Committee hears bill to clarify guest-artist and temporary-location permits for tattoo conventions

A Kansas Senate Commerce Committee hearing on House Bill 2338 focused on clarifying permits for out‑of‑state guest tattoo artists and temporary convention locations.

Representative Pat Proctor, who represents Leavenworth and Fort Leavenworth, told the committee the bill responds to concerns from a constituent who runs a tattoo shop and wanted to host conventions that bring guest artists from other states. He said the bill “clarify[s] the original legislative intent by making it clear that there are different permits” for guest artists and for temporary convention locations. Proctor added, “I do not have a tattoo,” as a light disclosure before explaining the change in intent he said was necessary after rules developed following earlier legislation caused confusion.

The bill would authorize the Kansas Board of Cosmetology to promulgate regulations for both permit types and would state that temporary‑location and guest‑artist permits “shall expire not later than 14 days” unless the board sets a shorter limit. Proctor said the 14‑day limit was discussed with the board and that the board may further restrict durations to prevent an out‑of‑state guest artist from moving around the state on a single short permit.

Committee members asked technical questions. Senator Kim asked whether the statutory term “cosmetic” covered airbrush techniques; one questioner noted his company builds robotic airbrush equipment. A staff member and later a senator referenced KSA 65‑19‑40, the statute the committee used to show the current statutory definition of tattooing and cosmetic tattooing requires use of a needle into or under the skin, which the staff said excludes non‑needle airbrush applications.

Proctor and several witnesses told the committee the problem arose after House Bill 2125 (previous session) when regulatory language lost the original intent and required guest artists to also license locations they had never seen. Proctor said the current bill restores the distinction so guest artists would not be forced to license a location in the state where they do not work regularly.

A board member of the Board of Cosmetology testified previously in the House as a proponent, Proctor told the committee; no opponents or neutral parties were present at this hearing. Proctor said the House passed the bill earlier this year by a 121‑2 vote and stood for questions in the Senate committee.

The committee closed the hearing on HB 2338 and opened a hearing on House Bill 2340.