SB 253 creates the Kansas Massage Therapist Licensure Act and places massage therapy under the regulatory authority of the State Board of Healing Arts. The bill establishes a new state licensing system for massage therapists, including education, age, citizenship/residency, examination, and character requirements for initial licensure. It also creates a grandfathering pathway for currently practicing therapists, allows licensure by endorsement from other jurisdictions, and authorizes temporary permits for certain foreign-trained applicants.
The bill defines massage therapy as a healthcare service involving manipulation of soft tissue for therapeutic purposes, while expressly excluding medical diagnosis, chiropractic, physical therapy, and other licensed practices. It also carves out a number of exemptions for other professions, students in supervised training, volunteers, family members, certain bodywork and energy-based practices, and religious practice. Licensed therapists would be required to use the title LMT, comply with renewal and continuing education requirements, carry professional liability insurance, and submit to fingerprint-based criminal history checks.
SB 253 gives the Board of Healing Arts broad enforcement and disciplinary powers, including license denial, suspension, revocation, fines, injunctions, and investigation authority. It also makes unlicensed practice and false representation as a licensed massage therapist unlawful, with violations treated as a class B person misdemeanor and as an unconscionable act under the Kansas Consumer Protection Act, though without a private right of action. The bill further creates a massage therapy advisory committee, sets fee caps, directs fee revenue between the healing arts fee fund and the state general fund, and preempts local governments from imposing their own professional licensing requirements for massage therapists.
The bill’s impact on state law is substantial because it adds a new statewide occupational licensing framework where none is described in the bill text, while also amending K.S.A. 2024 Supp. 22-4714 to add massage therapy applicants to the list of professions subject to fingerprinting and criminal history record checks. It also repeals the existing version of that criminal-history statute and revises related confidentiality rules for background-check information. In addition, the bill affects insurance law by stating that health insurance policies are not required to reimburse massage therapy services provided by licensed massage therapists.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call sentiment to summarize. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears generally supportive of professionalization and consumer protection through licensing, training, insurance, and enforcement standards, while also preserving exemptions for related professions and alternative bodywork practices. Likely points of contention include the new licensing burden, the citizenship/legal permanent resident requirement, mandatory liability insurance, criminal-history screening, preemption of local licensing authority, and the scope of exemptions for nontraditional practices and existing practitioners.
The bill would create a new statewide licensing regime for massage therapists under the State Board of Healing Arts, replacing any unregulated or locally varied approach with uniform education, examination, renewal, discipline, and enforcement standards. It amends K.S.A. 2024 Supp. 22-4714 to authorize fingerprinting and criminal-history checks for initial massage therapist applicants, and it repeals the existing version of that statute. The bill also preempts local governments from imposing their own professional licensing requirements on licensed massage therapists, while leaving zoning and criminal enforcement intact, and it declares that health insurance policies are not required to reimburse massage therapy services.
No committee discussion or votes were provided, so there is no direct record of legislative sentiment. From the bill’s structure, the measure appears to reflect a pro-regulation and consumer-protection approach, with support for formal licensure, background checks, continuing education, and disciplinary authority. At the same time, the broad exemption language suggests an effort to avoid overregulating related professions and established bodywork practices.
Likely areas of contention include whether massage therapy should be licensed at the state level at all, and whether the bill’s requirements are too restrictive for practitioners. Specific points that may draw debate are the 625-hour education requirement, the citizenship or lawful permanent resident requirement, mandatory liability insurance, fingerprinting and criminal-history checks, and the prohibition on unlicensed practice. The bill also may raise concerns about preempting local licensing authority, the treatment of nontraditional modalities such as Reiki, shiatsu, acupressure, and structural integration, and the scope of the grandfathering provisions for current practitioners.