Missouri Non-Compete Laws (2026): Are Non-Competes Enforceable?

Missouri courts enforce employee non-competes that are reasonable. No Missouri statute governs employee non-competes; the rule comes from the Missouri Supreme Court, which held in Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew, 379 S.W.3d 835 (Mo. banc 2012), that a non-compete is reasonable if it is no more restrictive than necessary to protect the employer's legitimate interests in trade secrets or customer contacts, and that a court can modify an overbroad term instead of throwing it out.

Two Missouri statutes, RSMo 431.202 and 431.204, deal with related clauses (employee non-solicitation and no-hire covenants, and covenants signed by business owners), and each says it does not affect the validity of non-competes. For how other states treat these agreements, see our non-compete laws by state guide.

Information last verified on 2026-10-08. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Missouri's court-made rule on employee non-competes from Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew (2012), the two related Missouri statutes on non-solicitation covenants (RSMo 431.202 and 431.204), and the 2025-2026 bills, with a short note on the federal FTC rule. It does not cover trade-secret claims (see Missouri trade secret laws) or severance pay (see Missouri severance pay laws).

Are non-competes enforceable in Missouri?

Yes, if they are reasonable. In Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew, 379 S.W.3d 835 (Mo. banc 2012), the Missouri Supreme Court stated: "Missouri courts generally enforce a non-compete agreement if it is demonstratively reasonable." It explained the standard this way:

"A non-compete agreement is reasonable if it is no more restrictive than is necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the employer." Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew, 379 S.W.3d 835 (Mo. banc 2012)

Missouri has not written that rule into a statute. Section 431.202, which covers non-solicitation and no-hire covenants, states: "Nothing in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection 1 of this section is intended to create, or to affect the validity or enforceability of, employer-employee covenants not to compete." Section 431.204 contains a similar disclaimer.

What makes a Missouri non-compete reasonable

Under Whelan, a court looks at these points:

In Whelan, the court held enforceable a two-year non-compete for an employee who managed a branch office's operations, clients and customers, limited to 50 miles from any location where he provided or arranged services, and sent the case back on fact issues, including whether he had violated it. That result reflects that case's facts. No Missouri statute sets a maximum length or distance for an employee non-compete.

What a court does with an overbroad non-compete

Missouri courts can trim a covenant rather than void it. In Whelan, the Missouri Supreme Court said that appellate courts "can give effect to its purpose by refusing to give effect to the unreasonable terms or modifying the terms of the contract to be reasonable."

The court applied that to the customer non-solicitation clauses in the case. Clauses that reached all of the employer's customers nationwide, plus prospective customers, were overbroad, and the court modified them to cover the customers the employees had dealt with.

Non-solicitation and no-hire covenants: RSMo 431.202

Section 431.202, in effect since July 1, 2001, governs covenants in which an employee promises not to solicit, recruit, hire or otherwise interfere with the employment of the employer's other employees. Under section 431.202.2, a covenant covered exclusively by subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection 1 "shall be conclusively presumed to be reasonable if its postemployment duration is no more than one year."

In practice, the statute conclusively presumes a covenant reasonable when it protects the employer's confidential or trade secret information or its customer or supplier relationships and lasts no more than one year after employment. A one-year covenant is also presumed reasonable even without those interests, but that provision, subdivision (4), does not apply to employees who provide only secretarial or clerical services.

The one-year presumption applies only to these employee non-solicit and no-hire covenants. It does not apply to non-competes. In Whelan, a two-year no-hire clause fell outside the one-year safe harbor, and its enforceability turned on a fact question about its purpose.

Section 431.202.5 adds that nothing in the section limits an employee's ability to seek or accept employment with another employer after the employee's voluntary or nonvoluntary termination.

Customer non-solicitation clauses

For ordinary employees, a customer non-solicitation clause is judged under common law. In Whelan, the Missouri Supreme Court held such a clause enforceable only to the extent it protects the employer's customer contacts, which is why it narrowed the clauses in that case to customers the employees had dealt with.

Covenants signed by business owners: RSMo 431.204

Section 431.204, enacted by SB 103 and effective August 28, 2023, applies only to covenants between a business entity and an owner of that business, not to ordinary employees. Under section 431.204.2, an owner's covenant not to solicit customers is presumed enforceable if it is limited to customers the owner dealt with and lasts no more than five years after the owner's business relationship ends. Under section 431.204.1, an owner's covenant not to solicit or hire the business's employees or owners is presumed enforceable if it lasts no more than two years after the owner's business relationship ends, and section 431.204.3 presumes enforceable an owner's written promise to give prior notice before terminating, selling or otherwise disposing of the ownership interest.

Section 431.204.4 also directs how courts handle an overbroad owner covenant: "a court shall modify the covenant, enforce the covenant as modified, and grant only the relief reasonably necessary to protect such interests." Like section 431.202, section 431.204 states that it does not affect the validity of covenants not to compete except as it expressly provides.

No salary threshold or profession-specific statute

Missouri law sets no income threshold for non-competes; section 431.202 and section 431.204 contain none, and Missouri has no general non-compete statute. Missouri also has no enacted statute limiting physician or other health care non-competes. Bills that would change both are pending or failed (see below).

Signing a non-compete after you start work

Missouri appellate courts treat continued at-will employment as consideration for a non-compete signed after the job started when the employee keeps access to the employer's protectable information and relationships. In JumboSack Corp. v. Buyck, 407 S.W.3d 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2013), the Missouri Court of Appeals said that "continued employment and the attendant access to the employer's protectable information and relationships constitutes adequate consideration for a non-compete agreement executed after the inception of employment."

If you are fired or laid off

Our research found no Missouri rule that treats a fired or laid-off employee's non-compete differently from one held by an employee who quit. Section 431.202.5 speaks only to the employee's ability to seek or accept other employment after a voluntary or nonvoluntary termination, and Missouri case law on this point was not fully surveyed. For how firing works in the state, see Missouri at-will employment laws.

Pending and failed Missouri bills

No Missouri non-compete bill was enacted in 2024, 2025 or 2026 that our research found. The most recent restrictive-covenant law found is SB 103 (2023), which created section 431.204. Bills from the 2026 session that would have restricted non-competes showed these last actions on the Missouri House site:

In 2025, physician non-compete bills HB 448 and HB 913 were last referred to the Emerging Issues committee on May 15, 2025 and were not enacted. None of these bills is law.

The FTC rule and Missouri non-competes

The FTC's nationwide non-compete rule never took effect. A federal court in Texas set it aside on August 20, 2024 (Ryan, LLC v. FTC, No. 3:24-CV-00986-E, N.D. Tex.), the FTC voted on September 5, 2025 to dismiss its appeals, and the FTC removed the rule from the Code of Federal Regulations on February 12, 2026. The FTC still acts case by case, for example approving a final order on June 22, 2026 that required a pest-control company to stop enforcing non-competes. More detail: FTC non-compete ban struck down and our non-compete laws by state guide.

Non-competes and trade secrets

Under Whelan, protecting trade secrets is one of the two interests that can justify a Missouri non-compete. Trade-secret law also protects that information on its own, without any non-compete. See Missouri trade secret laws.

Questions this page does not answer yet

Our research did not verify Missouri rules on the following, so this page does not state a rule on them:

• whether a Missouri court will honor an out-of-state choice-of-law or forum clause;
• how Missouri courts treat a non-compete after the employer fires the employee;
• whether any state agency takes non-compete complaints (our research identified none; disputes go to court).

If you have been asked to sign

Because Missouri enforces a non-compete only as far as it reasonably protects trade secrets or customer contacts, and lets courts trim overbroad terms, whether a particular agreement holds up depends on its length, territory and the interests it protects. A lawyer licensed in Missouri can review a specific agreement against those factors.

Related

• Non-compete laws by state
• Missouri trade secret laws
• Missouri severance pay laws
• Missouri at-will employment laws
• FTC non-compete ban struck down

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about Missouri non-compete law under Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew (2012) and RSMo 431.202 and 431.204, not legal advice. The information was last verified on 2026-10-08. For advice about a specific agreement, contact a legal aid office or a lawyer licensed in Missouri.

Last updated: 2026-10-08.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are non-competes enforceable in Missouri?

They can be. Under Whelan Security Co. v. Kennebrew (Mo. banc 2012), Missouri courts generally enforce a non-compete that is no more restrictive than necessary to protect the employer's legitimate interests in trade secrets or customer contacts.

Does Missouri have a non-compete statute?

Not for employee non-competes. RSMo 431.202 and 431.204 govern non-solicitation, no-hire and business-owner covenants, and each states that it does not affect the validity of non-competes except as it expressly provides.

Can a Missouri court rewrite an overbroad non-compete?

Yes. In Whelan (2012), the Missouri Supreme Court said courts can refuse to give effect to unreasonable terms or modify them to be reasonable, and it narrowed overbroad customer non-solicits.

How long can a non-solicitation agreement last in Missouri?

Under RSMo 431.202.2, an employee non-solicit or no-hire covenant covered by the statute is conclusively presumed reasonable if it lasts no more than one year after employment. A longer one is judged on its facts.

Does the one-year rule in RSMo 431.202 apply to non-competes?

No. Section 431.202 says it is not intended to create or affect the validity or enforceability of employer-employee covenants not to compete.

Are physician non-competes banned in Missouri?

No. HB 2184, HB 2821 and HB 2979 of 2026 would restrict physician non-competes, but none was enacted; the last actions shown were committee referral or a public hearing.

Is there a salary threshold for Missouri non-competes?

No. Missouri law sets none. HB 3427 of 2026 would have voided non-competes for hourly-wage employees, but its last action shown was a May 15, 2026 committee referral.

Does the FTC non-compete ban apply in Missouri?

No. A federal court set the FTC rule aside on August 20, 2024, and the FTC removed it from the Code of Federal Regulations on February 12, 2026.