-2026

- **California, Jan. 1, 2026:** "pay scale" now means "a good faith estimate of the salary or hourly wage range that an employer reasonably expects to pay" (Labor Commissioner FAQ 83). The bill is reported as SB 642 †.
- **Washington:** SSB 5408 (Ch. 383, Laws of 2025), effective July 27, 2025, gives employers five business days to fix a posting after written notice, through July 27, 2027. Statutory damages are now $100 to $5,000 per violation (https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/Senate/5408-S.SL.pdf).
- **Washington Supreme Court, Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits, No. 103394-0 (Sept. 4, 2025):** "a plaintiff must apply to a specific job posting but is not required to prove they are a 'bona fide' or 'good faith' applicant." (https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1033940.pdf)
- **Washington L&I:** new policy ES.E.2 on postings issued Dec. 3, 2025; ES.E.1 revised Feb. 18, 2026.
- **New Jersey:** pay range law in force June 1, 2025. Proposed rules N.J.A.C. 12:74 are still not adopted per NJDOL.
- **Vermont:** posting law in force July 1, 2025.
- **Massachusetts:** posting law in force Oct. 29, 2025. AG guidance revised Jan. 15, 2026. Cure period for postings runs until Oct. 29, 2027.
- **Cleveland:** salary history ban and posting rule from about Oct. 27, 2025.
- **Columbus:** posting rule adopted Nov. 2025, enforced from Jan. 1, 2027.
- **Allentown, PA:** own salary history ban, June 2025.
- **Delaware:** posting law enacted in 2025, effective Sept. 26, 2027.
- **Virginia:** salary history ban plus posting rule from July 1, 2026 (2026 Acts cc. 996, 1063). The Attorney General enforces it, and there is a private right of action. Posting violations get a 15-business-day cure period.
- **Maine:** posting law, PL 2025, c. 771, effective July 29, 2026 †.
- **Connecticut:** P.A. 26-12 (approved May 11, 2026) turned "on request" into a posting requirement from Oct. 1, 2026. It added benefits disclosure and an out-of-state clause, and dropped punitive damages.
- **Tennessee:** 2026 Pub. Ch. 552 adds a field preemption of local employment regulation.
- **Minnesota:** § 363A.08 history lists "2026 c 88 art 1 s 196". What that changed was not checked; it may be a technical revision.
- **New York City:** Int 0808-2024 (job-listing information) died at end of session.

## Secondary only (not confirmed from a primary source)

- **Effective dates marked †:** from HR Dive's running list (updated Apr. 28, 2026), https://www.hrdive.com/news/salary-history-ban-states-list/516662/
  - Alabama Sept. 1, 2019. Also Ogletree and Mercer; Bloomberg Law says Aug. 1.
  - California Jan. 1, 2018
  - Delaware Dec. 14, 2017
  - Hawaii Jan. 1, 2019
  - Illinois Sept. 29, 2019 (P.A. 101-0177)
  - Maine Sept. 2019 (HR Dive gives Sept. 17)
  - Maryland Oct. 1, 2020
  - Massachusetts July 1, 2018
  - Nevada Oct. 1, 2021
  - New York Jan. 6, 2020
  - Oregon Oct. 6, 2017
  - Rhode Island Jan. 1, 2023
  - Vermont July 1, 2018
  - Washington July 28, 2019
  - Albany County Dec. 17, 2017
  - Suffolk County June 30, 2019
  - Cincinnati and Toledo calendar dates
- **California:** posting duty since Jan. 1, 2023, and SB 642 as the 2026 bill. From law-firm summaries surfaced in search; the leginfo bill pages were blocked.
- **DC June 30, 2024 and Maryland posting Oct. 1, 2024:** law-firm alerts (Morgan Lewis, Crowell for DC). The DC AG page says only "In 2024".
- **Maine July 29, 2026:** Trusaic and Foley (https://www.foley.com/insights/publications/2026/05/trends-of-pay-transparency-laws-and-salary-history-bans-continue-to-grow-new-laws-enacted-in-virginia-maine-and-delaware/).
- **Nevada (NRS 613.133, SB 293 of 2021):** Fisher Phillips, Jackson Lewis and McDonald Carano summaries say:
  - employers may not seek or rely on wage or salary history;
  - after an interview they must give the wage or salary range;
  - "Public employers are allowed to ask an applicant for his or her salary expectation".
  - Not verified; the Nevada Legislature site blocks automated access.
- **Rhode Island (§ 28-6-22):** vendor and law-firm summaries (Teambridge, Sixfifty, Mondaq) say:
  - inquiry into wage history is banned from Jan. 1, 2023;
  - ranges go to applicants on request;
  - Teambridge says employers may ask about salary expectations.
  - Not verified.
- **New Jersey 34:6B-20:** law-firm alerts (Crowell, Littler, Proskauer) describe a ban on inquiring about salary history, with use and verification allowed if the applicant volunteers it. Not verified.
- **Columbus 2024 effective date for the salary history ban:** HR Dive lists March 1, 2024. A second research pass confirmed it from Legistar; that record was not read again for this file.
- **Northampton County, PA:** reported to have adopted a salary history ordinance on March 19, 2026 (news search only).
- **NYC Int 982-A/984-A:** pay-data reporting bills for employers with 200+ NYC staff, reported passed Oct. 9, 2025 (Littler). Enactment not verified.
- **Texas, State v. City of Houston, No. 03-23-00531-CV (Tex. App. July 18, 2025):** cities' challenge to HB 2127 reportedly dismissed for lack of standing (Texas Tribune, KUT; Littler reports a petition to the Texas Supreme Court in June 2026). Docket site returned 403.
- **Puerto Rico Law 16-2017:** listed by HR Dive as covering private employers. Text not read.

## Counts (as of 10 Nov. 2026)

- **Statewide laws that touch salary history for private employers:** 19 states plus DC.
  - **18 states bar asking about it.**
    - 15 are confirmed from primary text or official guidance: CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MN, NY, OR, VT, VA, WA.
    - 3 are confirmed only from secondary sources: NV, RI, and NJ's inquiry clause. NJ's ban on screening by salary history is confirmed.
  - Alabama is the 19th. It bars penalizing an applicant who declines to answer, not the question itself.
  - DC bans screening and requiring the answer as a condition of an interview.
- **Express permission to ask about expectations, confirmed from primary text or official guidance:**
  - States: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont.
  - Cities: New York City, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Kansas City MO, Cincinnati, Toledo, Columbus, Cleveland.
  - Silent: Colorado, Connecticut (it allows questions about the structure of pay, not its value), Maine, Maryland, New York State, Virginia, Washington, DC, Westchester, Albany County, Lehigh County, Allentown.
- **Pay range in postings, in force and enforceable on 10 Nov. 2026:** 20 jurisdictions.
  - 14 states: CO, WA, CA, NY, HI, MD, IL, MN, NJ, VT, MA, VA, ME, CT.
  - DC.
  - 5 local: New York City, Jersey City, Ithaca, Westchester County, Cleveland.
  - Columbus has adopted a posting rule but does not enforce it until Jan. 1, 2027. Delaware's starts Sept. 26, 2027.

## How to phrase this in the article

Safe to say:

- "At least 18 states bar employers from asking job applicants about their pay history, and so do New York City, San Francisco, Philadelphia and several Ohio cities." Say "at least" because three of the 18 rest on secondary sources here.
- "In some places the law explicitly lets employers ask what you expect to earn instead. California, Massachusetts, Illinois, Oregon and New York City say so in the statute or the official guidance."
- "Several regulators say a past-pay question on an application form is not allowed even if it is marked optional." Washington L&I, the NYC Commission on Human Rights and Philadelphia's regulation each say this in so many words.
- "As of November 2026, 14 states and DC require a pay range in job postings, plus New York City and a few other cities and counties."
- "Colorado, California and Washington apply their posting rules to remote jobs that someone in the state could fill." New York, Connecticut and Illinois reach remote jobs mainly when the job reports to a supervisor or office in the state.
- "Some states go the other way: Wisconsin's law says employers may ask about salary history and forbids cities from banning it."

Not safe:

- **Calling a specific company's form "illegal" or "in violation".** Whether a law applies depends on:
  - the employer's size (posting thresholds run from 1 employee to 50);
  - where the job is performed or reports to;
  - whether the employer does business in the state;
  - exemptions such as internal transfers, public-record pay, or federal laws that require verification.
  - The data shows what a form asks, not whether the employer is covered. Write "a question that X state's law bars covered employers from asking" at most.
- **"It is illegal to ask about salary history in N states" without "for most private employers" or similar.** Alabama does not ban the question, DC bans it only as a condition of interview or consideration, and some local laws cover only employers with 6 or 15+ employees.
- **"Asking about expected salary is legal everywhere."** Most laws are silent. Massachusetts and California warn that an expectations question must not be a disguised history question, and Massachusetts names follow-ups like "what is that expectation based on".
- **"Volunteered salary history can be used."** Illinois and Oregon say the employer may not rely on it even when volunteered. Most other states allow some use, often only to support a higher offer.
- **Any count of states without a date.** These numbers change every few months: Virginia, Maine and Connecticut all started in the second half of 2026.
- **Treating local laws as in force where a state may preempt them, or treating Columbus postings as enforceable before Jan. 1, 2027.**