New Hampshire Should Untangle Beauty Professionals from Unnecessary Regulations
Conor Norris
Chair Pearl, Vice Chair Carson, and all distinguished members of the Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee:
Thank you for allowing me to testify on the regulation of beauty services and professionals in New Hampshire. I am the assistant director of the Knee Regulatory Research Center at West Virginia University. The main takeaways of my comments are the following:
- Licensing is not always the appropriate form of regulation.
- Licensing in New Hampshire reduces economic mobility and increases income inequality.
- Over 20 states have safely removed licensing requirements for one of the niche beauty professions proposed by HB 644.
Occupational licensing is one of the most common forms of professional regulation and the most stringent. These laws prevent New Hampshire residents from working in a profession until they meet certain entry requirements, which often include education, training, and passing exams. Licensing is designed to protect consumers from harm from low-skilled professionals, which is an important goal. However, licensing is not the only form of regulation that we can turn to, to protect consumers.
State Symbols USA. "Seal of New Hampshire." State Symbols USA, statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-official-item/new-hampshire/state-seal/seal-new-hampshire
Licensing can be costly, and we have to weigh both the costs and benefits of licensing. Licensing laws create barriers to entry that make it more difficult to enter a profession.
Licensing can be costly, and we have to weigh both the costs and the benefits of licensing. Licensing laws create barriers to entry that make it more difficult to enter a profession. Economic research estimates that licensing reduces the number of professionals by up to 27 percent, increasing the prices paid by consumers.1
Many professions that do not require a traditional, 4-year college degree do require a license. These professions offer an avenue to meaningful employment for non-college graduates if they can afford to meet the licensing requirements. Unfortunately, because of the time and money it takes for training and education, many are unable to enter these professions. Research found that licensing laws in New Hampshire increased income inequality and decreased economic mobility—making achieving the American Dream that much more difficult.2
Niche beauty services, which include shampooing, hairstyling, makeup application, and eyebrow threading, provide a good example of this problem. Economists consistently find evidence that licensing laws act as a barrier to entry for barbers and cosmetologists.3 While licensing may be worthwhile to protect consumers from potential harms from the chemicals used by these professions, niche beauty services pose no such risk to consumers. Requiring a cosmetology license for blow-dry hair styling, or an esthetician license for makeup application or eyebrow threading imposes all of the costs of licensing with none of the benefits for consumers. These education programs cover far more information than is necessary, and some do not even teach the service being licensed.
Allowing niche beauty services to be performed without a license would make New Hampshire a leader in New England, but you would not be going out on a limb. According to the Institute for Justice, 8 states have removed licensing requirements to provide at least one niche beauty services in the past few years.4 Currently, 21 states exempt eyebrow threaders from the esthetician license.5 In 14 states, makeup artists are exempt from licensing.6 18 states explicitly exempt shampooers or hairstylists from a cosmetologist license.7
Since removing the licensing requirement for niche beauty services, states have not experienced a surge in consumer injuries. So far, we see no evidence of lower quality services or consumer harm resulting from delicensure and no consumer advocacy groups recommending reinstating licensing laws. No state has decided to relicense the practice since removing licensing.
Although licensing laws are designed to protect consumers from harm, they are not always appropriate. For niche beauty services, consumers face little risk of injury or harm. However, both consumers and aspiring beauty professionals still face the full costs of licensing. New Hampshire has the opportunity to join a growing number of states to remove unnecessary licensing requirements for safe beauty services.
Works Cited
1 Peter Blair and Bobby Chung, “How Much of Barrier to Entry is Occupational Licensing?,” British Journal of Industrial Relations 57, no. 4 (2019): 919–43
2 Timmons, Edward, Brian Meehan, Andrew Meehan, and John Hazenstab. "Assessing growth in occupational licensing of low-income occupations: 1993-2012." Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy 7, no. 2 (2018): 178-218.
3 Adams, Frank, John Jackson, and Robert Ekelund. "Occupational licensing in a “competitive” labor market: The case of cosmetology." Journal of Labor Research 23, no. 2 (2002): 261-278.; Timmons, Edward, and Robert Thornton. "The Licensing of Barbers in the USA." British Journal of Industrial Relations 48, no. 4 (2010): 740-757; Zapletal, Marek. "The effects of occupational licensing: evidence from business‐level data." British Journal of Industrial Relations 57, no. 4 (2019): 894-918.
4 Menjou, Mindy, Michael Bednarczuk, and Amy Hunter. "Beauty School Debt and Drop-Outs: How State Cosmetology Licensing Fails Aspiring Beauty Workers." Institute for Justice (2021).
5 Norris, Conor. “Tangled up in Licensing: The Case of Eyebrow Threading” Knee Center for the Study of Occupational Regulation Policy Brief. https://csorwvu.com/new-hampshire/
6 Knepper, Lisa, Darwyyn Deyo, Kyle Sweetland, Jason Tiezzi, and Alec Mena. “License to Work: A National Study of Burdens from Occupational Licensing. 3rd Edition.: Institute for Justice (2023).
7 Ibid.