Is a text message considered a legal signature in the US?

Understanding Electronic Signatures in the US

In the digital age, businesses increasingly rely on quick and efficient methods to execute agreements, raising questions about the validity of informal communications like text messages as signatures. From a commercial perspective, clarifying the legal standing of such methods is crucial for risk management and operational efficiency.

The Legal Framework for Electronic Signatures in the United States

The United States has established a robust legal foundation for electronic signatures, primarily through two key federal and state-level laws: the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN Act) of 2000 and the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), adopted by 49 states (with variations in New York and Illinois). These laws aim to facilitate electronic commerce by giving electronic records and signatures the same legal effect as their paper-based counterparts, provided certain conditions are met.

Under ESIGN, an electronic signature is defined broadly as “any electronic sound, symbol, or process, attached to or logically associated with a contract or other record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.” This intentionality is the cornerstone—simply sending a text message may not suffice unless it demonstrates clear agreement to the terms of a contract. For instance, replying “yes” or “agreed” in a SMS exchange could potentially qualify if it shows intent to be bound, but courts evaluate this on a case-by-case basis, considering factors like context, prior relationships, and whether the message references a specific document.

UETA complements ESIGN at the state level, emphasizing that electronic signatures must be attributable to the signer and created with intent. However, neither law explicitly endorses text messages as standalone signatures. Case law, such as the 2016 New York ruling in Naldi v. Grunberg, has upheld SMS confirmations as evidence of agreement in real estate deals when tied to formal contracts, but isolated texts without attached documents or explicit consent often fall short. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general also scrutinize these practices to prevent fraud, requiring records to be tamper-proof and attributable.

From a business viewpoint, this framework promotes innovation while protecting against disputes. Companies must ensure compliance by using platforms that capture audit trails, timestamps, and verification methods—far beyond a simple text. Non-compliance risks voided contracts, litigation, and reputational damage, especially in high-stakes sectors like finance and real estate. Recent updates, including the 2023 FTC guidelines on digital authentication, underscore the need for stronger identity verification amid rising cyber threats.

In practice, while a text message can contribute to proving consent, it is rarely considered a complete legal signature on its own. Businesses are advised to pair SMS with secure eSignature tools to meet ESIGN/UETA standards, reducing ambiguity and enhancing enforceability.

Comparing eSignature platforms with DocuSign or Adobe Sign?

eSignGlobal delivers a more flexible and cost-effective eSignature solution with global compliance, transparent pricing, and faster onboarding.

👉 Start Free Trial

Key Players in the eSignature Market

As businesses navigate these legal nuances, selecting a reliable eSignature platform becomes essential. The market features established providers like DocuSign, Adobe Sign, and emerging alternatives such as eSignGlobal and HelloSign (now part of Dropbox). Each offers tools to ensure compliance with US laws, but they differ in features, pricing, and regional focus. Below, we explore these options from a neutral, comparative lens.

DocuSign: The Industry Standard

DocuSign remains a dominant force in electronic signatures, powering millions of agreements annually with its cloud-based platform. It fully complies with ESIGN and UETA, providing features like audit trails, encryption, and mobile signing. Plans range from Personal ($10/month) for basic needs to Enterprise (custom pricing) for advanced automation and API integrations. Strengths include seamless integrations with CRM systems like Salesforce and robust bulk sending capabilities. However, its per-seat pricing can escalate for larger teams, and add-ons like identity verification incur extra costs.

Adobe Sign: Integrated Document Workflow

Adobe Sign, part of Adobe Document Cloud, excels in environments already using Adobe tools like Acrobat. It supports ESIGN/UETA compliance through secure signing workflows, conditional fields, and payment collection. Pricing starts at around $10/user/month for individuals, scaling to enterprise levels with SSO and advanced reporting. Its strength lies in PDF-centric features and integrations with Microsoft Office, making it ideal for document-heavy businesses. Drawbacks include higher costs for premium features and occasional complexity in setup for non-Adobe users.

eSignGlobal: A Global Contender with APAC Edge

eSignGlobal positions itself as a versatile eSignature provider, compliant in over 100 mainstream countries worldwide, including full support for US ESIGN/UETA standards. It stands out in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, where electronic signature regulations are fragmented, high-standard, and strictly regulated—often requiring “ecosystem-integrated” approaches like deep hardware/API integrations with government digital identities (G2B). Unlike the more framework-based ESIGN/eIDAS models in the US and Europe, which rely on email verification or self-declaration, APAC demands rigorous local adaptations, such as seamless ties to national systems. eSignGlobal addresses this with localized data centers in Hong Kong and Singapore, offering advantages in speed and compliance for cross-border operations.

The platform’s Essential plan is priced at $299/year (about $16.6/month equivalent when annualized), allowing up to 100 documents for signature, unlimited user seats, and verification via access codes—all on a no-seat-fee model that enhances cost-efficiency for scaling teams. It integrates natively with Hong Kong’s iAM Smart and Singapore’s Singpass for identity verification, while providing AI-driven tools like contract summarization and bulk sending. This makes it a strong option for businesses expanding into regulated APAC markets without compromising global usability.

Looking for a smarter alternative to DocuSign?

eSignGlobal delivers a more flexible and cost-effective eSignature solution with global compliance, transparent pricing, and faster onboarding.

👉 Start Free Trial

HelloSign (Dropbox Sign): User-Friendly Simplicity

HelloSign, rebranded as Dropbox Sign, focuses on ease of use with drag-and-drop interfaces and templates. It adheres to US eSignature laws, offering secure sharing via Dropbox integration. Pricing begins at $15/month for teams, with unlimited envelopes in higher tiers. It’s praised for quick onboarding and mobile compatibility but may lack advanced automation compared to larger rivals, suiting small to mid-sized businesses.

Comparative Overview of eSignature Platforms

To aid decision-making, here’s a neutral comparison based on key commercial factors like pricing, compliance, and features (data drawn from official 2025 sources; prices approximate annual USD for standard plans):

This table highlights trade-offs: DocuSign and Adobe Sign lead in maturity, while eSignGlobal offers value for unlimited scaling, and HelloSign prioritizes accessibility.

Business Implications and Best Practices

Adopting eSignatures streamlines operations, cutting costs by up to 80% compared to paper processes, per industry reports. However, businesses must audit platforms for legal alignment—text messages alone won’t cut it; integrate them with verified tools to mitigate risks.

In conclusion, while text messages can support but not fully embody legal signatures under US law, robust platforms ensure compliance. For DocuSign users seeking alternatives, eSignGlobal emerges as a neutral, regionally compliant choice, particularly for APAC-focused operations balancing global needs with cost efficiency. Evaluate based on your scale and geography for optimal fit.