Free Non-Compete Agreement Templates by State (PDF & Word)
State-specific non-compete templates. Enforceable in TX, FL, NY, IL — VOID in California (alternatives provided). Free PDF + Word.
What this hub covers
A non-compete agreement is a contract restricting an employee’s ability to work for a competitor or start a competing business after termination. Non-compete enforceability varies dramatically by state — from California’s outright ban (B&P §16600) to states that enforce reasonable restraints supported by adequate consideration.
Why state-specific matters
State-specific templates are essential because (1) California voids non-competes entirely (we provide the legal alternatives), (2) Illinois voids non-competes for employees under $75K, (3) Texas, Florida, and New York enforce reasonable restraints, and (4) the specific consideration, blue-pencil, and severability provisions that courts look for differ by state. Use the template matched to the employee’s work location.
Choose Your State
California
VOID under B&P §16600. NDA + non-solicit alternatives included.
View template →Texas
BCC §15.50 compliant. Enforceable with reasonable scope.
View template →Florida
F.S. §542.335 compliant. Legitimate business interest required.
View template →New York
Common law + 2023 ban proposal context.
View template →Illinois
Freedom to Work Act ($75K threshold).
View template →Don’t see your state?
Our generic template covers all 50 states. It can be customized to your jurisdiction.
View Generic TemplateWhere non-competes stand in each state (verified July 2026)
Last verified: July 2026 against state statutes and regulatory trackers. Laws change — before relying on any row below, confirm it with the official state source. How we source and update this data is described in our Editorial Policy.
Non-compete law is state law — the FTC’s 2024 federal ban was struck down in court, so the state rules below govern. Six states now void employee non-competes outright, a dozen more impose salary thresholds, and Florida moved in the opposite direction. The template on our non-compete page is drafted to the reasonableness standard, which is the strictest common denominator.
| State | Where it stands | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Reasonableness test (statute) | Ala. Code §8-1-190 framework: enforceable if it protects a legitimate business interest and is reasonable in scope. |
| Alaska | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts weigh duration, geography, and business need. |
| Arizona | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts enforce narrowly tailored agreements. |
| Arkansas | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Statutory reasonableness framework; recent legislation restricts non-competes for physicians. |
| California | Void / banned | Bus. & Prof. Code §16600; since 2024, void regardless of where or when signed, and attempting enforcement exposes the employer to liability. |
| Colorado | Income threshold | Void except for highly compensated workers ($130,014 in 2026, adjusted annually); $5,000 penalty per worker for violations. |
| Connecticut | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Common-law test; specific statutory limits for physicians and APRNs. |
| Delaware | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Courts apply a reasonableness test and scrutinize sale-of-practice terms for clinicians. |
| District of Columbia | Income threshold | Void below $150,000 (≈$162,000 as adjusted for 2026); $250,000+ threshold for medical specialists; 2-year cap when enforceable. |
| Florida | Expanded enforceability | Unusual direction: the 2025 CHOICE Act strengthens enforcement for high earners (above 2× county average wage) and permits terms up to 4 years. |
| Georgia | Reasonableness test (statute) | O.C.G.A. §13-8-50 et seq.: enforceable for defined employee categories if reasonable in time, territory, and scope. |
| Hawaii | Tech-industry ban | Void for employees of technology businesses; reasonableness test elsewhere. |
| Idaho | Reasonableness test (statute) | Statutory framework for ‘key employees’; 18-month presumption of reasonableness. |
| Illinois | Income threshold | Void under $75,000/year (rises to $80,000 on Jan 1, 2027) — 820 ILCS 90; notice and consideration requirements. |
| Indiana | Physician restrictions | Non-competes unenforceable for physicians under agreements entered on or after July 1, 2025; reasonableness test for others. |
| Iowa | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Common-law test; statutory limits for certain healthcare workers. |
| Kansas | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts enforce reasonable agreements. |
| Kentucky | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Common-law test; healthcare-practitioner restrictions. |
| Louisiana | Strict statutory limits | La. R.S. 23:921: void unless the agreement lists specific parishes/municipalities and lasts no more than 2 years; healthcare carve-outs. |
| Maine | Income threshold | Void at or below 400% of the federal poverty line; advance notice required; minimum $5,000 penalty. |
| Maryland | Income threshold | Void below 150% of the state minimum wage; healthcare providers earning up to $350,000 protected, others capped at 1 year / 10 miles; veterinary staff exempted entirely. |
| Massachusetts | Threshold + garden leave | MGL c.149 §24L: 12-month cap, garden-leave or other consideration required; banned outright for physicians, nurses, and psychologists. |
| Michigan | Reasonableness test (statute) | Statutory reasonableness standard (MCL 445.774a). |
| Minnesota | Void / banned | Minn. Stat. §181.988: void for employees and independent contractors (agreements after July 1, 2023); non-solicits and NDAs still allowed. |
| Mississippi | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts enforce reasonable agreements. |
| Missouri | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts enforce reasonable agreements protecting trade secrets or customer contacts. |
| Montana | Generally void | Mont. Code §28-2-703 voids contracts restraining a lawful profession, with narrow exceptions (sale of business, partnership dissolution). |
| Nebraska | Common-law (strict) | No statute; Nebraska courts refuse to rewrite overbroad agreements — an overreaching clause fails entirely. |
| Nevada | Threshold + statute | NRS 613.195: void for hourly-wage employees; courts must limit overbroad terms. |
| New Hampshire | Low-wage ban + notice | Void for low-wage employees; employers must disclose terms before the job offer is accepted; healthcare limits. |
| New Jersey | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts apply a three-part reasonableness test. |
| New Mexico | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Common-law test; statutory restrictions for healthcare practitioners. |
| New York | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute (a 2023 total ban passed the legislature but was vetoed); courts enforce narrowly. |
| North Carolina | Common-law + writing requirement | Must be in writing and signed; courts apply strict reasonableness and do not rewrite overbroad terms. |
| North Dakota | Void / banned | N.D.C.C. §9-08-06: void for employees, with narrow sale-of-business exceptions. |
| Ohio | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts may modify overbroad agreements. |
| Oklahoma | Void / banned | 15 Okla. Stat. §219A: employee non-competes void; direct customer solicitation may still be restricted. |
| Oregon | Income threshold | ORS 653.295: void below ≈$100,000 (adjusted); 18-month maximum; advance written notice required; stricter rules for medical licensees since 2025. |
| Pennsylvania | Reasonableness + healthcare limits | Common-law test; 2024 law limits non-competes for healthcare practitioners (1-year cap). |
| Rhode Island | Low-wage ban | Void for overtime-eligible employees and workers under 250% of the federal poverty level. |
| South Carolina | Common-law (strict) | No statute; courts construe against the employer and will not blue-pencil. |
| South Dakota | Statutory framework | Statute permits up to 2 years within a defined area; healthcare-practitioner exceptions. |
| Tennessee | Common-law + physician statute | Reasonableness test; specific statute caps physician non-competes (2 years / defined radius). |
| Texas | Statutory + healthcare limits | Bus. & Com. Code §15.50 framework; 2025 reform caps physician and other practitioner non-competes (1 year, limited radius, buyout clause) for agreements after Sept 1, 2025. |
| Utah | 1-year cap + industry rules | Post-2016 agreements capped at 1 year; special rules for broadcast employees and healthcare staffing platforms. |
| Vermont | Common-law reasonableness | No comprehensive statute; courts enforce narrowly. |
| Virginia | Low-wage ban (expanded) | Void for ‘low-wage’ employees; since July 1, 2025 the ban covers all FLSA overtime-eligible employees. |
| Washington | Threshold now; near-total ban 2027 | RCW 49.62: void below an inflation-adjusted salary threshold, 18-month presumption, layoff pay rule — and a near-total ban takes effect June 30, 2027. |
| West Virginia | Common-law + physician statute | Reasonableness test; statute limits physician non-competes (1 year / 30 miles). |
| Wisconsin | Strict statute | Wis. Stat. §103.465: an overbroad clause voids the entire restriction — no judicial rewriting. |
| Wyoming | Void / banned (new) | Non-competes signed on or after July 1, 2025 are void, with exceptions for executive/management personnel and sale of a business. |
How to verify: search your state legislature’s site for the statute cited above, or check your state attorney general’s employment guidance. If you operate in a ban or threshold state, consider a non-solicitation or confidentiality agreement instead — both remain enforceable in every state.
Non-Compete Agreement FAQs
What is a non-compete agreement?
A contract that restricts an employee from working for competitors or starting a competing business for a period after leaving a job.
Are non-compete agreements enforceable?
It depends heavily on the state. Some enforce reasonable ones; others, such as California, ban most non-competes outright.
What makes a non-compete reasonable?
A narrow scope, limited duration and geography, and a legitimate business interest. Overbroad agreements are often struck down.
Has non-compete law been changing?
Yes. The rules are shifting and several states have recently tightened or banned them. Confirm current law for your state.
Do non-compete laws vary by state?
More than almost any other employment document. Always confirm your state's current rules using the state cards above.