Ethics & California LawQuestion 322 of 484
An investor with no beauty license wishes to open a salon and hire licensed staff. Under BPC §7318 this is:
a.Forbidden — only licensed cosmetologists may own a salon
b.Permitted — California does not require the owner of an establishment to hold an individual practitioner license, but the establishment must obtain its own establishment license
c.Permitted only with BBC special approval
d.Permitted only if the investor takes a 50-hour ownership course
Explanation
BPC §7318 does not require the owner of a beauty establishment to be personally licensed; ownership is open to unlicensed investors. What is required is that the location itself hold a current BBC establishment license and that every practitioner working there be individually licensed.
Law Reference: BPC §7318Practice all 484 questions free — no signup required.
Related questions on this topic
- A salon owner sees a competing salon next door operating without an establishment license. The ethical and lawful response is to:
- During a pedicure a regular client asks the manicurist to shave down a hardened callus on the ball of the foot with a small razor-style credo blade. Under California law the manicurist should:
- Which foot care action IS permitted within the California manicurist scope of practice?
- A company owns three salon locations in three different California cities. Under BPC §7318 how many establishment licenses must it hold?
- A licensed cosmetologist plans to take three years off to raise her child and does not want to pay full renewal fees. Under BPC §7321 her best option is to:
- A cosmetologist whose license was REVOKED two years ago wants to return to practice. Under BPC §7321.3 she must:
Last reviewed: · editorial process
PrepPass Editorial Team · Verified against California Board of Barbering & Cosmetology Exam · How we review