There’s been a lot of chatter lately about changes to the Interstate Massage Compact. Some say the changes are “minor”, "more inclusive", or frame them as "helpful tweaks". But one detail in the revised language is not minor — it’s structural, and it risks excluding experienced, licensed therapists who were previously intended to be covered by the original compact’s flexibility. The revised compact excludes every therapist who qualified for licensure under NCBTMB ’s historic

The Council of State Governments (CSG) recently released a revised version of the Interstate Massage Compact (IMpact). As someone deeply invested in the success, integrity, and long-term stability of this compact, I believe these revisions should be rescinded—and that any new language should not be introduced until no earlier than 2027. Below, I want to explain why many practitioners, educators, and advocates are urging CSG to reconsider—and why this matters to every massage

Across the massage therapy profession, there has been growing confusion about a second, competing interstate compact being promoted by the American Massage Therapy Association (AMTA) in collaboration with the Council of State Governments (CSG) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Professionals deserve clarity. So let’s dig into the top five reasons this competing compact is not just ill-advised — but fundamentally illegitimate . 5. Five States Have Already Enacted IMpact