---
jurisdiction: "Maine"
slug: maine
countryCode: US
snapshotAsOf: "2026-06-10"
lastReviewed: "2026-06-02"
canonicalUrl: https://openagreements.org/legal/non-compete/maine
license: CC BY 4.0
stale: false
---

> [!IMPORTANT]
> **Informational only — not legal advice.** This is a snapshot of an OpenAgreements practice note,
> provided for general information. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client
> relationship, and is not a substitute for a licensed attorney in the relevant jurisdiction.
> Laws change; verify against the canonical version before relying on it.
>
> **Canonical:** https://openagreements.org/legal/non-compete/maine · **Snapshot as of:** 2026-06-10 · License: CC BY 4.0 · © UseJunior

# Non-Competes in Maine[^about]

Maine regulates employee non-competes through 26 M.R.S. § 599-A, using statutory bright-line limits plus Maine common-law reasonableness and as-applied review.


## At a glance

| Question | Maine |
| --- | --- |
| **Are non-competes enforceable?** | Allowed above a pay level |
| **Bottom line** | Maine treats non-competes as contrary to public policy and enforces them only when reasonable, and bans them entirely for employees earning at or below 400% of the federal poverty level (and for non-owner veterinarians). |
| **Main law or case** | 26 M.R.S. § 599-A |
| **Main exceptions** | Veterinarian (non-owner) ban; health-care-practitioner restriction (L.D. 2200, eff. July 13, 2026); employer no-poach ban (§ 599-B) |
| **When the ban took effect** | Wage-floor ban (threshold indexed; $62,600 in 2025) |
| **Can a court narrow it?** | Unsettled |
| **Applies to contractors?** | Unclear |
| **Restriction extended during a breach?** | Not addressed |
| **Maximum length set by law** | No statutory maximum (reasonable duration) |

## Are employee non-compete agreements enforceable in Maine? {#employee-noncompetes}

**Short answer.** Sometimes, but Maine starts from a statutory anti-restraint rule: 26 M.R.S. § 599-A says non-competes are contrary to public policy[^maine-599a-public-policy-narrow-interests] and enforceable only if reasonable and no broader than necessary to protect specified employer interests.

The statute limits those interests to trade secrets, confidential information that is not a trade secret, and goodwill. A covenant aimed only at ordinary competition is outside that statutory frame.

Maine common law points in the same direction. *Lord* says the covenant must sweep no wider than needed to protect the business interest, and *Sisters of Charity* treats duration, geography, and the nature of the protected interest as fact-intensive reasonableness questions [^lord-no-wider-than-necessary][^sisters-duration-geography-interest].

## Which Maine workers cannot be bound by non-competes? {#protected-workers}

**Short answer.** Maine bars non-competes for employees earning at or below 400 percent of the federal poverty level and for non-owner licensed veterinarians in covered veterinary facilities [^maine-599a-prohibited-workers][^maine-599a-veterinarian-prior-agreements].

The wage floor moves with the federal poverty level. Foley reports that Maine updated its threshold from $60,240 in 2024 to $62,600 in 2025 [^foley-2025-maine-threshold].

The veterinarian rule is stronger than ordinary non-enforcement. The current statutory text also tells courts not to enforce earlier or renewed veterinarian non-competes unless the veterinarian has an ownership interest in the facility [^maine-599a-veterinarian-prior-agreements].

> [!NOTE]
> **Practice note.**
>
> Do not treat the physician delayed-effect carve-out as a healthcare-wide permission rule. A separate health-care-practitioner restriction is now law: Governor Mills signed L.D. 2200 on April 15, 2026, and it applies to agreements entered into or renewed on or after its July 13, 2026 effective date [^ebg-ld2200-enacted][^maine-599a-prohibited-workers].

## What notice and timing rules apply to Maine non-competes? {#notice-timing}

**Short answer.** Maine requires pre-offer disclosure, a copy at least 3 business days before signing, and delayed effectiveness until the later of one year of employment or 6 months after signing, except for allopathic and osteopathic physician agreements [^maine-599a-disclosure-notice][^maine-599a-delayed-effectiveness].

The notice rule has two parts. First, if the job will require a non-compete, the employer must disclose that requirement before making the offer. Second, the employer must provide the agreement at least 3 business days before the required signing date.

The delayed-effectiveness rule is separate from the signing rule. A compliant agreement can be signed before it takes effect. For most employees, the restriction does not ripen until both the statutory waiting period and the employment-duration rule are satisfied.

> [!CAUTION]
> **Drafting note.**
>
> Build the notice and delay rules into onboarding workflows. A signature collected on time is not enough if the pre-offer disclosure or 3-business-day copy requirement was missed [^maine-599a-disclosure-notice].

## Will Maine courts narrow or reform an overbroad non-compete? {#court-narrowing}

**Short answer.** Often they evaluate the restraint as applied, not only as drafted. *Brignull* says Maine assesses a non-compete only as the employer sought to apply it[^brignull-as-applied-review].

That makes Maine different from a strict red-pencil jurisdiction and from a mechanical blue-pencil state. The court can focus on the actual enforcement request, but the requested restraint still must be reasonable in duration, geography, and protected interest.

*Lord* gives the limiting principle. The court may require specificity about what goodwill or business value needs protection before imposing or enforcing a severe restraint [^lord-specificity-goodwill-restraint].

> [!CAUTION]
> **Drafting note.**
>
> Do not draft broadly just because Maine recognizes as-applied review. *Lord* still requires a record showing that the scope is reasonably necessary to protect the specific goodwill or business value at issue [^lord-specificity-goodwill-restraint].

## Are employer no-poach or no-hire agreements allowed in Maine? {#employer-no-poach}

**Short answer.** No. 26 M.R.S. § 599-B prohibits employer-to-employer restrictive employment agreements that restrict one employer from soliciting or hiring another employer's employees or former employees [^maine-599b-no-poach-definition-ban].

The statute reaches agreements between two or more employers, including through franchise, contractor, and subcontractor arrangements. It separately bars entering into the agreement, enforcing it, or threatening enforcement.

Violations carry a civil fine of at least $5,000, and the Maine Department of Labor enforces the section [^maine-599b-penalty-enforcement].

## Are non-solicitation and confidentiality agreements safer alternatives in Maine? {#alternatives}

**Short answer.** Often yes. Section 599-A itself points to nonsolicitation, nondisclosure, and confidentiality agreements as alternatives, and a non-compete may be presumed necessary only when those alternatives cannot adequately protect the interest [^maine-599a-alternative-covenants].

That does not make every alternative covenant low risk. A confidentiality covenant can protect information beyond trade secrets, but it cannot bar use of general skill or knowledge. *Bernier* upheld a nondisclosure clause because it protected specialized original work without stopping the employee from using general skill and knowledge [^bernier-confidential-not-general-skill].

Maine also has a separate employment NDA statute. Section 599-C protects reporting, testimony, evidence, and law-enforcement communications in discrimination-related contexts, while preserving ordinary protections for proprietary information, trade secrets, and information confidential by law [^maine-599c-discrimination-reporting][^maine-599c-proprietary-info-saved].

> [!CAUTION]
> **Drafting note.**
>
> Do not make a confidentiality clause do non-compete work. Maine allows protection for specialized confidential information, but *Bernier* distinguishes that from blocking general skill and knowledge [^bernier-confidential-not-general-skill].

## What trade-secret remedies are available in Maine? {#trade-secrets}

**Short answer.** Maine trade-secret law gives employers remedies that can substitute for or sit beside narrow restrictive covenants, including injunctions, damages, exemplary damages, and attorney-fee awards [^maine-utsa-injunctions][^maine-utsa-damages][^maine-utsa-fees].

The definition matters because § 599-A cross-references Title 10, section 1542 for trade secrets. Maine defines a trade secret as information that derives independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable and is subject to reasonable secrecy efforts [^maine-utsa-trade-secret-definition].

The remedies are practical. Courts may restrain actual or threatened misappropriation, award actual loss and unjust enrichment, use a reasonable royalty measure, and award exemplary damages for willful and malicious misappropriation [^maine-utsa-injunctions][^maine-utsa-damages].

## What recent Maine non-compete developments should employers track? {#recent-developments}

**Short answer.** Track three moving points: the annually indexed wage threshold, the 2024 veto of L.D. 1496, and the newly enacted L.D. 2200 health-care-practitioner restriction effective July 13, 2026 [^foley-2025-threshold-recent][^bernstein-ld1496-veto-sustained][^ebg-ld2200-effective].

The 2024 veto means Maine did not move to a near-total employee non-compete ban then. Bernstein Shur reports that the veto was sustained on April 2, 2024, so employers continued to draft under the existing L.D. 733 framework [^bernstein-ld1496-veto-sustained].

The 2026 healthcare development is now law. Governor Mills signed L.D. 2200 on April 15, 2026, and it applies to non-compete agreements entered into or renewed on or after its July 13, 2026 effective date [^ebg-ld2200-effective].

> [!NOTE]
> **Practice note.**
>
> Confirm the codified text before relying on the § 599-A page alone for healthcare covenants. L.D. 2200 was signed on April 15, 2026 but does not take effect until July 13, 2026, so the Revisor's current § 599-A text may still show only the wage-floor and veterinarian prohibitions until the amendment is codified [^maine-599a-current-prohibited-workers][^ebg-ld2200-effective].

[^about]: By Steven Obiajulu, J.D. Published by [openagreements.org](https://openagreements.org) · Maintained by [UseJunior](https://usejunior.com). Last reviewed 2026-06-02. License: CC BY 4.0. Steven Obiajulu, J.D. is admitted in New York, not Maine. This article synthesizes Maine primary law and is not legal advice from a Maine-admitted attorney. This article is for informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

[^maine-599a-public-policy-narrow-interests]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "Noncompete agreements are contrary to public policy and are enforceable only to the extent that they are reasonable and are no broader than necessary to protect one or more of the following legitimate business interests of the employer:" *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(2).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^lord-no-wider-than-necessary]: **Lord v. Lord** — "We have long recognized that non-competition agreements are contrary to public policy and will be enforced only to the extent that they are reasonable and sweep no wider than necessary to protect the business interests in issue." *Lord v. Lord, 454 A.2d 830, 834 (Me. 1983).* <https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2367150/lord-v-lord/#:~:text=We%20have%20long%20recognized%20that,the%20business%20interests%20in%20issue.>

[^sisters-duration-geography-interest]: **Sisters of Charity Health System, Inc. v. Farrago** — "Although reasonableness is a question of law, the inquiry is fact-intensive, and it depends on the specific circumstances of the case: the covenant’s duration, the scope of the specified geographic area, and the nature of the interest to be protected." *Sisters of Charity Health Sys., Inc. v. Farrago, 2011 ME 62, ¶ 10, 21 A.3d 110.* <https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2444708/sisters-of-charity-health-system-inc-v-farrago/#:~:text=Although%20reasonableness%20is%20a%20question,the%20interest%20to%20be%20protected.>

[^maine-599a-prohibited-workers]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "The employee is earning wages at or below 400% of the federal poverty level; or" *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(3)(A).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^maine-599a-veterinarian-prior-agreements]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "A court may not enforce a noncompete agreement entered into or renewed with an employee who is a veterinarian licensed under Title 32, chapter 71‑A before the effective date of this paragraph unless the employee is working in a veterinary facility in which the employee has an ownership interest." *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(3).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^foley-2025-maine-threshold]: **Noncompete Agreements: Updated Income Thresholds for 2025** — "Accordingly, Maine is updating its $60,240 threshold from 2024 to $62,600 in 2025." *Foley & Lardner, Noncompete Agreements: Updated Income Thresholds for 2025 (2025).* <https://www.foley.com/insights/publications/2025/01/noncompete-agreements-updated-income-thresholds-for-2025/>

[^ebg-ld2200-enacted]: **Maine Restricts Noncompetes for Health Care Practitioners** — "On April 15, 2026, Governor Janet T. Mills signed into law ‘An Act Relating to Noncompete Agreements Between Employers and Health Care Practitioners,’ L.D. 2200 (the ‘Amendments’)." *Epstein Becker Green, Maine Restricts Noncompetes for Health Care Practitioners (2026).* <https://www.tradesecretsandemployeemobility.com/maine-restricts-noncompetes-for-health-care-practitioners>

[^maine-599a-disclosure-notice]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "An employer shall notify an employee or prospective employee of a noncompete agreement requirement and provide a copy of the noncompete agreement not less than 3 business days before the employer requires the agreement to be signed to allow time for the employee or prospective employee to review the agreement and negotiate the terms of the agreement or employment with the employer if the employee or prospective employee wishes to do so." *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(4).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^maine-599a-delayed-effectiveness]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "Except for a noncompete agreement between an employer and an allopathic physician or an osteopathic physician licensed under Title 32, chapter 48 or chapter 36, respectively, the terms of a noncompete agreement do not take effect until after one year of the employee's employment with the employer or a period of 6 months from the date the agreement was signed, whichever is later." *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(5).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^brignull-as-applied-review]: **Brignull v. Albert** — "Finally, because the reasonableness of a noncompetition agreement depends on the specific facts of the case, we assess the agreement only as Brignull has sought to apply it and not as it might have been enforced on its terms." *Brignull v. Albert, 666 A.2d 82, 84 (Me. 1995).* <https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2381411/brignull-v-albert/#:~:text=Finally%2C%20because%20the%20reasonableness%20of,been%20enforced%20on%20its%20terms.>

[^lord-specificity-goodwill-restraint]: **Lord v. Lord** — "Upon remand, on the basis of the existing record and any further evidence received, the presiding justice should first define the nature and components of the good will included in the determination of value and then proceed to determine the scope of any restraint which may be reasonably necessary to protect the value of the asset." *Lord v. Lord, 454 A.2d 830, 835 (Me. 1983).* <https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2367150/lord-v-lord/#:~:text=Upon%20remand%2C%20on%20the%20basis,the%20value%20of%20the%20asset.>

[^maine-599b-no-poach-definition-ban]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-B — Restrictive employment agreements** — "An employer may not:" *26 M.R.S. § 599-B(2).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-B.html>

[^maine-599b-penalty-enforcement]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-B — Restrictive employment agreements** — "An employer that violates subsection 2 commits a civil violation for which a fine of not less than $5,000 may be adjudged. The Department of Labor is responsible for enforcement of this section." *26 M.R.S. § 599-B(3).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-B.html>

[^maine-599a-alternative-covenants]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "A noncompete agreement may be presumed necessary if the legitimate business interest cannot be adequately protected through an alternative restrictive covenant, including but not limited to a nonsolicitation agreement or a nondisclosure or confidentiality agreement." *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(2).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>

[^bernier-confidential-not-general-skill]: **Bernier v. Merrill Air Engineers** — "The nondisclosure clause does not prohibit Bernier from using the general skill and knowledge he acquired during his employment with Merrill." *Bernier v. Merrill Air Eng'rs, 2001 ME 17, ¶ 18, 770 A.2d 97.* <https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2361851/bernier-v-merrill-air-engineers/#:~:text=The%20nondisclosure%20clause%20does%20not,during%20his%20employment%20with%20Merrill.>

[^maine-599c-discrimination-reporting]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-C — Nondisclosure agreements** — "An employer may not require an employee, intern or applicant for employment to enter into a contract or agreement that waives or limits any right to report or discuss unlawful employment discrimination, as defined and limited by Title 5, chapter 337, subchapter 3, occurring in the workplace or at work-related events." *26 M.R.S. § 599-C(2).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-C.html>

[^maine-599c-proprietary-info-saved]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-C — Nondisclosure agreements** — "Nothing in this section may be construed as limiting the use of nondisclosure agreements to protect the confidentiality of proprietary information, trade secrets or information that is otherwise confidential by law, rule or regulation." *26 M.R.S. § 599-C(4).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-C.html>

[^maine-utsa-injunctions]: **10 M.R.S. § 1543 — Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Injunctive relief)** — "Actual or threatened misappropriation may be restrained or enjoined." *10 M.R.S. § 1543(1).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/10/title10sec1543.html>

[^maine-utsa-damages]: **10 M.R.S. § 1544 — Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Damages)** — "Damages may include both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss. In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, the damages caused by misappropriation may be measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator's unauthorized disclosure or use of a trade secret." *10 M.R.S. § 1544(1).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/10/title10sec1544.html>

[^maine-utsa-fees]: **10 M.R.S. § 1545 — Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Attorney's fees)** — "If a claim of misappropriation is made in bad faith, a motion to terminate an injunction is made or resisted in bad faith or willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award reasonable attorneys fees to the prevailing party." *10 M.R.S. § 1545.* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/10/title10sec1545.html>

[^maine-utsa-trade-secret-definition]: **10 M.R.S. § 1542 — Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Definitions)** — "‘Trade secret’ means information, including, but not limited to, a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique or process, that:" *10 M.R.S. § 1542(4).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/10/title10sec1542.html>

[^foley-2025-threshold-recent]: **Noncompete Agreements: Updated Income Thresholds for 2025** — "Specifically, thresholds in Washington, Colorado, Maine, Rhode Island, Oregon, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. increase each year." *Foley & Lardner, Noncompete Agreements: Updated Income Thresholds for 2025 (2025).* <https://www.foley.com/insights/publications/2025/01/noncompete-agreements-updated-income-thresholds-for-2025/>

[^bernstein-ld1496-veto-sustained]: **Governor Mills Vetoes L.D. 1496: What Maine Employers Need to Know** — "Because L.D. 1496 was vetoed and that veto was sustained by the Maine State Legislature, Maine employers should continue to reference L.D. 733 when drafting and negotiating noncompete agreements." *Bernstein Shur, Governor Mills Vetoes L.D. 1496: What Maine Employers Need to Know (2024).* <https://www.bernsteinshur.com/insights-events/governor-mills-vetoes-l-d-1496-an-act-to-prohibit-noncompete-clauses-what-maine-employers-need-to-know/>

[^ebg-ld2200-effective]: **Maine Restricts Noncompetes for Health Care Practitioners** — "The Amendments apply to all noncompete agreements entered into, or renewed on or after, the Amendments’ effective date of July 13, 2026 (the ‘Effective Date’)." *Epstein Becker Green, Maine Restricts Noncompetes for Health Care Practitioners (2026).* <https://www.tradesecretsandemployeemobility.com/maine-restricts-noncompetes-for-health-care-practitioners>

[^maine-599a-current-prohibited-workers]: **26 M.R.S. § 599-A — Noncompete agreements** — "The employee is earning wages at or below 400% of the federal poverty level; or" *26 M.R.S. § 599-A(3)(A).* <https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/26/title26sec599-A.html>
