> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://dso.getlemma.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # DSO laws by state > 51-jurisdiction operator index to dental-practice ownership, proprietor clauses, DSO and management rules, official authority, and death-transition windows. Use this index to identify the first state-law questions an operator should put into a structure memo, diligence request, or management-services-agreement review: who may own the practice, whether ownership itself is licensed conduct, and whether dentistry has a special filing, fee, asset, or control rule. Select a state name for the detailed operator page; select the authority in the final column for the official text. The posture labels are editorial issue-spotting tools, not state-created legal categories or a substitute for a transaction-specific conclusion. A statute may regulate one entity form but not another, an exception may turn on a facility or nonprofit license, and rulemaking or board interpretation may change the answer. Use the detailed state page to frame the facts, then confirm the operative text and advice for the proposed structure. ## How to read the table * **Working posture:** Strict means the cited text expressly limits ownership or treats proprietorship as dental practice. Moderate means the result is inferential, depends on entity form, or follows from specific permissions. Permissive means the dental act provides a lay-ownership path or does not state a dentist-only rule. Hybrid identifies a statutory ceiling that still needs entity-form analysis. * **Proprietor clause?:** whether the dental act treats owning, maintaining, operating, or managing an office as practicing dentistry. A “yes” is a direct licensure hook, but the exact verbs and exceptions still matter. * **Dental/DSO overlay:** dentistry-specific registration, management, fee, control, or disclosure rules. “None identified” means this index did not identify a special DSO regime. Ordinary entity, facility, payer, privacy, and transaction laws may still apply. ## The table | State | Working posture | Ownership/control rule | Proprietor clause? | Dental/DSO overlay | Primary authority | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | [Alabama](/reference/legal/states/alabama) | Strict | § 34-9-9 generally reserves employing dentists and controlling an office or its equipment to licensed dentists, with an enumerated control list and specified exceptions | No; standalone control rule | Registered 501(c)(3) clinic pathway under § 34-9-7.2 | [Alabama Board Dental Practice Act](https://dentalboard.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Dental-Practice-Act-2024.pdf) | | [Alaska](/reference/legal/states/alaska) | Strict | AS 08.36.367 reserves practice ownership and operation to chapter licensees while allowing specified asset ownership and business management; records are excluded | Control hook at AS 08.36.360(7) | Support permissions are in AS 08.36.367 itself | [Alaska Board statutory compilation](https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/web/portals/5/pub/DentalStatutes.pdf) | | [Arizona](/reference/legal/states/arizona) | Permissive; registration-based | A registered “business entity” may offer dental services if licensees conduct them; unregistered operation is criminal | No | Per-office business-entity registration. HB 2308's dental-insurer ownership bar is enacted but does not become operative until September 12, 2026 | [A.R.S. § 32-1213](https://www.azleg.gov/ars/32/01213.htm) · [2026 Laws ch. 89](https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2r/laws/0089.htm) · [2026 general effective date](https://azdeq.gov/legislative-affairs) | | [Arkansas](/reference/legal/states/arkansas) | Moderate | § 17-82-104 restricts corporate practice and lay direction; the dental-corporation form is dentist-owned | No | § 17-82-111 permits bounded nonclinical services; dental corporations register with the Board | [Arkansas Dental Practice Act](https://healthy.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/May-2025-Dental-Practice-Act.pdf) | | [California](/reference/legal/states/california) | Strict | B\&P § 1625(e) treats proprietorship as dentistry; dental corporations may have only the allied-licensee minority interests allowed by Corp. Code § 13401.5 | Yes | SB 351 adds dental-practice control restrictions for specified private-equity and hedge-fund arrangements | [California Legislature, B\&P ch. 4 art. 2](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?article=2.\&chapter=4.\&division=2.\&lawCode=BPC\&part=\&title=) · [SB 351](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB351) | | [Colorado](/reference/legal/states/colorado) | Strict | C.R.S. § 12-220-303(1)(a) reserves dental-practice proprietorship to a licensed dentist | Yes | Amended Rule 1.7 is scheduled to become operative January 1, 2027; it bars a DSO from proprietorship and conditions support, billing, records access, and fees | [Colorado official Title 12 download](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/agencies/office-legislative-legal-services/2025-crs-titles-download) · [Rule 1.7 docket](https://www.coloradosos.gov/CCR/eDocketDetails.do?trackingNum=2026-00138) | | [Connecticut](/reference/legal/states/connecticut) | Strict | §§ 20-122 and 20-123 restrict dental-office ownership or operation and dental-business ownership to dentists and permitted professional entities | Through direct prohibition | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Connecticut General Assembly, ch. 379](https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_379.htm) | | [Delaware](/reference/legal/states/delaware) | Moderate | § 1101(15) treats proprietorship of a dental operation as dentistry; trade-name owners must satisfy § 1171 | Yes | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Delaware Code, title 24 ch. 11](https://delcode.delaware.gov/title24/c011/sc01/index.html) | | [District of Columbia](/reference/legal/states/district-of-columbia) | Strict | § 3-1201.02(5)(J) treats proprietorship as dentistry, subject to specified dentist-owned entity paths | Yes | No DSO-specific filing identified | [D.C. Code § 3-1201.02](https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/3-1201.02) | | [Florida](/reference/legal/states/florida) | Strict | § 466.0285 generally limits employing dentists to dentists or all-dentist professional entities; prohibited contracts are void and violations can be felonies | No; standalone employment rule | Rule 64B5-17.013 lists permitted management functions and clinical boundaries | [Fla. Stat. § 466.0285](https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute\&URL=0400-0499/0466/Sections/0466.0285.html) | | [Georgia](/reference/legal/states/georgia) | Strict | § 43-11-47(a)(7)(A) channels practice through dentist-owned entity forms and treats prohibited lay employment as discipline | No | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Georgia General Assembly code portal](https://www.legis.ga.gov/laws/code) · [Board rule ch. 150-8](https://rules.sos.ga.gov/gac/150-8) | | [Hawaii](/reference/legal/states/hawaii) | Strict | §§ 448-14.5 and 448-15 prohibit non-dentist ownership, direction, or control and corporate practice outside exceptions | Yes | § 448-14.5(b) enumerates prohibited control | [Hawaii official ch. 448 compilation](https://files.hawaii.gov/dcca/pvl/pvl/hrs/hrs_pvl_448.pdf) | | [Idaho](/reference/legal/states/idaho) | Strict | § 54-924(13) makes any non-dentist ownership interest in the practice entity a discipline ground for its dentists | No | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Idaho Code § 54-924](https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/title54/t54ch9/sect54-924/) | | [Illinois](/reference/legal/states/illinois) | Strict | 225 ILCS 25/38.1 and /44 restrict lay employment, control, and corporate practice | Yes | § 44(g) preserves nonclinical services by dental management service organizations | [225 ILCS 25/44](https://www.ilga.gov/documents/legislation/ilcs/documents/022500250K44.htm) | | [Indiana](/reference/legal/states/indiana) | Strict | IC 25-14-1-23 treats employing a dentist and specified contractual control as dentistry; prohibited lay employment can be a Level 6 felony | Through employment/control clauses | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Indiana Code title 25](https://iga.in.gov/laws/2025/ic/titles/25) | | [Iowa](/reference/legal/states/iowa) | Permissive; statutory-silence caveat | Ch. 153 does not state a dentist-only ownership rule; §§ 153.16 and 153.18 regulate owners of offices where others practice | No | No DSO filing identified. Current 481 IAC 576.3 does not carry forward the former nominal-owner language attributed to 650 IAC 10.4 | [Iowa Code ch. 153](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/153.pdf) · [481 IAC ch. 576](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/iac/chapter/481.576.pdf) | | [Kansas](/reference/legal/states/kansas) | Strict | §§ 65-1424, 65-1425, and 65-1435 restrict proprietorship and corporate forms and add owner-presence and office-count rules | Proprietor/remuneration hook | §§ 65-1470 and 65-1471 require DSO registration and constrain management contracts | [K.S.A. § 65-1470](https://ksrevisor.gov/statutes/chapters/ch65/065_014_0070.html) | | [Kentucky](/reference/legal/states/kentucky) | Permissive under 2026 statute | KRS 313.075 allows entities to own or operate practices if licensees perform the dentistry | No | KRS 313.075 adds clinical-control and dental-benefit-plan ownership rules, with an existing-arrangement provision | [KRS 313.075](https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=56883) | | [Louisiana](/reference/legal/states/louisiana) | Strict | R.S. 37:776(A)(10) treats non-dentist ownership of any kind as a discipline ground; professional entity forms remain dentist-owned | No | Management contracts are permitted within the ownership, control, and fee-splitting limits | [R.S. 37:776](https://www.legis.la.gov/legis/Law.aspx?d=94438) | | [Maine](/reference/legal/states/maine) | Permissive; statutory-silence caveat | Ch. 143 does not state a dentist-only ownership rule, and § 18371(1)(A) contemplates proprietors; entity-form and trade-name rules still apply | No | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Maine official ch. 143 compilation](https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/32/title32ch143.pdf) | | [Maryland](/reference/legal/states/maryland) | Strict; express | HO § 4-103 permits only a licensed dentist or dental professional corporation to own a practice and reserves clinical staffing, treatment records, and sharing in practice revenue or fees to dentists | No; direct ownership/control rule | § 4-103 permits enumerated support services only within its conditions; compensation must be predetermined and fixed, although the amount may use revenues or profits from a prior period of at least 12 months | [Maryland HO § 4-103](https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gho\§ion=4-103) | | [Massachusetts](/reference/legal/states/massachusetts) | Strict | G.L. c. 112, § 49 generally bars a corporation from conducting a dental office; separately licensed clinic paths require their own analysis | No; standalone office rule | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Mass. G.L. c. 112, § 49](https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXVI/Chapter112/Section49) | | [Michigan](/reference/legal/states/michigan) | Moderate; entity-form-based | PC and PLLC ownership provisions require professional licensure; the dental practice act itself does not supply the ownership rule | No | No DSO-specific filing identified | [MCL 450.1284](https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-450-1284) | | [Minnesota](/reference/legal/states/minnesota) | Strict | § 150A.05 subd. 1(2) treats proprietorship of a dental place as dentistry; § 150A.11 restricts corporate practice | Yes | No DSO-specific filing identified; the 2023 transaction-review definition excludes dental providers | [Minn. Stat. § 150A.05](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/150A.05) | | [Mississippi](/reference/legal/states/mississippi) | Moderate; board-rule and entity-form based | Board Regulation 55 and § 79-10-31 restrict the PC form to dentist shareholders; trade names require Board registration | No | Regulation 55's conditional management safe harbor keeps fees and billing with the dentist | [Mississippi Board Regulation 55](https://www.dentalboard.ms.gov/sites/dentalboard/files/regulation55.pdf) | | [Missouri](/reference/legal/states/missouri) | Strict | § 332.071 treats owning, leasing, operating, or managing an office, as well as influencing professional judgment, as dentistry | Yes | § 332.081.5–.6 limits contracts; a 2026 amendment created a bounded hospital-employment exception for emergent care | [Mo. Rev. Stat. § 332.071](https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=332.071) | | [Montana](/reference/legal/states/montana) | Strict | § 37-4-101(2)(b) treats a manager, proprietor, or operator of a dental place as practicing dentistry | Yes | § 37-4-104(2) supplies an express control list | [Mont. Code § 37-4-101](https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0370/chapter_0040/part_0010/section_0010/0370-0040-0010-0010.html) | | [Nebraska](/reference/legal/states/nebraska) | Moderate; answer not express | § 38-1128 regulates people owning or operating dental workplaces but does not state a dentist-only ownership rule; § 38-1115 includes proprietor-directed remuneration in the practice definition | Remuneration hook, not proprietorship alone | § 38-1128(2) gives a coerced dentist a damages-and-fees action. § 38-179(2) bars dividing professional fees for bringing or referring a patient, with specific partner/employee, written gross-receipts-rent, and retirement/separation exceptions. It is not a categorical ban on every revenue-based fee. | [Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 38-1128](https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=38-1128) · [38-179](https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=38-179) | | [Nevada](/reference/legal/states/nevada) | Strict | NRS 631.395 makes prohibited lay ownership, fee sharing, or control criminal illegal practice | No; standalone ownership/control rule | Manager registration under NRS 631.388; percentage-of-revenue support-fee ban; §§ 631.3455–.3457 safe harbor and licensing consequences | [Nevada Legislature, NRS ch. 631](https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-631.html) | | [New Hampshire](/reference/legal/states/new-hampshire) | Strict | RSA 317-A:20 treats owning, leasing, or operating a dental business as dentistry; entity violations can be felonies | Yes | No DSO filing identified; charitable-trust exception must be tested separately | [New Hampshire RSA ch. 317-A](https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXX/317-A/317-A-mrg.htm) | | [New Jersey](/reference/legal/states/new-jersey) | Strict | N.J.S.A. 45:6-19 treats proprietorship or operation as dentistry, including specified employment, equipment-lease, and control arrangements; N.J.A.C. 13:30-8.13 confines entity forms | Yes | N.J.A.C. 13:30-8.13 bars percentage-of-income fees for specified space, equipment, staffing, marketing, or management arrangements | [New Jersey Board rules, N.J.A.C. 13:30](https://www.njconsumeraffairs.gov/regulations/Chapter-30-New-Jersey-Board-of-Dentistry.pdf) · [N.J.S.A. 45:6-19](https://lis.njleg.state.nj.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=xhitlist\&vid=Publish%3A10.1048%2FEnu\&xhitlist_q=%5BRank%20100%5D%5BDomain%3A%2045%3A6-19.%20%22Practicing%20dentistry%22%20defined%5D45%3A6-19.%20%22Practicing%20dentistry%22%20defined) | | [New Mexico](/reference/legal/states/new-mexico) | Permissive; owner-licensure based | §§ 61-5A-5(H) and 61-5A-5.1 permit a lay individual or entity to function as a “non-dentist owner” only through the Board's license or an exemption | No | 16.5.9 NMAC requires owner licensure, clinical independence, public disclosures, records, 30-day change reporting, and detailed applications; 2026 amendments took effect April 21, 2026 | [16.5.9 NMAC](https://www.srca.nm.gov/parts/title16/16.005.0009.html) · [filed 2026 amendments](https://prod-rf-lambda.rtssaas.com/PublicFiles/d89c47bd0d70402dba89b03a22bda6d1/e767da42-1b9a-41d6-9004-f680a53d829c/16.5.9amend.html) · [official statute search](https://nmonesource.com/nmos/en/nav.do) | | [New York](/reference/legal/states/new-york) | Strict | Education Law and professional-entity statutes require licensed practice and licensee ownership of dental professional entities | No; license and entity law | 8 NYCRR 29.1(b)(4) restricts percentage-of-receipts space, facility, equipment, or personnel fees; dentistry's application under PHL art. 45-A requires current definition analysis | [N.Y. Education Law § 6602](https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/EDN/6602) | | [North Carolina](/reference/legal/states/north-carolina) | Strict | G.S. 90-29(b)(11) treats owning, managing, supervising, or controlling a dental enterprise, including digitally, as dentistry | Yes | G.S. 90-40.2 requires a management-agreement legal-review warning; Rule 21 NCAC 16X .0101 restricts revenue-linked fees. S.B. 257 removed mandatory Board agreement review in 2026 | [G.S. 90-29](https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_90/GS_90-29.html) · [S.L. 2012-195](https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/SessionLaws/HTML/2011-2012/SL2012-195.html) | | [North Dakota](/reference/legal/states/north-dakota) | Hybrid; entity analysis required | § 43-28-25(3) makes ownership above 49% by a non-dentist a misdemeanor. That criminal ceiling does not affirmatively authorize every 49%-or-less interest under the selected entity statute | No | No DSO registration. A qualifying professional organization has an annual-report obligation under § 10-31-13 | [N.D.C.C. ch. 43-28](https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t43c28.pdf) · [ch. 10-31](https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t10c31.pdf) | | [Ohio](/reference/legal/states/ohio) | Moderate–strict | ORC 4715.01 treats proprietorship or operation as dentistry and reaches specified above-market equipment leases and profit through ownership or control | Yes | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Ohio Rev. Code § 4715.01](https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-4715.01) | | [Oklahoma](/reference/legal/states/oklahoma) | Strict | 59 O.S. § 328.19(A)(18) treats holding a financial interest in a dental office as dentistry; unlicensed practice can be a felony | Yes | Dental trade-name registration under § 328.31 | [Oklahoma State Courts Network, § 328.19](https://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=95481) | | [Oregon](/reference/legal/states/oregon) | Strict | ORS 679.020(2) limits ownership, operation, conduct, or maintenance of a dental practice to a licensed dentist, subject to stated exceptions | No; standalone rule | SB 951's 2025 management restrictions exclude dentistry from their defined provider scope | [Oregon Legislature, ORS ch. 679](https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors679.html) | | [Pennsylvania](/reference/legal/states/pennsylvania) | Moderate; case-law and entity-form based | *Neill v. Gimbel Bros.* bars a lay corporation from practicing through employed dentists; § 8996 requires licensed beneficial owners and managers for a restricted professional company | No | No DSO registration. A restricted professional company files an annual registration by April 15 under § 8998; late filing carries statutory penalties | [15 Pa.C.S. § 8996](https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/15/00.089.096.000..HTM) · [§ 8998](https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/15/00.089.098.000..HTM) | | [Rhode Island](/reference/legal/states/rhode-island) | Strict text with an MSO/facility clause to reconcile | § 5-31.1-1(17)(i)(A)(II) includes owning, leasing, maintaining, operating, managing, or conducting a dental business in the practice definition; § 5-31.1-1(17)(iii) separately addresses a non-dentist operating a licensed outpatient center or MSO | Yes | MSO noninterference rule; facility and referral-service advertising disclosures | [R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-31.1-1](https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE5/5-31.1/5-31.1-1.htm) | | [South Carolina](/reference/legal/states/south-carolina) | Permissive–moderate; entity-form caveat | No express dentist-only practice-ownership section identified; § 40-15-83 contemplates corporate employers, while professional-company rules remain form-specific | No | Mobile dental-facility registration under § 40-15-177 | [S.C. Code ch. 40-15](https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t40c015.php) | | [South Dakota](/reference/legal/states/south-dakota) | Strict | SDCL 36-6A-31(9) reserves management, ownership, and operation of the practice vehicle to dentists | Exclusive-responsibility formulation | No DSO-specific filing identified | [SDCL 36-6A-31](https://sdlegislature.gov/Statutes/Codified_Laws/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute\&Statute=36-6A-31) | | [Tennessee](/reference/legal/states/tennessee) | Strict | T.C.A. § 63-5-121 generally requires a Tennessee-licensed dentist to own an active practice and restricts lay employment, subject to stated clinic exceptions | No; direct ownership/employment rule | Dental professional entity rule 0460-01-.08 | [Tennessee Comptroller audit addressing § 63-5-121](https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Archives/Joint/committees/gov-opps/ed/Audit_Board%20of%20Dentistry.pdf) · [official Board rules](https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/rules/0460/0460-01.20230919.pdf) | | [Texas](/reference/legal/states/texas) | Strict | Occupations Code § 251.003(a)(4) treats owning or operating an office that employs or engages a dentist as dentistry; unlicensed practice can be a third-degree felony | Yes | Business & Commerce Code ch. 73 requires annual dental support organization registration with the Secretary of State | [Tex. Occ. Code ch. 251 official PDF](https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/OC/pdf/OC.251.pdf) · [Bus. & Com. Code ch. 73](https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/?artSec=\&chapter=BC.73\&code=BC\&tab=1) | | [Utah](/reference/legal/states/utah) | Permissive; statutory-silence caveat | Ch. 58-69 does not state a dentist-only practice-ownership rule; licensed functions remain reserved | No | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Utah Code § 58-69-102](https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title58/Chapter69/58-69-S102.html) | | [Vermont](/reference/legal/states/vermont) | Strict | 26 V.S.A. § 564 supplies an ownership whitelist that includes dentists and specified institutional or nonprofit facilities | No; standalone ownership rule | No DSO-specific filing identified | [Vermont Statutes, title 26 ch. 12](https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/fullchapter/26/012) | | [Virginia](/reference/legal/states/virginia) | Moderate; entity-form channel | § 54.1-2717 channels dental practice entities through professional corporations and professional LLCs; trade names are separately regulated | No | Board guidance 60-24 addresses business entities; guidance 60-6 addresses sale, closure, and death transitions | [Va. Code § 54.1-2717](https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter27/section54.1-2717/) | | [Washington](/reference/legal/states/washington) | Moderate; statutorily channelled | RCW 18.32.020(3) is a proprietor clause, but § 18.32.675 separately allows ordinary asset interests excluding records, nonlicensed staffing, support services, and agreed fees. The federal safe-harbor conditions apply to a distinct nonprofit integrated-care personnel path, not all ordinary permissions | Yes | RCW 18.32.677 enumerates ten nonlicensee-interference prohibitions, including training, advertising, refunds, records access, referrals, and patient communications; no DSO registration | [RCW 18.32.675](https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=18.32.675) · [RCW 18.32.677](https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=18.32.677) | | [West Virginia](/reference/legal/states/west-virginia) | Strict | § 30-4-16 limits practice entities to Board-certificated, dentist-owned corporations or PLLCs, subject to statutory exceptions | No | Certificate-of-authorization regime with annual renewal | [W. Va. Code § 30-4-16](https://code.wvlegislature.gov/30-4-16/) | | [Wisconsin](/reference/legal/states/wisconsin) | Permissive; professional-standards boundary | § 447.06(1) permits a nonlicensee to control practice operations only within the chapter's professional-standard limits | No | § 447.06(1g) prohibits patient and procedure quotas in dentist employment contracts | [Wisconsin Statutes ch. 447](https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/447.pdf) | | [Wyoming](/reference/legal/states/wyoming) | Moderate–strict | § 33-15-114(a)(ii) treats a manager, proprietor, or operator of a dental place as practicing dentistry; entity-form statutes add ownership constraints | Yes | Board rules incorporate ADA ethics provisions relevant to fee splitting, subject to the rule's stated exclusions | [Wyoming Statutes title 33](https://wyoleg.gov/statutes/compress/title33.pdf) · [Board rules](https://dental.wyo.gov/rules) | ## Death and transition windows Death does not produce one nationwide grace period. Some dental acts allow an estate to operate temporarily; some professional-entity statutes instead set a transfer, redemption, offer, or cancellation deadline. Do not treat an entity-law redemption period as permission for an unlicensed estate to make clinical decisions. | Deadline or standard | Jurisdictions and what the period governs | | -------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | 90 days | Wisconsin service corporation: transfer or corporate acquisition of shares held by a personal representative under § 180.1919(2) | | 6–10 months | Georgia: LLC-interest transfer under § 43-11-47(a)(7)(B) · New York: redemption within six months after representative appointment under BCL § 1510 · New Hampshire professional corporation: fair-value offer within six months after death and cancellation mechanics after 10 months under RSA 294-A:9 | | About 12 months | Alabama: cure under § 34-9-9(b) · Arizona: estate registration exemption under § 32-1213(J)(5) · California: §§ 1625.3–.4 · D.C.: spouse/estate route · Hawaii · Illinois: 225 ILCS 25/38.2 · Maryland: one year plus a possible six-month extension under HO § 4-301 · Minnesota: surviving-spouse provision in § 319B.07 · Montana: § 37-4-104 · Nebraska: deceased-dentist name use under § 38-1129 · New Jersey: 375-day share transfer under 14A:17-13(c) · New Mexico: surviving-spouse exemption under § 61-5A-5(I)(3) · North Carolina: § 55B-7(b) · Virginia: PC transfer or acquisition under § 13.1-552(C), with a form-specific PLLC rule in § 13.1-1117(C) · Washington: transfer or redemption and fiduciary authority under §§ 18.100.116 and .118 | | 13 months or reasonable administration | Pennsylvania professional corporation: estate holding for a reasonable administration period under § 2923(b), with separate 13-month acquisition/charter mechanics under § 2907 | | 18–30 months | Connecticut: 18 months under § 20-122(c) · Kansas: 18 months, extendable to 30, under § 65-1424(b) | | About 24 months | Alaska: extendable statutory period · Louisiana: R.S. 37:752(9) · Nevada: family route under NRS 631.385 · North Dakota · South Dakota: § 36-6A-33(15) · Tennessee: § 63-5-121(b) · West Virginia: § 30-4-16(g) | | 36–48 months | Massachusetts: three years under c. 112, § 53 · Maine: 48 months under 13 M.R.S. § 732(5) | | Reasonable time or agency guidance | Vermont: § 564(b) · Michigan: MCL 450.1286 · Virginia Board guidance 60-6 supplies operational guidance in addition to the form-specific one-year statutes | Build the transfer restriction, valuation mechanism, records plan, signatory changes, payer notifications, and substitute-owner process against the law governing the exact entity form. See [Plan for succession](/guides/formation/plan-for-succession). ## What the map shows 1. **A proprietor clause creates a direct licensure hook.** In a “yes” jurisdiction, the ownership or operating conduct itself can satisfy the practice definition. That usually makes entity ownership, leases, employment, and actual control first-order questions, but statutory exceptions still control. 2. **“Permissive” describes different legal paths.** Arizona registers business entities; New Mexico licenses non-dentist owners; Kentucky now supplies an express entity path; Iowa, Maine, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Utah depend more heavily on statutory text, silence, or entity form. Wisconsin has an express operational permission bounded by professional standards. North Dakota's 49% criminal ceiling is not affirmative authorization for every minority-interest structure. 3. **Do not put every filing under the label “DSO registration.”** Texas and Kansas register a DSO; Nevada registers a dental practice manager; Arizona registers a business entity offering dental services; New Mexico licenses a non-dentist owner; Pennsylvania requires an annual restricted-professional-company filing. The regulated person, trigger, location rule, and renewal cycle are different. 4. **Current-period revenue formulas face express dental restrictions in at least five jurisdictions.** Maryland requires predetermined fixed compensation under HO § 4-103(E)(14), subject to its prior-period calculation rule; Nevada bars percentage-of-revenue support fees; New Jersey, New York, and North Carolina have rule-based restrictions. Nebraska's § 38-179(2) is narrower: it addresses division of fees for bringing or referring a patient and should not be restated as a blanket management-fee ban. 5. **Effective dates belong in the closing calendar.** Arizona's 2026 insurer-ownership restriction is enacted but not operative until September 12, 2026. Colorado's amended Rule 1.7 is scheduled to become operative January 1, 2027. Kentucky's KRS 313.075 became effective April 13, 2026. Track enacted, operative, grandfathered, and proposed rules separately on the [dental legislation tracker](/reference/legal/dental-legislation-tracker). ## Sources The final column favors official legislatures, code publishers, dental boards, rule repositories, and agency compilations. Where an official site does not expose a stable section-level URL, the linked state page records the navigation path and any source limitation. New Mexico's compiled 16.5.9 HTML still displays earlier text, so the row also links the filed 2026 amendment. The House Oversight Committee's [Survey of State Laws Governing the Corporate Practice of Dentistry](https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/4-25-12-Survey-of-State-Laws-Governing-the-Corporate-Practice-of-Dentistry.pdf) is a dated 2012 research pointer, not current-law verification. The cases behind the doctrine are collected on [DSO & dental case law](/reference/legal/dso-case-law).