Dental Restrictive Covenants

As a 17 th -century French playwright, actor, and poet, Molière probably received his fair share of stinging, negative reviews of his work. While we may not know exactly how he felt about such critiques, he did offer some sage advice that dentists should heed when confronted with a patient’s scathing, hurtful, or untrue online review: “ A wise man is superior to any insults which can be put upon him and the best reply to unseemly behavior is patience and moderation .” Human nature being what it is, patience and moderation can be in short supply when a dentist reads a review that casts doubt on their competence, integrity, or professionalism, especially if they believe that the review’s content contains abject falsehoods or misrepresentations. Not only can such online comments make blood boil and bruise the ego, but even one negative review can have a devastating impact on a practice and its reputation. 84% of the public trusts online reviews to help them make consumer decisions, including those involving healthcare providers. According to some surveys, more than 70% of patients say they read reviews before selecting a healthcare provider, and nearly half would not consider a provider with fewer than four stars. Negative reviews can disproportionately influence perception, even if they represent a small fraction of feedback. Given that a single negative review can stand out in an otherwise glowing profile and, if left unaddressed, may deter potential patients, dentists understandably will want to respond, correcting misstatements or otherwise neutralizing the misrepresentations or assertions contained in the review. But those responses, if made reflexively and without careful consideration of legal and ethical boundaries, can make a bad situation worse or make the dentist appear petty and vindictive. Additionally, dentists who do decide to respond to a patient’s negative review publicly may inadvertently reveal confidential patient information in their attempts to refute allegations of poor or substandard care. Such transgressions can have catastrophic licensing and regulatory consequences for dentists. So what should dentists do when faced with a horrible review that every prospective patient can see? As discussed below, responses can, and often should, be made, but with the patience and moderation Molière recommended. Hitting Back v. Hitting HIPAA Perhaps the biggest risk dentists take when publicly responding to a patient’s negative review is inadvertently violating their HIPAA patient privacy obligations. Unlike other businesses, dentists cannot freely discuss the details of a patient’s complaint in a public forum. The HIPAA Privacy Rule prohibits disclosing protected health information (PHI) without patient authorization. Even acknowledging that the reviewer is a patient may constitute a privacy violation. For example, if a patient writes, “I had a terrible root canal here,” the dentist cannot reply with, “We offered you antibiotics, but you refused.” That would be a clear HIPAA violation. Instead, dentists should respond in general terms that neither confirm nor deny treatment specifics. Best Practices for Responding to Negative Reviews When deciding how and whether to respond, dentists should keep the following principles and tips in mind: Cool Off Before Going Off. The worst thing a dentist can do with a bad online review is to immediately post a response in the throes of anger and indignation, however justifiable those emotions may be. Before deciding whether and how to respond, take the time needed for your professionalism and rationality to come back to the fore. Stay Professional and Neutral. Never respond defensively or emotionally. A hostile reply can escalate the issue and further damage your reputation. Even if the review feels unfair, professionalism is key. Acknowledge Without Confirming. Responses should not confirm that the reviewer is or was a patient. Instead, use neutral language such as: “We take all feedback seriously and strive to provide excellent care. We encourage you to contact our office directly to discuss your concerns.” Take the Conversation Offline. Invite the reviewer to call or email the office to resolve the issue privately. This demonstrates attentiveness while protecting confidentiality. Highlight Practice Values. Use responses as an opportunity to reaffirm commitment to patient care. For example: “Our goal is to make every patient feel comfortable and well cared for. We welcome feedback to help us improve.” When Silence May Be Golden Not every negative review needs a reply. If the comment is clearly unreasonable, inflammatory, or fraudulent, sometimes the best response is no response—or a simple flagging of the review for removal. Consider not responding in the following circumstances: Abusive or Fake Reviews. If a review contains profanity, slander, or appears fraudulent, flag it for removal instead of responding. Ongoing Legal Disputes. If the complaint relates to malpractice or litigation, responding publicly can backfire and give the patient more ammunition for their claims. Obvious Spam. Automated or irrelevant reviews do not require acknowledgment. Can You Sue for Defamation? Sure. Will You Win? Probably Not. On more than one occasion, a panicked and indignant dentist or other client of mine has called me to ask whether they could and should sue their former patient for defamation for a harsh online review. The answer, of course, is that you are well within your rights to sue “YourDentalPracticeSucks123” or whoever it is that is trying to take a wrecking ball to your career. You can sue anybody for anything. Whether such a lawsuit will be successful or has any legal basis is another matter entirely. The fact is that even the most scathing negative online review, if susceptible to the principle of “innocent construction” (meaning the allegedly libelous statement is given a non-defamatory interpretation because it is deemed ambiguous) or is composed of opinions rather than demonstrably false allegations of misconduct, will likely not qualify as actionable defamation in most jurisdictions. Furthermore, such lawsuits can expose the offended dentist or other professional to backlash, ridicule, and bad publicity in the fast-moving and fickle world of social media. If you look to hold online review sites and other platforms responsible for false and defamatory information posted by reviewers, you won’t get terribly far. While you may be able to get a website to remove a particularly egregious post, Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act largely immunizes such sites from claims based on comments or reviews posted by third-party users. Is It a Subjective Opinion or a Factual Allegation? The most common issue that arises in defamation cases based on online reviews is the question of whether or not a statement was false. Only false statements of fact can form the basis of a defamation claim, not opinions, no matter how histrionic or counterfactual they may be. A statement of fact is one that can be objectively proved or disproved. Consider the two following hypothetical reviews of a dentist: “She was rude, impatient, and treated me disrespectfully. It was perhaps the worst experience I’ve ever had with a dentist in my entire life. She is horrible.” “He stole money from my purse and touched me inappropriately while I was under sedation.” The former is a non-actionable opinion, as the dentist will not be able to objectively prove whether or not she was, in fact, rude, disrespectful, and the cause of one of the worst experiences in the patient’s life. Contrast that with the latter statement that accuses the dentist of specific actions and misconduct that can be proven or disproven with evidence. Proactive Reputation Management The best defense against negative reviews is a steady stream of positive ones. Dentists can encourage satisfied patients to leave feedback by: Sending follow-up emails with review links Placing QR codes in the office for easy access Training staff to request reviews after successful appointments A high volume of positive reviews will dilute the impact of the occasional negative one and provide a more accurate picture of patient satisfaction. As infuriating as negative online reviews can be, it is the rare dentist who can make it through their career without leaving at least one patient dissatisfied or unhappy with their treatment. When a patient shares those feelings with the world, it can be easy to let it get under your skin. But sometimes, restraint can speak louder than a retort. If you have questions or concerns about negative online reviews or reputation management for your dental practice, please contact Grogan Hesse & Uditsky today at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

On July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) was signed into law. One may question whether this sprawling piece of legislation deserves to be called “beautiful,” but it undoubtedly earns the “big” in its name, especially for small businesses like dental practices. That is because it contains several provisions that could have a significant impact on the tax obligations of practices and their owners. Most notably, the OBBBA solidifies significant tax reforms and exemptions that were part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). Here are seven aspects of the OBBBA that are of particular interest to dental practices and their owners. 1. Permanent Qualified Business Income (QBI) Deduction The 20 percent small business tax deduction (also known as the section 199a deduction) for sole proprietorships, partnerships, S-corporations, and LLCs, which was scheduled to expire at the end of 2025, is made permanent and extends the amount of income subject to the phase-out rules. Specifically, the income threshold for single taxpayers is expanded by $25,000 and for joint filers by $50,000. The bill also includes a new minimum deduction of $400 for taxpayers with at least $1,000 of qualified business income from one or more actively conducted trades or businesses in which they materially participate. 2. Expanding Section 179 Expensing The bill increases the Small Business Expensing Cap from $1.22 million to $2.5 million. It also brings back and makes permanent “bonus depreciation,” which allows for an immediate write-off of 100 percent (versus 40 percent) of the cost of new qualified property acquired after January 19, 2025, such as equipment, vehicles, and software. 3. Qualified Small Business Stock The OBBBA modifies the Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS) provisions contained in Section 1202 of the Internal Revenue Code by increasing the amounts that can be excluded from gross income, raising the size limit for QSBS investments, and shortening the holding period so investors can take advantage of the provision's benefits earlier than before. Specifically: For QSBS issued after OBBBA's July 4, 2025, effective date, the per-taxpayer gain exclusion cap for the sale of QSBS is raised from $10 million to $15 million, with that threshold being adjusted for inflation starting in 2027. The exclusion amount will now be $15 million or 10x the basis in the stock, whichever is greater. The aggregate gross assets a C corporation may have for its stock to qualify as a qualified small business is now $75 million – up from $50 million - for stock issued after July 4, 2025, with the new limit to be adjusted for inflation beginning in 2027. For QSBS acquired after July 4, 2025, the holding period required to qualify for the QSBS gain exclusion drops from five years to three years. After three years, a 50% exclusion is available, increasing to 75% after four years, and reaching 100% exclusion after five years. 4. Enhancing the Employer-provided Childcare Credit Section 45F of the tax code, which is designed to incentivize businesses to invest in childcare, now provides qualifying small businesses (gross receipts of $25 million or less for the preceding five years) with a maximum tax credit of up to $600,000 per year on up to 50 percent of qualified childcare expenses provided to employees. This credit is effective beginning in 2026. 5. Employer-provided Student Loan Repayment Assistance The OBBBA makes the employer-provided student loan repayment benefit permanent, allowing employers to contribute up to $5,250 per year towards employees' student loans, tax-free for both the employer and employee. This annual limit will be adjusted for inflation starting in 2026, ensuring the benefit keeps pace with rising education costs. 6. Permanent, Inflation-Indexed Estate & Gift Tax Exemption The OBBBA permanently increases the unified federal estate and lifetime gift tax exemption to $15 million per individual ($30 million for married couples), indexed for inflation starting in 2026. If the TCJA’s exemption provisions had expired, the threshold would have dropped to approximately $7 million per individual. This stability allows ultra-high-net-worth individuals to accelerate lifetime gifting and fund trusts efficiently. Techniques such as SLATs (Spousal Lifetime Access Trusts) are now more powerful planning tools given the increased exemption scope. The generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax exemption is now also aligned with the $15 million per individual exemption, also indexed for inflation. 7. SALT Deduction Raised – For Some The law increased the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap from $10,000 to $40,000; however, this cap is not universally available. If your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) exceeds certain thresholds, the $40,000 cap will be phased out. For single filers, the phase-out starts at $250,000 MAGI. For joint filers, the phase-out starts at $500,000 MAGI. The deduction is reduced by 30% of the amount exceeding these thresholds until it reaches the original $10,000 cap for the highest earners. The income thresholds for the phase-out will increase by 1% annually from 2026 to 2029. If you have questions about the OBBBA and what it means for you and your practice, please contact Grogan Hesse & Uditsky today at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

Dental practices that choose to lease rather than purchase and own their business location have several options for setting up shop. While plenty of practices operate out of stand-alone buildings, even more lease space in retail shopping centers, professional buildings, or office complexes. The terms of that lease – from the rent to the term to build-out, termination, or assignment rights – can have an outsized impact on the growth and success of a practice. But one lease provision, in particular, can determine whether your practice faces stiff and unwanted competition from another practice just steps from your office’s front door: the exclusivity (or exclusive use) clause. What Is An Exclusive Use Provision in a Dental Practice Lease? As the name implies, an exclusive use clause in a lease limits the landlord’s ability to lease space in the same complex or building to another tenant engaged in the same type of business. Think about why you would choose a particular location for your practice. Aside from the features of the space itself, it is likely because of favorable characteristics like foot traffic, accessibility, parking, and the lack of other similar practices in the surrounding area. If, after conducting demographic research and spending time and resources selecting the perfect location for your practice, your landlord could wipe out those efforts with the stroke of a pen by leasing space nearby to a competing practice, it could be a devastating blow. Negotiating an Exclusive Use Provision Most commercial leases are initially prepared by the landlord. As such, they are unsurprisingly skewed in favor of the landlord’s interests. It is unlikely that a landlord would voluntarily and preemptively tie their hands by limiting the pool of potential tenants. That is why the burden is usually on the tenant to push for and negotiate an exclusivity provision. When negotiating the terms of your dental practice lease (which you should only do with the help and counsel of an experienced attorney), the goal will be to get your landlord to agree not to rent space to other dental practice tenants. If your landlord refuses to limit their ability to lease space to other dentists generally and you nevertheless want to pursue the desired space, you may be able to be more specific and agree to a provision that restricts the landlord’s ability to lease to a particular competing specialty such as pediatric dentists, orthodontists, periodontists, etc. Protecting Yourself From a Landlord’s Breach of an Exclusivity Clause The contracts most likely to be broken are those with few, if any, consequences for violating their terms. That is why the value of an exclusivity provision is directly related to the price that the landlord will pay for entering into a lease with a competitor despite the clause in your lease. Given the potentially catastrophic impact of having a neighbor in the same building siphoning off your patients and diluting your hard-earned goodwill, that price should be significant. Several different penalties can serve to protect your practice from a breach of an exclusivity provision: Rent Abatement. One of the most straightforward and commonly used remedies is rent abatement. If the landlord allows a competing business to open in violation of the exclusive use clause, an abatement penalty can entitle you to a full or partial reduction in base rent or other charges. This abatement typically remains in effect until the violation is cured or the competing tenant leaves. The lease should specify the amount of rent to be abated (e.g., 50% of base rent) and whether the abatement applies to other charges such as common area maintenance fees or percentage rent. Termination Right. A strong lease will give the tenant the option to terminate the lease entirely if the landlord fails to cure the violation within a specified period after notice. This is a significant penalty that underscores the seriousness of the exclusive use protection. Liquidated Damages. Liquidated damages provide a pre-agreed amount that the landlord must pay if it breaches the exclusive use clause. This can be calculated based on the tenant’s projected loss in revenue, estimated lost profits, or some other measurable metric tied to the tenant’s business performance. Injunctive Relief. Ideally, the lease should give you the right to seek injunctive relief from a court to stop the violation of the exclusive use provision, such as requiring the landlord to terminate the lease or evict the competing tenant.  Getting a landlord to agree to a strong exclusivity provision with equally strong penalties for breaches of it requires deft and persuasive negotiating skills, and is yet another reason why dental practice owners should never enter into or negotiate a lease without the assistance of experienced counsel. If you are considering a lease for your practice, please contact Grogan Hesse & Uditsky today at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

Recent amendments to the Illinois Dental Practice Act (the “Act”), which Gov. JB Pritzker is expected to soon sign into law, will make it easier for newly minted dental professionals to begin practicing while their license applications are pending. The amendments, which would take effect on January 1, 2026, establish the following criteria under which license-pending dentists and dental hygienists can practice under the delegation of a licensed general dentist: The Applicant has completed and passed the IDFPR-approved licensure exam and presented their employer with an official written notification indicating such; The Applicant has completed and submitted the application for licensure; and The Applicant has submitted the required licensure fee. Once obtained, authorization for dentists and dental hygienists to practice under these provisions can be terminated upon the occurrence of any of the following: The Applicant receives their full-practice license; IDFPR provides notification that the Applicant’s application has been denied; IDFPR requests that the Applicant stop practicing as a license-pending dentist/dental hygienist until the Department makes an official decision to grant or deny a license to practice; or Six months have passed since the official date of the Applicant’s passage of the licensure exam (i.e., the date on the formal written notification of such from the Department). IDFPR has yet to post anything on its website regarding these amendments, but we will provide an update if and when it does. If you have any questions about these new provisions regarding the employment of license-pending dentists and hygienists, please contact Grogan Hesse & Uditsky today at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

As all dental practice owners know, insurance companies frequently make adjustments to their reimbursement amounts, leading to the common circumstance that a patient who paid a certain amount at the time of treatment may be entitled to a credit from the practice. That credit, usually kept on the practice’s books so that the patient can apply it to future services, has two distinct qualities that have significant legal and financial implications when a practice is about to be purchased or sold. Failure to account for and address such outstanding patient credits early in a transaction can lead to unwanted surprises as well as potentially costly penalties. That is because a patient credit is not only a liability on the books of the practice, it is also the as-yet unclaimed personal property of the patient. That latter characteristic comes with legal obligations under state unclaimed property laws. If you are buying or selling a dental practice, here is what you need to know about handling patient credits during and after the transaction. Accounting For Credits in the Purchase Price More often than not, unused patient credits remain just that – unused. If a practice purchaser knew for an absolute certainty that the patient would never return and ask for the credit to be applied to new services, it would not impact the underlying practice valuation or sale price. Of course, nothing is certain, and if a practice has thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of credits on the books, even a fraction of those credits, if redeemed, could have a significant impact on the practice’s profitability. That is why any patient credits should be disclosed, identified, and addressed as early in the transaction as possible so that neither the buyer nor seller find themselves in the uncomfortable position of renegotiating the purchase price or providing the buyer with a credit. Reporting and Accounting Obligations Under Unclaimed Property Laws Any business holding goods or funds that belong to a customer, client, or other company or individual cannot simply pocket that property or money because its owner may have forgotten about it or is unaware of its existence. If a business holding such property, which includes patient credits, loses contact with the owner for a certain period set by law (called the “dormancy period”), the company effectively becomes the trustee of that property, holding it for the benefit of the owner until they make a claim for its return. In Illinois, that claim may come after the owner searches the Illinois State Treasurer’s unclaimed property database . The information in that database comes from businesses that must provide the Treasurer’s Office with detailed and frequent reports about any unclaimed property they hold pursuant to the requirements of Illinois’ Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (the “Act”). Most U.S. states have adopted this model act, so the following discussion of Illinois’ version is representative of unclaimed property laws generally. When Does Property Become “Unclaimed”? As noted, property is considered unclaimed and abandoned if it has not had any activity within a designated “dormancy period” and the holder is unable to locate the property owner. Under Sec. 15-201 of the Act, the dormancy period is three years for most types of property, though others have longer or shorter periods. For example, there is a 15-year period for traveler's checks, a five-year period for money orders, and a one-year period for payroll checks. Patient credits would fall under the three-year period. Reporting and Notice Obligations For Holders of Unclaimed Property Any for-profit and not-for-profit business entities that conduct business in Illinois are required to electronically report unclaimed property to the Treasurer’s Office on an annual basis. Even businesses not holding any unclaimed property must file a negative report advising as such if they meet any of the following criteria: Annual sales of more than $1,000,000; Securities that are publicly traded; A net worth of more than $10,000,000; or More than 100 employees. The deadline for Illinois dental practices to file unclaimed property reports for unused patient credits is May 1 of each year. The report should reflect one year of account activity three years prior to the last calendar year. Example: If your report is due May 1, 2018, your report will cover activity from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The detailed requirements as to what must be included in the report are set forth in Section 760.410 of the Illinois Administrative Code . At the same time the report is filed, unclaimed property must be remitted to the Treasurer’s Office. Holders of unclaimed property also must make efforts to reach out to the owner before filing their report and remitting the property. Specifically, the holder of property presumed abandoned shall send a due diligence notice to the apparent owner by first-class U.S. Mail between 60 days and one year before reporting the property. The required contents of the due diligence notice are set forth in Section 760.460 of the Illinois Administrative Code . Consequences of Non-Compliance Holders of unclaimed property face significant penalties for failing to comply with the reporting, notice, and remittance requirements of the Act. Interest and penalties may be imposed on the failure to file, pay, or deliver property by the required due date. Specifically, the state can charge interest at 1% per month on the value of the unreported/unpaid property and impose a penalty of $200 per day up to a maximum of $5,000 until the date a report is filed or the unclaimed property is paid or delivered. For businesses that may have neglected their obligations under the Act, Illinois (and most other states that have adopted the uniform act) offers a Voluntary Disclosure Agreement (VDA) program for unclaimed property holders. In exchange for voluntary compliance through an executed VDA, the Treasurer's Office will agree to forgo the right to assess penalties and interest outlined in the Act. How To Address Unclaimed Property Obligations in a Practice Sale As part of transactional due diligence, a practice purchaser should ensure that the seller has satisfied all of its reporting obligations under applicable law. If it has not, the purchaser should require the seller to complete a Voluntary Disclosure Agreement prior to closing and also include a robust indemnification clause in the purchase agreement should the practice later face penalties for noncompliance. Because of the financial complexities and legal risks involved relating to unclaimed patient credits, practice buyers and sellers alike should consult with experienced counsel to help them navigate this significant and oft-neglected aspect of the practice’s finances and operations. If you are a dental professional considering a sale, acquisition, or merger, please contact us at ddslawyers.com at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your complimentary initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

Once again, mandatory Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting deadlines under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) have been put on hold. Not only have all deadlines been scrapped but domestic reporting companies may soon be permanently relieved of any CTA obligations whatsoever. Just days after stating it would enforce new March 21, 2025 deadlines, FinCEN issued a February 27, 2025, alert announcing that “ it will not issue any fines or penalties or take any other enforcement actions against any companies based on any failure to file or update” BOI reports by the current deadlines “until a forthcoming interim final rule becomes effective and new relevant due dates in the interim final rule have passed. FinCEN said that no later than March 21, 2025, it “intends to issue an interim final rule that extends BOI reporting deadlines, recognizing the need to provide new guidance and clarity as quickly as possible, while ensuring that BOI that is highly useful to important national security, intelligence, and law enforcement activities is reported.” Just two days after FinCEN’s announcement suspending existing deadlines, the Department of the Treasury went even further. In a March 2, 2025 release , the department said that “not only will it not enforce any penalties or fines associated with the beneficial ownership information reporting rule under the existing regulatory deadlines, but it will further not enforce any penalties or fines against U.S. citizens or domestic reporting companies or their beneficial owners after the forthcoming rule changes take effect either.” That is because “the Treasury Department will further be issuing a proposed rulemaking that will narrow the scope of the rule to foreign reporting companies only.” The bottom line is that it appears the new administration has decided to kill the CTA altogether as to domestic reporting companies. We will, of course, provide updates as warranted. If you have questions about this latest development or the CTA generally, please contact Jordan Uditsky at Grogan Hesse & Uditsky, P.C.

In a previous post , we discussed the pros and cons and ins and outs of selling a dental practice to a dental services organization (DSO). The DSO model continues to be attractive and popular. According to Grand View Research , the U.S. DSO market size was estimated at $26.9 billion in 2023 and is projected to grow at an annual rate of 16.4% from 2024 to 2030. Despite the exponential growth of DSOs, and the large amounts of private equity that fuel that expansion, they are still a relatively recent development in the dental industry. As such, the DSO model is still evolving and being refined in response to market conditions and demands. That evolution includes a new form of DSO – the “Invisible DSO” (IDSO) – designed to provide financial and operational support to private dental practices without the significant loss of autonomy and leadership that makes many owners wary of joining a traditional DSO. What Makes an IDSO “Invisible”? Unlike traditional DSOs that often impose centralized control over management and branding, IDSOs operate discreetly - almost “invisibly” - in the background. IDSOs allow dentists to keep their brand identity and operational independence without having to rebrand under a corporate umbrella. As important, dentists in an IDSO can still make clinical decisions without external interference – for the most part. Key Features of an IDSO That retention of leadership and control comes with many of the benefits of group affiliation within a traditional DSO, including: Equity Partnership Model. Dentists sell a portion of their practice (typically 51% to 80%) to the IDSO in exchange for a combination of cash and equity in the more extensive dental group. This allows dentists to "de-risk" their financial position while still maintaining ownership and influence over the practice. Operational and Administrative Support. As with traditional DSOs, IDSOs provide back-office support, including billing, human resources, marketing, compliance, and IT. This helps streamline operations without the dentist having to give up control over daily clinical decisions. Access to Growth Capital. As noted, private equity is the backbone of the DSO industry, including IDSOs. This readily available cash facilitates the ability of individual practices to expand, recruit more staff, and update technology, equipment, and infrastructure. Group Negotiation Power. By being part of a more extensive network, practices gain better negotiated rates on supplies, lab costs, and insurance reimbursements (which can be as much as 20% higher than independent practices). This reduces overhead and increases profit margins. Financial Security and Liquidity. Selling a portion of the practice to an IDSO provides dentists with an immediate financial payout. This can be a useful strategy for retirement planning or reducing financial risk while still retaining practice ownership. Additionally, the private equity behind DSOs may provide dentists with an opportunity to benefit from a future liquidity event, such as a sale to a larger investment group. Reduced Administrative Burden. One of the most appealing aspects of an IDSO is the ability to unburden themselves of many administrative functions, freeing dentists to focus on patient care and facilitating lower stress and higher job satisfaction.  Stronger Competitive Positioning. Solo dental practices face growing competition from corporate dental chains. IDSOs provide the resources needed to compete effectively while maintaining independence. Potential Downsides of Joining an IDSO While an IDSO can be a more attractive option than its traditional counterpart, it is not without potential downsides. These include: Invisibility Isn’t Absolute. The key distinguishing feature of an IDSO, as noted, is the ability of the practice owner to retain control of their practice, clinical decisions, and brand. However, that autonomy, while significant, is not limitless. Even if the dentist holds on to a great deal of decision-making power, the IDSO may influence staffing, marketing, financial decisions, and even treatment protocols. This can lead to conflicts between corporate interests and clinical judgment, potentially pressuring practitioners to prioritize profitability over patient care. Revenue Sharing. Since the IDSO takes a significant equity stake in the practice, profits must be shared. Accordingly, dentists might earn less per year compared to full ownership. Long-term Commitments. Most IDSOs require a long-term commitment, often 5–10 years. Dentists looking for total independence in the short term may find these agreements restrictive. Potential for Future Policy and Ownership Changes Although IDSOs promise, and usually deliver, autonomy, private equity-backed groups may eventually adjust policies or introduce new financial structures that affect dentists’ control. If a larger organization acquires the IDSO, there could be unexpected changes in how the practice is managed. An IDSO can change hands multiple times, and a practice owner could be stuck with the company even if their relationship with the organization otherwise goes south. Before joining an IDSO, it's essential to carefully review the terms, understand the long-term implications, and ensure that the partnership aligns with your personal and professional goals and your practice’s culture and outlook. Consulting with an experienced dental industry attorney can help you navigate the complexities of the decision. If you are a dental professional considering a sale or merger, please contact us at ddslawyers.com at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your complimentary initial consultation. We focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices, and this blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

Many dentists and dental practices offer financing arrangements as a way to help patients, especially the uninsured, pay for their care and treatment. For those who utilize third-party vendors for such financing, recently enacted amendments to the Illinois Dental Practice Act impose new disclosure and transparency obligations on dentists and practices and place limits on what staff can do and say in their interactions with patients regarding the subject. The amendments became effective January 1, 2025. With other states enacting or considering similar legislation regarding external patient financing for health care providers, these changes serve as a reminder to dentists in every jurisdiction about the importance of staying up to date on changes in their state’s laws and regulations. Here is what you need to know and do about these changes in order to ensure compliance once the calendar turns to the new year. No Establishing, Promoting, or Assisting With Third Party Financing A dentist, employee of a dentist, or agent of a dentist may not “arrange for, broker, or establish financing extended by a third party for a patient.” That term encompasses and prohibits submitting an application to a third-party creditor, lender, or creditor's intermediary for approval or rejection on behalf of a patient. It also prohibits dental practices from providing patients with software, links, or QR codes that have been customized with the practice’s branding. Practices can, however, provide patients with a third party’s marketing and advertising materials so long as they are not customized to the practice. Beyond providing or displaying generalized third-party advertising materials, dentists and staff cannot do much more in terms of helping a patient apply for or obtain financing. Anyone associated with a practice cannot do any of the following: Complete any portion of an application for financing extended by a third party for a patient or patient's guardian. Provide the patient or patient's guardian with an electronic device to apply for financing extended by a third party. Promote, advertise, or provide marketing or application materials for financing extended by a third party to a patient who has been administered or is under the influence of general anesthesia, conscious sedation, moderate sedation, or nitrous oxide; is being administered treatment; or is in a treatment area, including, but not limited to, an exam room, surgical room, or other area when medical treatment is administered, unless an area separated from the treatment area does not exist. Mandatory Disclosure When discussing or providing applications for financing extended by a third party, a dentist, employee of a dentist, or agent of a dentist must provide the following written notice in at least 14-point font: DENTAL SERVICES THIRD-PARTY FINANCING DISCLOSURE This is an application for a CREDIT CARD, LINE OF CREDIT, OR LOAN to help you finance or pay for your dental treatment. This credit card, line of credit, or loan IS NOT A PAYMENT PLAN WITH THE DENTIST'S OFFICE. It is a credit card, line of credit, or loan from a third-party financing company. Your dentist does not work for this company. Your dentist may not complete or submit an application for third-party financing on your behalf. You do not have to apply for a credit card, line of credit, or loan. You may pay your dentist for treatment in another manner. Your dentist's office may offer its own payment plan. You are encouraged to explore any public or private insurance options that may cover your dental treatment. The lender or creditor may offer a "promotional period" to pay back the credit or loan without interest. After any promotional period ends, you may be charged interest on portions of the balance that have already been paid. If you miss a payment or do not pay on time, you may have to pay a penalty and a higher interest rate. If you do not pay the money that you owe the creditor or lender, then your missed payments can appear on your credit report and could hurt your credit score. You could also be sued by the creditor or lender. If your dentist's office has completed or submitted an application for third-party financing on your behalf, you may file a complaint by contacting the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation at https://idfpr.illinois.gov/admin/dpr/dprcomplaint.html or by calling (312) 814-6910." Penalties for Non-Compliance A violation of these new rules and limitations is punishable by a fine of up to $500 for the first violation and a fine of up to $1,000 for each subsequent violation. IDFPR has the power to take additional disciplinary action as well. If you have any questions about these new requirements or third-party financing for dental services generally, please contact Jordan Uditsky at Grogan Hesse & Uditsky. We Focus on You So You Can Focus on Your Patients At Grogan Hesse & Uditsky, P.C., we focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Please call us at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices. This blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.

Few decisions a dental practice owner makes are as impactful as who they hire as an associate dentist. Whether a freshly minted dental school graduate or a more seasoned lateral hire, the associate you bring on board will hold the well-being of your patients, as well as the reputation, culture, and financial trajectory of your practice, in their hands. Making an informed decision, and conducting the due diligence necessary to do so, is critical and will go a long way towards fostering a mutually productive professional relationship. There is a multitude of considerations that go into the associate dentist hiring decision matrix – technical expertise, skill sets that match your needs, demeanor and communication skills, cultural fit, and agreed compensation structure, among others. But all of these factors, as important as they are, are irrelevant if the candidate lacks the fundamental ability to practice dentistry in your state or has issues of concern in their record that cast doubt on their suitability for your practice. If you have a seemingly ideal associate dentist candidate in your sights and are ready to move forward with an offer, make sure you cover all of the following fundamental licensing, credentialing, and disciplinary bases before doing so. Verify Licensure In Your Jurisdiction: Confirm the associate holds a valid dental license in your state or is in the process of obtaining their license. Obtain a photocopy or digital copy of the state dental license and verify the license status and validity using your state dental board’s online system. Check Educational Background: Request transcripts or diplomas from accredited dental schools. Specializations: If the candidate claims additional certifications, specialization, or training, ensure they provide supporting documentation. DEA Certification: Ensure the new associate has a valid DEA certificate. Get a copy of the certificate and confirm the registration number and expiration date. Malpractice History: Inquire about past claims or lawsuits. Ask about the underlying allegations and how the matters were resolved. Malpractice Insurance: If the associate will be responsible for maintaining their own malpractice insurance coverage, obtain proof of their current coverage, and verify policy limits, policy number, the insurance provider’s contact information, and the policy renewal dates. Assess Clinical Skills and Competence: Ask the candidate to present cases they’ve handled, including treatment plans and outcomes, and consider having candidates perform a procedure or shadow your team to observe their techniques and patient interaction. Peer Recommendations: Speak to previous employers, mentors, or colleagues about the candidate’s skills and areas for improvement. Conduct a Thorough Background Check: Ensure the candidate has no criminal history or legal issues beyond malpractice claims that could jeopardize patient safety, their licensure status, or your practice's reputation. Employment History and Contractual Obligations: Verify the candidate’s employment history and inquire about their reasons for leaving previous positions. Also ask about any contractual restrictions on their ability to join your practice, such as non-competition or non-solicitation agreements. Understanding of Ethics and Compliance Obligations: Inquire as to their knowledge and appreciation of and commitment to fundamental ethical and legal compliance obligations. We Focus on You So You Can Focus on Your Patients As noted, the hiring and onboarding of a new associate dentist is a multifaceted, multistep endeavor. No matter how impressive a putative associate may seem and perhaps is, confirming that they possess the foundational requirements and attributes needed to contribute to your practice and care for your patients is indispensable. At Grogan Hesse & Uditsky, P.C., we focus a substantial part of our practice on providing exceptional legal services for dentists and dental practices, as well as orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists, pediatric dentists, and oral surgeons. We bring unique insights and deep commitment to protecting the interests of dental professionals and their practices and welcome the opportunity to work with you. Please call us at (630) 833-5533 or contact us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. Jordan grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather, and sister each owning their own dental practices. This blend of legal, business, and personal experience provides Jordan with unique insight into his clients’ needs, concerns, and goals.