HB 3225
Specifies qualifications for a physician who is among the majority of the shareholders or directors of a professional corporation organized for the purpose of practicing medicine.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
Committee
Behavioral Health and Health Care
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
85%
Oppose
15%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill clarifies the qualifications for physicians who hold a majority of the shares or directors in a professional corporation that practices medicine. It requires that these physicians be licensed in Oregon, have a domicile and residency within the state, and be actively involved in patient care. The bill also includes exceptions for certain nonprofit and rural health clinics.
Key provisions
- Physicians must hold the majority of voting shares in a medical professional corporation.
- Physicians must be a majority of the directors in a medical professional corporation.
- All officers (except secretary and treasurer) must be licensed Oregon physicians.
- The Oregon Medical Board can require physicians to hold more than a majority of shares or directors.
- Physicians must have a domicile and residency within Oregon.
- Physicians must be actively involved in patient care.
- Certain nonprofit and rural health clinics are exempt from these requirements.
- A business entity can hold shares in a medical professional corporation solely for reorganization purposes.
Who is affected
- Physicians
- Professional medical corporations
- Oregon Medical Board
- Healthcare providers
- Patients
Notable changes
- Establishes specific residency and active patient care requirements for physicians holding controlling shares or director positions.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of House Bill 3225 believe that the bill is crucial for maintaining patient care integrity and safeguarding healthcare providers' interests. They argue that national studies have linked healthcare consolidation to increased costs and reduced access to care, highlighting concerns about corporate pressures on medical professionals. Additionally, proponents emphasize the need to protect independent medical practices and maintain ethical standards, citing threats from Corporate Practice of Medicine (CPOM) and the erosion of patient-centric care due to insurance company imperatives and mega corporation influence. They urge the Legislature to pass HB 3225 to preserve physician autonomy, ensure quality care, and safeguard medical decision-making authority, ultimately protecting consumers and preserving evidence-based treatment.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of House Bill 3225 express concerns that the legislation would have a detrimental impact on Oregon's healthcare system. They argue that the bill's provisions would disrupt continuity of care and patient-provider relationships, particularly in the context of telehealth services, which are essential for rural and underserved populations. Additionally, the Oregon Ambulatory Surgery Center Association (OASCA) warns that the bill's limitations on investments in ambulatory surgery centers could reduce access to care for patients and hinder new development, ultimately leading to a decrease in healthcare options for residents.