2015 Legislative Changes in Nevada for Massage Therapists

NevadaLegislatureBuildingThe Nevada Legislature usually meets every 2 years – 2015 marks the 78th Session of the Legislature to do the business of legislation: regulation of all the state functions and scopes in a Session that concludes around the end of May.

The AMTA-NV Chapter’s Mission is to serve any AMTA members while advancing the art, science and practice of massage therapy – a part of that ‘practice’ Mission is to assure that, as an organization, our members are treated fairly and have an opinion, if not a say, about how we’re regulated.

The first step is knowledge – knowledge of the laws that affect us: that we know them is our bound, ethical duty.  That we follow the ones that are ‘in effect’ for each of us, professional- and business-related (separately), is our legal duty.  Duty of Diligence lays groundwork for having an opinion and effect on those laws that may change the way we practice.

The Chapter strives to be aware of and respond to or act upon legislation that is of Profession in nature – so, following: we’ve broken up the 3 Bills that we – through our Government Relations Consultant, National Government Relations Department, and local, chapter Government Relations Committee – have been tracking that may affect all Licensed Massage Therapists in the future into two, distinct categories: ones that affect professionals and ones that affect business owners.

 

Proposal That Affects Massage Therapy (professionals):

This year, 2015, there is one specifically-massage-therapy Bill – AB 126 – that will affect how the NSBMT regulates its Applicants.  Below is a summary of those proposed changes to NRS.640C:

AB 126http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/78th2015/Bills/AB/AB126.pdf

Sponsor:  Assemblywoman Margaret Carlton

​Summary:  Proposed changes to NRS.640C:

 

  • adds exemption of nail techs from massage licensure;
  • strikes the language “by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies, or its successor organization” which leaves the sentence stating “successfully pass a nationally recognized competency examination in massage that meets acceptable psychometric principles, is statistically validated through a job-task analysis under current standards for educational and professionally testing massage therapists and has been approved by the Board; or other examinations approved by the board;”
  • clarifies by changing the limit of time allowed to reinstate an inactive license to 2 years;
  • strikes the 10 year limitation on criminal background offenses;
  • eliminates ‘moral turpitude’ as being a reason to not give a license;
  • adds “has knowingly failed to report to the board that the holder of a license or other person has engaged in unethical or unprofessional conduct as it relates to the practice of massage therapy within 30 days after becoming aware of that conduct”

 

The path of this Bill started in the Nevada Assembly (AB = “Assembly Bill”) and will move on to the Senate, if passed by the Assembly.  The Senate will need to pass this Bill for it to get to the Governor’s desk, which is the last approval the Bill needs to become law.

The Chapter has drafted and remitted a letter of support to the Sponsor and the NSBMT for the above changes to NRS.640C. [view letter]

 

Other Proposals That Affect Massage Therapy (business owners):

AB 336http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/78th2015/Bills/AB/AB336.pdf

Sponsor:  Assemblymen Benitez-Thompson and Hambrick

​Summary:  Proposed change to NRS.597:

* adds requirement, under threat of penalty ($500/day, after the first 24-hour Warning), [Section 1.1.d] “A massage parlor or public spa;” to post a state-produced sign regarding the National Human Trafficking Resource Center Hotline “in a conspicuous location near the public entrance of the business or establishment or in another conspicuous location in clear view of the public and employees where similar signs are customarily posted”

This is likely a trend around the country and does not affect NRS.640C – it does affect how the classified/defined businesses listed need to operate according to NRS.597…

Currently, the NSBMT is requesting “parlor” be changed to “establishment”, so this will affect all “massage establishments”

The Chapter has drafted and remitted to the Sponsor a letter of support with the NSBMT’s requested change of “parlor” to “establishment” [view letter]

 

SB 252http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/78th2015/Bills/SB/SB252.pdf

Sponsor: Committee on Revenue and Economic Development (on behalf of the Department of Administration)

Summary: Proposed change to NRS.76:

Current law requires Independent Massage Therapists and Massage Establishments to maintain a State Business License annually, fee = $200 (unless Exempt).

Proposed law requires Independent Massage Therapists and Massage Establishments to maintain a State Business License quarterly, fee = minimum $100 (based on reported gross income for each quarter)(pg 15, table, at the link above)(unless Exempt)

Basically, it’s a fee structure change for all Nevada business licensees.  This will affect how IMTs and some Establishments will do business.

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Please leave your Comments below – stimulate a conversation/debate/opinion with your educated, well-thought-out questions or comments.  Everyone has an opinion about the profession they love…so let us hear yours!

If you have specific questions about how these changes might affect you, please contact the AMTA-NV Chapter Government Relations Committee or the Board of Directors – we would be happy to help you understand what these changes involve.

If you want to stay up-to-date with the latest changes, please come back to this page occasionally.

We are also looking for a Nevada chapter member to be active in the Government Relations Committee: attending NSBMT meetings, reporting to the AMTA-NV Chapter Board of Directors, and bringing legislative issues to the members’ attention (no matter the origin; within and regarding any Nevada [jurisdiction’s] statutes, codes, and/or regulations).  Join us in keeping AMTA-NV members IN THE KNOW and empowering our practices in massage therapy!

Comments

  1. SB252 DISAPPROVAL.

    If passed, 120,000 of the 300,000 entities filed with the NvSOS will either be Dissolved or Abandoned, since the entities DO NOT CONDUCT business within Nevada. Besides the Nevada BLF, entities that conduct business in another state must pay fees to that foreign state (i.e., Nevada BLF $400.00, and CA Franchise Tax Fee $800.00; TOTAL: $1,200.00 PER YEAR).

    The undersigned has 5 entities filed with the NsSOS, THAT DO NOT CONDUCT BUSINESS, but are holding companies for TradeMarks/Intellectual Property to protect ONE PAYROLL ENTITY. I will abandon 4 of the entities, and reincorporate in Wyoming with NO BLF. My associate has 8 entities, that DO NOT CONDUCT BUSINESS, which are Holding Companies (which do not have IRS EINs). Thus, the state of Nevada will IMMEDIATELY lose 12 entities between 2 professionals), and thousands of other professional will follow.

    Additionally, numerous entities that comprise the 120,000 entities that DO NOT CONDUCT BUSINESS within Nevada are formed by attorneys for Family Trusts, and those entities will be Dissolved or Abandoned.

    Should SB252 be passed by the Legislature, “THE CASH COW” which the Governor believes he has found, will result in the loss of most entities that DO NOT CONDUCT BUSINESS within Nevada. Thus, pass SB252, AND WAIT for the RESULTS of business not conducting business.

    SJ Herlihy

    • Thank you for your astute observations, SJ! They certainly bring to light the other Businesses and ways of operating in NV that most massage therapists do not consider. Your comments are appreciated!

  2. SB252
    I’m assuming this means they are doubling the cost of the business license. That is significant for independent LMT.

    • That seems to be the case, Annette – ‘at least’ doubling, if you go with the minimum quarterly tax. In the U.S., the AMTA reports the average massage therapist is “most likely to be a sole practitioner” (business license-holding) and works around “18 hours/week”…although in Southern Nevada, most LMTs are employed only and the sole proprietors, if working an average of 18 hours per week or less (as they may also be employed), will suffer the doubling effect of the lowest rate of the new tax tier (from $200/yr to $100/qtr). Significant, indeed!

  3. "Zoe" Sherry Yates LMT says:

    Perhaps they could exempt fee’s for those who have not yet paid of their student loans….at least.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: