diff --git a/proposals/4155-invite-filtering.md b/proposals/4155-invite-filtering.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..4693e3fc885
--- /dev/null
+++ b/proposals/4155-invite-filtering.md
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+# MSC4155: Invite filtering
+
+Matrix supports ignoring users via the eponymous [module] and the `m.ignored_user_list` account data
+event. This is a nuclear option though and will suppress both invites and room events from the ignored
+users. Additionally, the `m.ignored_user_list` event only allows for block-list configurations that ignore
+specific users but doesn't have a mechanism to ignore entire servers. These shortcomings make the module
+insufficient for use cases such as tightly locked down applications where ignoring needs to be the default
+behaviour.
+
+This proposal generalises the ignoring users [module] to allow filtering invites specifically. The scheme
+outlined below is conceptually borrowed from the [gematik specification]. The main purpose of this proposal
+is to ensure that this option is available for comparison with [other existing MSCs] that attempt to address
+invite filtering.
+
+
+## Proposal
+
+To allow users to configure which other users are allowed to invite them into rooms, a new account data
+event `m.invite_permission_config` is introduced.
+
+```json5
+{
+  "type": "m.invite_permission_config",
+  "content": {
+    "default": "allow | block",
+    "user_exceptions": {
+      "@someone:example.org": {},
+      ...
+    },
+    "server_exceptions": {
+      "example.org": {},
+      ...
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+The `default` field defines the standard setting that is applied to all invites that don't match an
+exception. Exceptions invert the default setting and are provided via the `user_exceptions` and
+`server_exceptions` fields which follow the format of the `ignored_users` field in `m.ignored_user_list`.
+
+As an example, a block-list configuration that ignores invites from `@badguy:scam.org` but allows invites
+from any other user would look like this:
+
+```json5
+{
+  "type": "m.invite_permission_config",
+  "content": {
+    "default": "allow",
+    "user_exceptions": {
+      "@badguy:scam.org": {},
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+In contrast, an allow-list configuration that permits invites from users on goodguys.org but blocks invites
+from all other servers would look like this:
+
+```json5
+{
+  "type": "m.invite_permission_config",
+  "content": {
+    "default": "block",
+    "server_exceptions": {
+      "goodguys.org": {},
+    }
+  }
+}
+```
+
+Note that since the default setting for entities that don't match an exception is part of the configuration,
+an exception for a user does _not_ need to be accompanied by an exception for their server[^1].
+
+Servers MAY suppress invites for which the configuration evaluates to `block` and not send them to the recipient.
+They MAY additionally reject the invite.
+
+Clients SHOULD hide invites from users for which the permission configuration evaluates to `block`. They MAY
+allow reviewing ignored invites in a dedicated section of their UI.
+
+
+## Potential issues
+
+Larger permission configurations could run into the [event size limit] of 65536 bytes. This issue also exists
+with the `m.ignored_user_list` event.
+
+
+## Alternatives
+
+As mentioned above, the main goal of this proposal is to offer an alternative so that the question of invite
+filtering can be answered holistically. Therefore, this section will not attempt to make a case for why the
+current proposal is better than others and instead simply list the alternatives known to the author at the
+time of writing:
+
+- [MSC2270] (which borrows from `m.ignored_user_list` to ignore rooms and invites)
+- [MSC3659] (which introduces a push-rule-like grammar to filter invites)
+- [MSC3840] (which is similar to this proposal but only supports block-list semantics)
+- [MSC3847] (which ignores invites by building on [moderation policy lists] and could be combined with
+  [MSC4150] to support both block-list and allow-list use cases)
+
+
+## Security considerations
+
+None.
+
+
+## Unstable prefix
+
+Until this proposal is accepted into the spec, implementations should refer to `m.invite_permission_config`
+as `org.matrix.msc4155.invite_permission_config`. Note that the [gematik specification], which predates
+this MSC, uses an event type of `de.gematik.tim.account.permissionconfig.v1` and slightly different field
+names. Given that the general JSON scheme of the event is the same though, implementations of the
+[gematik specification] should largely be equivalent to implementations of this MSC.
+
+
+## Dependencies
+
+None.
+
+
+[^1]: This is in contrast to e.g. [Mjolnir] which requires two `org.matrix.mjolnir.allow` rules, one for
+      the user ID and one for the server name, to build an allow list that only permits a single user.
+
+[event size limit]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#size-limits
+[gematik specification]: https://github.com/gematik/api-ti-messenger/blob/9b9f21b87949e778de85dbbc19e25f53495871e2/src/schema/permissionConfig.json
+[Mjolnir]: https://github.com/matrix-org/mjolnir
+[MSC2270]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/2270
+[MSC3659]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3659
+[MSC3840]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3840
+[MSC3847]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3847
+[MSC4150]: https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/4150
+[moderation policy lists]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#moderation-policy-lists
+[module]: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.10/client-server-api/#ignoring-users
+[other existing MSCs]: #alternatives