Can a non-physician own a med spa in Indiana?

Q: Can a non-physician own a med spa in Indiana?

THIS SECTION SAID INDIANA WAS “comparatively permissive” WITH NO STRICT CORPORATE-PRACTICE BAN. THE CLAIMS BENEATH IT SAY THE OPPOSITE, AND THEY ARE WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS. The employment safe harbor in the medical practice act is not general: it reaches only “an entity described in subsection (a)(21) through (a)(22)” — a hospital licensed under IC 16-21 or IC 12-25, or a health care organization whose members, shareholders or partners are themselves licensed providers — and even for those the entity must not direct or control the physician’s independent medical acts, decisions or judgment. Separately, a professional corporation may issue shares only to licensed individuals, to general partnerships whose partners are all licensed, to other professional corporations, or to the trustee of a qualified trust. A lay-owned company is outside both lists. These claims survey IC 25-22.5-1-2, IC 23-1.5-3-1 and chapter 25-1-9; they do not survey the whole of Indiana’s entity law. (Ind. Code §25-22.5-1-2(c); Ind. Code ch. 25-1-9 (Health Professions Standards of Practice), read in full; Ind. Code § 23-1.5-3-1(a)-(b) (Professional corporations — shares; issuance; transfer)) This is regulatory monitoring, not legal advice.

Ownership · part of The Practice Perimeter

Short answer
The cited rules do not settle this — the physician-employment safe harbor covers only hospitals and licensee-owned health care organizations that don't control medical judgment, and PC shares may go only to licensees or a qualified trust's trustee.

This section said Indiana was “comparatively permissive” with no strict corporate-practice ban. the claims beneath it say the opposite, and they are what the statute says. The employment safe harbor in the medical practice act is not general: it reaches only “an entity described in subsection (a)(21) through (a)(22)” — a hospital licensed under IC 16-21 or IC 12-25, or a health care organization whose members, shareholders or partners are themselves licensed providers — and even for those the entity must not direct or control the physician’s independent medical acts, decisions or judgment. Separately, a professional corporation may issue shares only to licensed individuals, to general partnerships whose partners are all licensed, to other professional corporations, or to the trustee of a qualified trust. A lay-owned company is outside both lists. These claims survey IC 25-22.5-1-2, IC 23-1.5-3-1 and chapter 25-1-9; they do not survey the whole of Indiana’s entity law.

Drawn from 3 verified rules in this section · regulatory monitoring, not legal advice

Ind. Code §25-22.5-1-2(c) · Jul 26, 2026
Ind. Code ch. 25-1-9 (Health Professions Standards of Practice), read in full · Sep 2, 2026
Ind. Code § 23-1.5-3-1(a)-(b) (Professional corporations — shares; issuance; transfer) · Sep 8, 2026

Related Indiana rules

Indiana’s employment safe harbor is not general — it names the entities it covers, and a lay-owned company is not one of them. “An employment or other contractual relationship between an entity described in subsection (a)(21) through (a)(22) and a licensed physician does not constitute the unlawful practice of medicine or osteopathic medicine under this article if the entity does not direct or control independent medical acts, decisions, or judgment of the licensed physician.” Subsection (a)(21) is “A hospital licensed under IC 16-21 or IC 12-25”, and (a)(22) is “A health care organization whose members, shareholders, or partners are individuals, partnerships, corporations, facilities, or institutions licensed or legally authorized by this state to provide health care or professional services as” a physician, a psychiatric hospital, a hospital, a health maintenance organization, a health facility, a dentist, a registered or licensed practical nurse, a midwife, an optometrist, a podiatrist, a chiropractor, a physical therapist or a psychologist. The no-control condition is a SECOND requirement on those entities, not a route for any other kind of owner.
Ind. Code §25-22.5-1-2(c) · verified Jul 26, 2026
Indiana’s standards-of-practice chapter was surveyed and contains no fee-division ground. ic 25-1-9 is the chapter that supplies the grounds for disciplining a health practitioner, and it contains no prohibition on dividing or sharing a professional fee, and no use of “rebate”, “kickback” or “remuneration”. An absence in this chapter, not in Indiana law as a whole.
Ind. Code ch. 25-1-9 (Health Professions Standards of Practice), read in full · verified Sep 2, 2026

All 3 cited Indiana rules on ownership & corporate practice of medicine →

Get Indiana changes as they publish

We scan the Indiana legislature and licensing boards daily, plus the FDA and the Federal Register. Free weekly Brief — what changed, in plain language, with the source.

Free · unsubscribe in one click · we never sell your address

← All Indiana rules and changes · MedSpaRadar is regulatory monitoring and reference: it summarizes public laws, regulations and agency actions and links each to its source. It is not legal, medical, or compliance advice, and using it creates no attorney-client relationship. A summary can lag its source or leave out detail, and monitoring itself can be interrupted — so an absence of alerts means nothing reached you, not that nothing happened. Read the cited source, check its effective date, and confirm any change to your operations or clinical practice with qualified health-law counsel and your medical director. Legislative data via LegiScan (CC BY 4.0).

Can a non-physician own a med spa in Indiana?

Related Indiana rules

How other states answer this

Related Indiana questions