KRS 313.075 took effect April 13, 2026, and board implementation may continue to develop. Check the legislation tracker for pending changes.
1. CPOD status
Tier: Permissive KRS 313.075(1)(b) (created by 2026 Ky. Acts ch. 131, § 12, effective April 13, 2026) provides that a person or entity shall not own, operate, or advertise the operation of a dental practice “unless licensed by or employing individuals licensed by the board.” A non-dentist entity may therefore own and operate a practice if board-licensed personnel perform the dentistry. Before this section, KRS ch. 313 contained no ownership restriction. The definition of “practicing dentistry” in KRS 313.010(11) covers clinical acts, including performing or advertising dental operations for compensation, diagnosis and treatment of teeth and jaws, impressions, prosthetic work outside a dentist’s work order, and use of the titles “dentist,” “D.M.D.,” or “D.D.S.” It contains no office-ownership or dentist-employment language. Unlicensed practice is a Class B misdemeanor for a first offense and Class A thereafter (KRS 313.070).2. Other professions
This page covers dentistry only. Medicine, optometry, veterinary practice, and other professions are governed by different statutes and boards, even within the same state. For medical-practice sources, use the MSO-PC Wiki.3. Professional entity forms
Permitted forms: dentists (“doctors of dentistry”) are expressly covered by the Professional Service Corporation Act, KRS ch. 274 (KRS 274.005 defines “professional service”). Kentucky also permits PLLCs under the LLC Act (KRS ch. 275). Confirm the PLLC mechanics with counsel. Ownership: because KRS 313.075(1)(b) permits lay ownership, no dentist-only shareholder rule applies to an operating practice outside the PSC form, and no bar on hygienist ownership appears in that provision. A Kentucky group may therefore hold the practice directly rather than use a friendly-PC structure, subject to the clinical-control restrictions in section 6. Also confirm before filing:- Naming rules, designator requirements, and any limits tied to licensed owners’ names; several states regulate dental trade names separately
- Board pre-approval or certificates, whether the dental board must act before (or after) the secretary of state will file
- Officer and director licensure, including states that restrict these roles as well as ownership to licensees
4. Fee structure
No Kentucky statute located for this page bans percentage-of-collections management fees. If the entity owns the practice, a separate management fee may be unnecessary. An arrangement short of ownership must still comply with KRS 313.075(2)‘s clinical-control restrictions, and KRS 313.075(3) separately bars control of clinical operations by anyone who sets reimbursement rates. Verify the structure with Kentucky counsel. For the MSA, test whether a percentage-of-collections fee is permitted under the state’s dental, fee-splitting, referral, tax, and contract rules. Several states expressly restrict revenue-linked dental management fees, and the Aspen Dental settlements imposed related party-specific terms. Flat and cost-plus formulas are not automatic safe harbors; the services, calculation, amount, control rights, and actual payments still matter. See Fee-splitting rules and Set the management fee.5. Noncompetes
No dental-specific noncompete statute was identified in this research; Kentucky noncompetes are governed by general state law. Verify current Kentucky law with counsel before including one. Federal noncompete policy changed substantially in 2025 and 2026. The FTC’s Non-Compete Rule was vacated, the agency dismissed its appeals in September 2025, and the rule was removed from 16 C.F.R. pt. 910 effective February 12, 2026. State law remains central. Dental enforcement resolutions in New York and California have also restricted noncompetes for the settling parties as a corporate-practice remedy. Verify the current rule, worker, agreement type, transaction context, effective date, and remedy in this state. See the legislation tracker.6. DSO-specific law and registration
Yes. KRS 313.075 (2026) regulates clinical autonomy rather than registration. There is no DSO registration or filing requirement. The statute provides:- (1)(b)–(c): entities may not operate a dental practice or employ dental personnel unless the personnel are board-licensed.
- (2)(a): a person or entity not licensed to practice dentistry “shall not exercise control over: 1. Clinical decision making; 2. Diagnosis or treatment planning; 3. Patient records; 4. The supervision of licensed dental personnel; or 5. The professional judgment of a licensed dentist.” Under (2)(b), the dentist “shall retain final authority and responsibility for all clinical decisions.”
- (3): clinical operations “shall not be directly or indirectly controlled by a person or entity that establishes reimbursement rates for dental services,” a restriction relevant to payer-affiliated ownership.
- (4): the rule is expressly prospective. Ownership interests and contractual arrangements lawfully in existence on April 13, 2026 are grandfathered and may still expand or be modified.
7. Death and transition window
None needed, and none appears in KRS ch. 313: because lay ownership is permitted, a deceased dentist’s practice can pass to heirs or a buyer without a statutory continuation clock. For practices held in a KRS ch. 274 PSC, share-transfer mechanics follow that chapter.8. Practical structuring notes
Kentucky permits direct ownership subject to statutory clinical-control rules, so a friendly-PC structure may be unnecessary. Draft governance documents and any management services agreement (MSA) against the five KRS 313.075(2)(a) subjects: clinical decisions, diagnosis and treatment planning, patient records, supervision of licensed personnel, and professional judgment. A structure with a payer-affiliated owner needs specific review under subsection (3). The chapter was substantially reorganized around 2010, so older section numbers such as KRS 313.310 are obsolete. The provisions of 201 KAR ch. 8 reviewed for this page contain no ownership or management-agreement rules.9. Verification checklist
- Confirmed the permitted entity form for dentistry in this state
- Confirmed whether dental board pre-approval or a certificate is required before filing
- Confirmed whether officers and directors must be licensed dentists
- Confirmed the management fee structure is lawful here, including any restriction on revenue-linked fees
- Clinical carve-out drafted against this state’s current statutory language, including any enumerated control prohibitions
- Transfer restriction and succession documents checked against this state’s death-transition window
- Noncompete provisions checked against current state law
- DSO foreign-qualified before it has employees here
- Any DSO registration, licensure, or disclosure obligation identified and calendared
- Trade-name and advertising-disclosure rules for dental practices checked
10. Sources
For the cases and statutes referenced above, see DSO & dental case law and the 51-jurisdiction table. For enacted and pending legislation, see the dental legislation tracker.