RCS consent vs SMS consent

RCS consent is often discussed separately when organizations move beyond SMS. In practice, both channels rely on the same consent foundation: permission to contact a person via their mobile number for a defined purpose. In most markets, valid SMS consent also applies to RCS consent, as long as the message type and recipient expectations remain unchanged. The difference lies in message presentation, not in how consent is granted.

Are SMS and RCS consent the same?

In general, SMS and RCS consent are treated the same from a regulatory and operational perspective. Both require explicit permission to send messages to a mobile number for a specific purpose.

When a customer has opted in to receive SMS messages, that consent will usually also apply to RCS messages, provided the sender, message category, and purpose do not change. Promotional SMS consent, for example, typically allows the same promotional communication to be delivered via RCS.

Consent does not transfer across scope. Transactional or service-related consent does not allow promotional RCS messages. The deciding factor is always what the recipient agreed to receive, not which messaging technology is used.

What does explicit opt-in mean for RCS consent?

Explicit opt-in means the recipient has actively agreed to receive messages from a business on their mobile number. This requirement applies equally to SMS and RCS.

Opt-in must be clear and purpose-specific. The recipient should understand who is sending the messages and what type of communication to expect. Passive consent or pre-checked boxes are generally not sufficient.

Recipients must also be able to opt out at any time, typically by replying “STOP” or using equivalent controls available in the RCS interface.

When does SMS consent not apply to RCS?

Although SMS consent generally applies to RCS, it cannot be reused when message scope or expectations change.

SMS consent does not apply to RCS when:

• The message type changes, such as moving from service updates to promotions

• The original opt-in was limited to a one-time or single-purpose message

• The sender identity changes or is unclear

• Local laws or operator rules require additional disclosures

For example, consent to receive order confirmations by SMS does not allow promotional RCS messages. The same restriction would apply if SMS continued to be used.

Practical differences between SMS and RCS that do not change consent

SMS and RCS differ technically, but these differences do not affect consent requirements. Permission remains tied to the mobile number and the agreed message purpose.

These differences affect how messages are delivered and displayed, not whether consent is required.

Why transparency still applies when using RCS

RCS introduces visible sender profiles and branded elements that change how messages appear to recipients. While this does not change consent requirements, it increases expectations around clarity.

Businesses should ensure that:

• Consent language and privacy policies mention the use of rich messaging formats such as RCS

• Sender names and logos accurately reflect the sending organization

• Message purpose matches what was stated at opt-in

• Opt-out options are clearly available within the conversation

Responsibility for transparency always lies with the business sending the messages.

RCS consent in practice

LINK Mobility supports SMS and RCS through a unified messaging setup, allowing businesses to use the same mobile number-based consent records and opt-out handling across channels.

While SMS consent generally applies to RCS, businesses must still review applicable local laws and operator requirements. RCS consent should be treated as part of an existing mobile messaging consent framework, with compliance responsibility remaining with the business sending the messages.