In the 2025 legislative session, two states have proposed legislation that would scale back or eliminate cosmetology licensing requirements for salon and barbershop services, sparking debate about government regulation.

The Professional Beauty Association (PBA) has emerged as a strong opponent to these measures, arguing that any reduction in licensing standards would have negative consequences for both the industry and consumers. The organization has actively fought against proposals in both Arizona and Iowa this year.

While Arizona’s bill was unsuccessful, Iowa’s legislation remains under consideration, keeping the issue at the forefront of industry discussions.

Myra Irizarry Reddy, who serves as the PBA’s Director of Government Affairs, argues strongly against weakening professional standards in the beauty industry.

“Licensing procedures currently in place ensure beauty professionals receive proper education in sanitation, chemical safety, and client protection,” according to Reddy. “These requirements serve as essential protections rather than unnecessary bureaucracy.”

She further warns that businesses face significant risks if standards are lowered. “When untrained individuals provide salon services, businesses become vulnerable to legal action, liability issues, and problems with uninsured workers.”

The Iowa legislation, House Bill 711, proposes creating an “establishment training program” that would permit salons and barbershops to employ unlicensed practitioners, provided clients are informed of their status. In response, the PBA is mobilizing Iowa residents to voice opposition to the bill.

In Arizona, House Bill 2039 (nicknamed the “Arizona DOGE” bill after the new federal department established to reduce government spending) sought to eliminate eight state regulatory boards, including the Arizona Barbering & Cosmetology Board.

The Arizona proposal failed to pass after a bipartisan vote against it, with many legislators specifically citing the proposed elimination of the cosmetology board as their reason for opposition. Other less extensive bills inspired by the DOGE initiative to reduce state agency responsibilities continue to advance through Arizona’s legislature.

Arizona State Representative Anna Abeytia, who holds certification as a lash technician licensed through the state board, voted against the bill, describing it as “extremely harmful” to herself and others working in the industry.

The PBA has been proactive in organizing members to oppose efforts to reduce licensing requirements at the state level.

“Beauty professionals shouldn’t have to repeatedly justify that our chosen career requires education and training, and contributes significantly to a thriving industry,” Reddy states with frustration.

She notes that reducing a state’s licensing standards could prevent participation in interstate license reciprocity agreements, which currently allow cosmetologists to relocate between states without retaking licensing examinations.

Reddy characterizes state-level rollbacks of cosmetology licensing as an unnecessary solution to a nonexistent problem.

“This approach not only puts consumer safety at risk but also undermines public confidence in a profession that depends on proper training and licensing to maintain health and safety standards,” she explains.

“The professional beauty industry has reached its limit with these proposals,” she concludes.