Tennessee Senate Bill SB2221

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Engrossed: 4/6/26
• Enrolled: 4/29/26
• Passed: 5/22/26
• Chaptered: 5/27/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 71, Chapter 5, Part 15, relative to ambulances.

Summary

SB2221 amends Tennessee law governing ambulances under Title 71, Chapter 5, Part 15. The bill changes the penalty or charge structure in Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 71-5-1506(a), replacing a flat rate of fifty dollars per calendar day for each day with a monthly charge equal to five percent of the principal amount owed for each month. It also extends the sunset date in Section 71-5-1509 from June 30, 2026 to June 30, 2027, keeping the existing ambulance-related statutory framework in place for an additional year. In practical terms, the bill affects the collection or enforcement terms tied to ambulance-related obligations by shifting from a daily fixed amount to a percentage-based monthly amount. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law, reflecting a determination that the public welfare requires prompt implementation. The legislation is narrow in scope and does not create a new program; rather, it adjusts existing statutory terms and extends the life of the underlying provision.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 71, Chapter 5, Part 15 by revising the financial calculation in Section 71-5-1506(a) and extending the expiration date in Section 71-5-1509. This changes the legal rate applied to amounts owed from a fixed daily fee to a monthly percentage-based charge and prolongs the statutory authority through June 30, 2027. The affected parties are those subject to the ambulance-related provisions in the chapter, including entities responsible for paying or collecting the amounts governed by the statute.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the Senate Health and Welfare Committee unanimously, then the Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee unanimously, and later cleared floor consideration without any recorded opposition. The final passage vote was unanimous as well, indicating strong bipartisan or at least cross-chamber agreement on the need for the amendment and extension.

Contention

There is little evidence of substantive contention in the available record. No committee transcript is provided, and every recorded vote was unanimous, suggesting the bill was treated as a routine technical or administrative adjustment rather than a disputed policy change. If any concern existed, it likely would have centered on the revised fee structure—moving from a flat daily amount to a five percent monthly charge—or on extending the sunset date, but no opposition is reflected in the voting history.