SECONDARY COSMETOLOGY SCHOOLS S.B. 703 (S-1) & 1081 (S-1):
SUMMARY AS PASSED BY THE SENATE
Senate Bills 703 and 1081 (Substitute S-1 as passed by the Senate)
Sponsor: Senator Sam Singh
Committee: Regulatory Affairs
Date Completed: 12-27-24
CONTENT
Senate Bill 703 (S-1) would amend the Occupational Code to allow an individual to
operate more than one cosmetology school if that individual were licensed to
operate a school of cosmetology and the secondary school met certain
requirements.
Senate Bill 1081 (S-1) would amend the State License Fee Act to modify existing
application and license fees for cosmetologists and similar professions, raise the
annual license fee for a cosmetology establishment or school, and prescribe new
application and license fees for a secondary cosmetology school.
Senate Bill 1081 is tie-barred to House Bill 5403, which would amend the Occupational Code
to provide for the licensure of secondary cosmetology school facilities like Senate Bill 703.
Senate Bill 703 (S-1)
The bill would add Section 1205b to the Occupational Code to require the Department of
Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) to issue a secondary school facility license to a person
that held a license to operate a school of cosmetology to operate one or more additional
facilities to teach cosmetology services that were separate from the original premises if the
following requirements were met:
-- An application was submitted to LARA by the owner or manager of the secondary facility
school.
-- The application included a statement of how the secondary facility school would be used,
the address of the premises of the secondary facility school, and a current, detailed floor
plan of the proposed premises that included 1) the arrangement of the classroom, 2) the
placement of equipment, and 3) the location of the premises’ entrances and exits.
-- The secondary school facility met all requirements for a cosmetology school; however, the
secondary facility school could not offer cosmetology services to the public and could not
contain equipment that could be used to perform cosmetology services on the public,
including hair-drying chairs, hydraulic styling chairs, or hair-styling stations.
-- Provisions had been made for the daily supervision of the secondary facility school by a
licensed cosmetology instructor who had at least three years' experience in all services of
cosmetology that were taught in the secondary facility school.
-- The secondary facility school was approved by LARA.
"Secondary school facility" would mean a school that teaches cosmetology in a classroom
setting and meets all the following requirements:
-- Is associated with a school of cosmetology.
-- Is operated by a person that holds the license to operate the school of cosmetology that
the secondary school facility is associated with.
Page 1 of 3 sb703/1081/2324
-- Is located at a premises that is separate from the premises of the school of cosmetology.
The owner or manager of a school that operated a secondary facility school approved by LARA
would have to always display a copy of the school of cosmetology license and the license of
each instructor who worked at the secondary facility school in a prominent place in the
secondary facility school that was visible to the public. The Department would have to
regularly inspect each secondary facility school facility to determine whether the licensee was
conforming to the regulations in the Code.
A licensee’s secondary school facility license would be considered void if there were a sale or
other transfer of the secondary school facility, a sale or other transfer of ownership, or a
change in the location of the secondary school facility. If a person whose license was void
wished to continue to operate a secondary school facility, the person would have to submit a
new license application and obtain a new secondary school facility license.
Within 18 months of the bill’s effective date, LARA, in consultation with the Board of
Cosmetology, would have to promulgate rules to implement the bill.
Senate Bill 1081 (S-1)
The State Licensing Fee Act prescribes fees for the regulation and enforcement of certain
occupations and professions. This includes the following fees, among others, for a person
licensed or seeking licensure as a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist, esthetician,
electrologist, or instructor or a person licensed or seeking licensure to operate a cosmetology
establishment or school of cosmetology, seeking a student registration or transfer, or seeking
a permit to conduct an apprenticeship program:
-- The application processing fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist,
esthetician, electrologist, or instructor paid before September 30, 2027, is $15.
-- The application processing fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist,
esthetician, electrologist, or instructor paid after September 30, 2027, is $10.
-- The annual license fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist, esthetician,
electrologist, or instructor paid before September 30, 2027, is $24.
-- The annual license fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist, esthetician,
electrologist, or instructor paid after September 30, 2027, is $12.
-- The student registration or transfer fee paid before September 30, 2027, is $15.
-- The student registration or transfer fee paid after September 30, 2027, is $5.
The bill would delete these fees and instead would prescribe the following:
-- The application processing fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist,
esthetician, electrologist, or instructor would be $15.
-- The annual license fee for a cosmetologist, manicurist, natural hair culturist, esthetician,
electrologist, or instructor would be $42.
-- The student registration or transfer fee would be $15.
The bill would raise the annual license fee for a cosmetology establishment from $25 to $150
and a school of cosmetology from $100 to $250. The bill would require an individual who
sought to operate a secondary school facility to pay the following fees:
-- A $100 application processing fee.
-- A $200 annual license fee.
Page 2 of 3 sb703/1081/2324
At the beginning of each fiscal year, LARA could increase the fees collected by a percentage
amount equal to at most the average percentage wage and salary increase granted for that
fiscal year to classified civil service employees employed by LARA. If LARA increased fees, the
increase would be effective for that fiscal year, and LARA would have to use the increased
fees as the basis for calculating fee increases in subsequent fiscal years.
By August 1 of each year, LARA would have to provide to the Director of the Department of
Technology, Management, and Budget and the chairpersons of the Appropriations Committees
of the Senate and House of Representatives a complete schedule of fees to be collected from
individuals seeking licensure as cosmetologists, manicurists, natural hair culturists,
estheticians, electrologists, or instructors or individuals licensed or seeking licensure to
operate a cosmetology establishment, school of cosmetology, secondary school facility,
seeking a student registration or transfer, or seeking a permit to conduct an apprenticeship
program for the following fiscal year.
Currently, the Act allows LARA to charge a fee for the publication and distribution of the public
act from which a board's authority is derived and the rules promulgated under that act. The
fee is the cost of publication or $2, whichever is greater. The bill would remove the option for
the $2 fee.
Proposed MCL 339.1205b (S.B. 703)
MCL 338.2209 and 338.2225 (S.B. 1081)
BRIEF RATIONALE
According to testimony, LARA had been allowed to issue licenses to cosmetology schools to
operate secondary facilities in the past, but the practice ended when the LARA deemed it did
not have the necessary statutory authority to provide these licenses. Some have argued that
these licenses promote business in Michigan and that the practice should be re-instated.
FISCAL IMPACT
The bill would have a positive fiscal impact on State government and no impact on local
government. According to data from LARA, the cosmetology program has operated at a deficit
for the past four years. The fees listed in the bill as well as a number of other occupational
fees are deposited into the Licensing and Regulation Fund, including inspection and
registration fees. The fee increases prescribed by the bill, including the cosmetology licensing
fee from $24 to $42 and the secondary school facility fee, would allow LARA to administer the
Fund without the deficit.
Analyst: Nathan Leaman
SAS\S2324\s703sb
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official
statement of legislative intent.
Page 3 of 3 Bill Analysis @ www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa sb703/1081/2324


Statutes affected:
Substitute (S-1): 338.2209, 338.2225
Senate Introduced Bill: 338.2209, 338.2225
As Passed by the Senate: 338.2209, 338.2225