Top 5 Reasons The AMTA Competing Compact Is Illegitimate

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 — and AMTA, CSG, and DoD Have No Plan for the Chaos Their New Compact Creates

As of December 2025, five U.S. states have already enacted the original Interstate Massage Compact. These states invested real time, legislative effort, public hearings, fiscal analysis, and regulatory planning into adopting IMpact as written.

Yet AMTA, CSG, and DoD have released no details, roadmap, or transition strategy explaining how their new version would affect the states that already joined the original compact.

Will those states have to pass entirely new legislation?

Will their enacted laws simply be abandoned?

Will the compact commission’s formation be delayed or derailed?

We don’t know — because there is no guidance.

This lack of planning undermines the early-adopter states and makes massage therapists in those jurisdictions collateral damage in a political and organizational struggle they didn’t ask for.

4. AMTA Was Part of the IMpact Development Process — Until Its Position Became Ambiguous at Best and Intentionally Unclear at Worst

The original compact was not developed in a vacuum. FSMTB’s official documentation shows that IMpact emerged from a large stakeholder group that included:

• state board regulators

• educators

• practicing massage therapists

• ABMP

• AMTA

• and additional experts across the profession

This multi-year process welcomed feedback, public comment, and professional scrutiny.

For years, AMTA participated in these development meetings and conversations.

But instead of continuing in that collaborative spirit, AMTA shifted to a public stance that has been unclear, conditional, and contradictory.

They have voiced concerns about education hours, exam history, and legacy credentialing — but instead of following the established process to address those concerns, they supported a breakaway compact written outside the public eye.

That move destabilizes professional unity and signals that AMTA’s goal is not collaboration, but control.

3. AMTA’s Stated Concerns Should Be Addressed Through IMpact’s Rulemaking Process — Not Forced Into Statute to Satisfy One Organization

FSMTB is clear on this point:Once a compact is enacted by multiple states, the Compact Commission has the authority to address details like education equivalency, legacy exam pathways, and administrative rules.

This is intentional. A compact statute must be broad, stable, and consistent across all member states. The detailed operational questions are supposed to be handled by rulemaking, not by stuffing complex regulatory issues into statutory language.

AMTA’s solution?

Rewrite the compact entirely and hard-code their preferred positions into statute to bypass the rulemaking process.

This sets a dangerous precedent: that one national association can demand a rebuilt compact simply because it disagrees with the democratic regulatory process built into the original model.

Regulation by statute — especially on matters meant for expert rulemaking — ties the hands of future regulators and complicates national portability.

It’s regulatory bad practice.

2. The “Revised” Compact Was Developed in a Rushed, Closed-Door Process

The original IMpact was developed over years, beginning in 2021, with transparent processes, stakeholder engagement, open meetings, and broad professional participation.

Conversely, the AMTA-backed compact appears to have been created in a compressed, opaque, three-month window — between August and November of 2025 — within a CSG/DoD/AMTA silo.

This sudden, hurried development raises serious concerns:

• Why was the broader profession excluded?

• Why was this drafted behind the scenes instead of through open stakeholder meetings?

• Why the rush — especially when IMpact already exists and is enacted in multiple states?

Rushed legislation leads to unclear laws, regulatory challenges, and long-term instability. It is the opposite of what interstate compacts require to succeed.

1. The Competing Compact Has Not Been Professionally Vetted — Unlike IMpact

This is the most critical issue.

IMpact is the only compact model that has undergone full stakeholder vetting.Its development included:

• multiple national organizations

• state massage boards

• educators

• practicing therapists

• military representatives

• technical review teams

• public comment periods

• multi-year revisions and refinements

Meanwhile, the new AMTA-backed compact has **not been:

• publicly vetted

• reviewed by regulators

• reviewed by educators

• reviewed by licensees

• subjected to profession-wide feedback

• tested for implementation feasibility

• reviewed through a transparent rulemaking framework

Simply put: This “revised compact” has not gone through the democratic process that gives an interstate compact legitimacy.

Its existence creates confusion, divides the profession, weakens mobility efforts, and threatens to destabilize the hard-won progress already achieved by the states that enacted IMpact.

Conclusion: Stability, Integrity, and Public Protection Matter

Interstate compacts only work when they are:

• transparent

• collaborative

• broadly vetted

• professionally supported

• regulator-driven

IMpact meets those criteria.

The AMTA-backed competing compact does not.

Massage therapists deserve a clear, unified path to mobility — not a rushed, unvetted duplicate pushed into the field without the care the profession deserves.

If we want portability, professionalism, unity, and public protection, we must stay aligned with the only legitimate compact: IMpact.

Accompanying Vlog:

Peace and Healing,

Kirby Clark Ellis, MTI, BCTMB