Michigan Senate Bill SB0130

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/6/25
• Refer: 3/6/25
• Report Pass: 4/8/25
• Refer: 4/8/25
• Report Pass: 4/23/25
• Engrossed: 4/29/25
• Refer: 4/29/25

Caption

Occupations: cosmetologists; cosmetology licensing fees; modify. Amends secs. 9 & 25 of 1979 PA 152 (MCL 338.2209 & 338.2225). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0131'25

Impact

The proposed amendments imply an increase in certain fees while also allowing for annual adjustments based on inflation and other economic factors. The fee for initial applications and renewals will vary by profession and type of registration, notably impacting businesses and individuals in the beauty industry. These changes intend to ensure the fees collected will align with the operational costs associated with processing applications and maintaining appropriate regulation within the profession. Consequently, a shift in the financial responsibility towards users of these services may be observed.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 130 aims to amend the State License Fee Act originally set forth in 1979, specifically targeting sections that govern the licensing fees associated with various cosmetology professionals. This bill proposes updates to the fee structure, introducing new applications for licensure as a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist, esthetician, and electrologist, as well as operating schools of cosmetology. By refining these fees, the bill seeks to streamline the licensure process and make it more accessible for applicants within the state of Michigan.

Sentiment

The conversation surrounding SB 130 appears largely supportive from industry representatives, who argue that a clear and structured fee framework will enhance regulatory compliance and improve the quality of services provided by licensed cosmetologists. However, some concerns have arisen regarding the potential for increased barriers to entry for new professionals in the cosmetology field who may struggle to afford these new fees. The balance between maintaining regulatory oversight and ensuring accessibility for practitioners remains a central point of discussion.

Contention

There is notable contention about how these fee increases could affect the overall accessibility of cosmetological services to consumers. Critics argue that higher costs could be transferred to clients, ultimately leading to increased prices for beauty services. Additionally, as SB 130 is tied to the enactment of Senate Bill No. 131, discussions about the coordination of these pieces of legislation may further complicate the legislative landscape for cosmetology licensure regulations.