Tennessee House Bill HB0182

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/15/25
• Refer: 1/27/25
• Refer: 2/12/25
• Refer: 2/26/25
• Chaptered: 3/21/25
• Passed: 3/21/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 62, Chapter 38, relative to The Ink of Hope Act.

Summary

HB0182, known as the “Ink of Hope Act,” amends Tennessee’s tattoo licensing laws to add human trafficking awareness requirements for tattoo operators and tattoo artists. Before receiving a permit to operate a tattoo establishment or to apply a tattoo, applicants must complete up to one hour of free training, provided online or in person by a nonprofit approved by the Tennessee Human Trafficking Advisory Council. The training must cover how to recognize signs of human trafficking, how to respond, how to refer clients to victim resources, and how to report concerns to the Tennessee Human Trafficking Resource Center Hotline. The bill also requires existing license holders who are renewing their licenses as of December 31, 2025, to complete the same training by December 31, 2028. If they do not complete the training by that deadline, their license becomes invalid until they comply. In addition, the bill changes the renewal process so local health department forms must include questions on recognizing and reporting human trafficking. HB0182 further provides liability protections for tattoo professionals and their employers when they respond to suspected trafficking, refer a client to services, or do not respond or refer. Those actions or omissions cannot be used as the basis for civil or criminal liability, and the Department may not take disciplinary action against them for those choices under the new section. The act takes effect immediately for rulemaking purposes and otherwise on January 1, 2026. The bill’s impact is to expand the regulatory duties tied to tattoo licensing under Title 62, Chapter 38, while creating a new statewide training and reporting framework aimed at identifying human trafficking through the tattoo industry. It affects applicants, current licensees, employers, the Department, local health departments, and approved nonprofit trainers, and it adds a new compliance condition for licensure renewal. The overall sentiment appears strongly supportive and noncontroversial. The bill advanced unanimously through subcommittee and committee and passed the House on consent calendar with no recorded opposition, suggesting broad bipartisan agreement with the anti-trafficking purpose. The main policy focus is prevention and referral rather than enforcement, and the liability protections indicate an effort to encourage reporting without exposing tattoo professionals to legal risk.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 62, Chapter 38, by adding mandatory human trafficking recognition training for tattoo operators and tattoo artists, modifying license renewal paperwork, and creating a new compliance deadline for existing licensees. It also adds statutory immunity from civil, criminal, and departmental liability for specified responses or nonresponses to suspected trafficking, thereby changing the legal obligations and protections associated with tattoo licensure and regulation.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received very favorable treatment throughout the legislative process. It passed the House Business and Utilities Subcommittee, the House Commerce Committee, and the House floor unanimously or by consent with no recorded dissent, indicating broad support for the anti-human-trafficking purpose and the training-based approach. The absence of committee opposition suggests little controversy around the measure.

Contention

No major opposition is reflected in the available votes or materials. The only potentially sensitive policy issues are the new mandatory training requirement for license applicants and renewals, the deadline that can render a license invalid for noncompliance, and the immunity provisions shielding tattoo professionals and employers from liability and departmental discipline when they respond to suspected trafficking or fail to do so. However, the bill’s unanimous advancement suggests these provisions were not strongly contested in the legislative record provided.