AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 56, Chapter 7 and Title 63, relative to payment for services rendered by chiropractors.
Summary
SB0225 would amend Tennessee’s insurance reimbursement law to require health insurance entities to treat chiropractic physicians the same as medical physicians when calculating payment for covered services or procedures that are billed using nationally recognized code books such as CPT. The bill changes references in existing law from “chiropractor” to “chiropractic physician,” and it adds a new nondiscrimination rule prohibiting insurers from using different reimbursement methodologies or amounts based solely on whether the provider is a chiropractic physician or a physician licensed under Title 63, Chapters 6 or 9.
The bill also bars insurers from avoiding this parity requirement by creating chiropractic-specific codes or payment methods that are not part of the nationally recognized code book used by the insurer. At the same time, it preserves the use of national uniform relative value units (RVUs) to reflect the resources involved in furnishing a service. The bill expressly excludes TennCare, CoverKids, and insurance coverage provided by the state or local governments from its requirements, and it would take effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
If enacted, SB0225 would amend Tennessee Code Annotated § 56-7-2404 and related terminology in Title 56 and Title 63 to expand reimbursement protections for chiropractic physicians in the commercial insurance market. It would limit how private health insurance entities set reimbursement for covered chiropractic services, while leaving public programs such as TennCare, CoverKids, and state or local government coverage outside the bill’s scope. The measure could affect insurer payment policies, provider billing practices, and reimbursement disputes involving chiropractic care.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was initially controversial but later gained stronger support. It failed in the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee on March 25, 2025, by a 4-3 vote, indicating early resistance. In later committee action, however, it was recommended for passage with amendments by an 8-1 vote in Commerce and Labor and then advanced unanimously, 11-0, in the Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee, suggesting that amendments or further discussion improved its reception.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s requirement that insurers not discriminate between chiropractic physicians and medical physicians in reimbursement methodology or amount, which may raise concerns among insurers about cost, payment parity, and administrative flexibility. Supporters would likely view the measure as a fairness and provider-equality issue for chiropractic care, while opponents may object to mandated reimbursement parity or the restriction on insurer-specific coding approaches. The explicit exemption for TennCare, CoverKids, and government coverage indicates the bill is focused on private insurance and may have been designed to address concerns about broader fiscal impact.