The five rows below carry the operative statutory language verbatim, each quote pulled from the official code. This page is one state from the full state-by-state reference. Nothing here is legal, tax, or financial advice.
The five-part test in brief
Whether an ABA practice needs a professional entity is a stack of five questions. The licensing act is the gateway, because an unlicensed profession is generally not a professional service and an ordinary entity governs. The professional-entity statute supplies the form and the ownership rule that applies if that form is used. The scope definition decides whether ABA is actually inside that statute. The corporate-practice doctrine, a separate body of law that often lives in the medical practice act or case law rather than the entity statute, is usually what forces licensed ownership and pushes outside capital into a management company. And the fee-splitting and anti-remuneration rules constrain management-fee economics even where ownership is open. The rows below run those five against this state's actual code, quoting the operative language so the position rests on the statute.
North Carolina, provision by provision
North Carolina
Ownership openYes. Behavior analysts are licensed by the North Carolina Behavior Analysis Board under Article 43 of Chapter 90, and it is a violation for an unlicensed individual to practice behavior analysis or to hold oneself out as practicing it. The existence of that license raises the professional-entity question, but as the next rows show, the entity statutes do not reach Article 43.
North Carolina restricts ownership of a professional entity to licensees. A professional corporation may have as shareholders only those individuals the Act permits, that is, persons licensed to render the same professional service, and the professional-LLC provisions apply the same restriction to members. But that restriction governs only if ABA is a professional service the Act reaches, which is the scope question in the next row.
It does not. The Professional Corporation Act defines professional service by a closed list of licensing statutes, and the professional-LLC provisions in Chapter 57D apply only to those same listed statutes. The list references the psychology article, Article 18A of Chapter 90, but not Article 43, under which behavior analysts are licensed. Because Article 43 is omitted, ABA is not a professional service the Act reaches, so it need not be rendered through a professional corporation or professional LLC, and an ordinary LLC or corporation governs with open ownership.
Ownership. No North Carolina rule requires licensed ownership of an ABA practice. The corporate-practice-of-medicine doctrine is medicine-specific, rooted in the Medical Practice Act and the Medical Board's authority over the practice of medicine, and behavior analysts are licensed under Article 43, outside that framework. Combined with the entity statutes' omission of Article 43, nothing reaches the equity of an ABA practice, so a non-licensee may own a standard LLC or corporation that employs licensed behavior analysts.
Clinical control. The doctrine does not by its terms reach an ABA practice, so it imposes no requirement that a licensed analyst hold clinical control or that a lay owner stay out of the business. Ownership is open because neither equity nor clinical control is policed for ABA.
No ABA-specific North Carolina fee-splitting statute was identified, and the state's fee-splitting and self-referral restrictions are oriented to the medical professions. For an ABA practice the operative remuneration constraints are federal, principally the Medicaid anti-kickback rules, together with payor contract terms and the Code of Conduct enforced by the North Carolina Behavior Analysis Board. This row will be updated if a directly applicable provision is confirmed.
Outlook: how this verdict could change
Likelihood of change: Moderate. North Carolina is an active private-equity-oversight state, but its current bill is physician-focused and does not reach ABA. The verdict would change only if Article 43 were added to the § 55B-2(6) professional-service list (which would make the professional corporation and PLLC licensee-only for ABA), or a corporate-practice or MSO bill were broadened beyond medicine.
What to watch. Senate Bill 570 (2025), presently limited to Article 1 of Chapter 90 (the practice of medicine), and any amendment to the § 55B-2 list, which was last amended in 2019 and omits Article 43.
Disruption if it changes: Moderate. Adding Article 43 to the list would make the PC and PLLC licensee-only; a follow-on mandate to use the professional form would force re-formation and recredentialing, while a control-only or reporting rule would not.
Where professional advice is essential, not optional
Verbatim statutory text is a starting point, not a conclusion. Statutes are amended, agencies issue rules that fill them in, and courts interpret them, so the corporate-practice and fee-splitting questions in particular often turn on interpretation rather than the words on the page. Use this page to locate the operative provisions and to speak from the source, then confirm the current text against the official code and engage qualified North Carolina counsel before acting. The entity verdict is also only one layer of a North Carolina practice's obligations, alongside the facility and records rules and the North Carolina Medicaid enrollment that discloses the entity and its owners. Nothing here is legal, tax, or financial advice.
The provisions quoted here change and are interpreted by agencies and courts. The official North Carolina General Statutes and qualified North Carolina counsel are the authoritative sources. Neither this page nor any secondary source should be relied on in place of direct verification and professional advice.