The National Association of Realtors (NAR) agreed to new rules around real estate commissions as part of a lawsuit settlement in March. Now, consumers face a deluge of conflicting predictions.
One narrative predicts a coming utopia for homebuyers: A price war will erupt, and commissions will plunge amid a new wave of competition among buyers’ agents. A competing narrative goes in the opposite direction: Under the new commission structure, buyers will realize they’re on the hook for thousands and decide not to use agents at all. NAR, meanwhile, has portrayed the changes as minor tweaks rather than a major shift.
The competing narratives underscore just how complex Realtor compensation is — and how much more complex it may soon get. Here’s a look at the new commission structure and what it could mean for both homebuyers and sellers.
How real estate commissions work
Traditionally, when a home seller hires a real estate agent to represent their listing, the seller agrees to pay a commission. The national average is about 5 percent of the home’s sale price, with 2.5 percent going to the listing agent and the other 2.5 percent to the buyer’s agent. (On a $400,000 home, 5 percent comes to $20,000, or $10,000 for each agent.) Sometimes the listing agent gets lucky and sells to an unrepresented buyer, keeping the entire 5 percent.
Who pays them?
Even this is a bit murky. Agent fees come out of the seller’s proceeds at closing, but it’s reasonable to assume that the seller adjusts their price accordingly — it’s baked into the home’s sale price. And so it’s the buyer who ultimately pays it, just not directly to their agent: That extra 5 percent is rolled into the sale price.
What’s changing?
NAR’s settlement says nothing about the amount of commissions. The biggest change is that, starting in July, listing agents no longer will make offers of compensation to buy-side agents on the multiple listing service (MLS). In addition, a buyer’s agent must now have a written contract with the buyer specifying the fee. Until now, NAR encouraged but didn’t require written agreements between buy-side agents and buyers.
A federal judge gave preliminary approval to the settlement in April 2024, and the final court approval is expected in November.
Compared to the old model, the new version offers a greater level of transparency — homebuyers now will be fully aware of how much they’re paying for an agent’s services. “It’s always good when people understand what they are and are not paying for,” says David Druey, Florida regional president at Centennial Bank.
While the new rules prevent listing agents from posting buy-side commissions in the MLS, sellers and listing agents still can agree on the amount off the MLS.
“Although sellers can elect not to pay any buyer agent compensation, that doesn’t mean they will avoid the economics,” says Budge Huskey, president and chief executive of Premier Sotheby’s International Realty in Naples, Florida. “Buyers may easily write into any offer a contingency requiring that the seller cover the cost, or may request other concessions, such as closing cost assistance in the dollar amount they are paying their representative.”
Does this mean real estate commissions are now negotiable?
Technically, real estate commissions always have been negotiable — a theme NAR long has stressed. Practically, though, the picture gets complicated. In many cases, Realtors are more skilled at negotiating than their clients, so the consumer comes into the negotiation at a disadvantage. What’s more, the buyer’s agent commission was determined by the seller, not by the buyer. The new rules shift that responsibility to buyers, who now will discuss compensation directly with the agents representing them.
Is this good or bad for consumers?
Some foresee a near-nirvana for consumers. Vishal Garg, CEO of mortgage company Better, predicts the settlement will unleash a “buy-side price war” — buyer agents will begin competing fiercely for clients.
Others fear a darker turn. Ken H. Johnson, a real estate economist at Florida Atlantic University and a former real estate broker, says the new rules just add another layer of complexity to an already-confusing process.
“No longer advertising buyer agent commissions will only create a more confused and drawn-out transaction process as buyers, sellers and agents will have to negotiate the fee, who will pay for it and how much will be paid by each party,” Johnson says. “Due to this added level of complexity, buyers will almost certainly have to negotiate with more sellers before they find the deal they are satisfied with. Thus, the house-hunting period will extend for the average buyer.”
Concerns for first-time buyers
Many in the real estate industry worry that first-time homebuyers — those who need expert guidance the most, and who are already severely hampered by high prices and high mortgage rates — will be priced out of professional representation. If commissions no longer come out of the seller’s proceeds, the thinking goes, buyers won’t have an additional $7,500 or $10,000 to pay an agent.
“Most of those buyers are scraping the barrel to the bottom to come up with a down payment,” says Dave Liniger, chairman and co-founder of RE/MAX. (The firm was one of the large brokerages named as defendants in the suit along with NAR; RE/MAX settled last year for $55 million.)
For now, buyers can’t roll commission costs into their mortgages under the new rules. But industry players widely expect the Federal Housing Finance Agency, overseer of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to change those rules.
“I think there’s going to be pressure on them to allow that,” Liniger says. “The industry needs first-time buyers.”
Indeed, NAR already has been attempting to nudge the mortgage industry in that direction: “We are talking with Freddie and Fannie to see what can be done,” says Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist.
A change to the real estate commission structure is shaking the industry — and homebuilders and consumers appear to be the winners.
This week, Compass (COMP) agreed to pay $57.5 million to settle antitrust claims related to commissions. It’s the first major brokerage to announce a settlement since the National Association of Realtors (NAR) agreed to pay $418 million as part of a lawsuit alleging the industry conspired to inflate agent fees.
Experts say the NAR settlement — which essentially decouples buyer and seller agent fees — is a win for consumers because it will create transparency around how commissions are set and paid and ultimately lower costs.
“This will reshape the housing market in the greatest fashion we’ve seen in over 50 years,” KBW analyst Ryan Tomasello told Yahoo Finance Live (video above).
US Realtor commissions have ranged from 5% to 6% since the 1950s, and are usually split between the seller’s and buyer’s agents, with the home seller footing the entire bill.
Increased transparency will make it easier for buyers to negotiate fees or bypass the use of agents entirely. Buyer agent usage in most countries is uncommon, averaging 33% compared to the US’s rate of nearly 90%.
For buyers who decide to use an agent, advocates say fee costs are likely to substantially decline. Right now, US commission rates are among the highest in the world. Commissions on a $500,000 home sold in the US would be about $25,000 to $30,000 — compared to roughly $6,500 in the UK.
As a result, the total commission pool, currently $100 billion nationally, could be slashed to $70 billion, according to KBW’s analysis.
Read more: How to sell your house without a Realtor
A ‘major boost’ for homebuilders
Changes resulting from the NAR settlement are a “major boost” for homebuilders, who typically paid the buyer agent’s commission.
In a note to clients, Evercore ISI’s Stephen Kim wrote that agent commissions have been a “significant drag” to builders’ profitability, therefore a “shift in broker fees represents a significant positive for builder margins.”
“This would disproportionately advantage large homebuilders, who have their own salespeople and robust online shopping environments; it is far easier to buy a new home without a buyer’s agent than an existing home,” wrote Kim.
Homebuilder stocks have already been on the rise as high mortgage rates continue to limit the supply of used homes for sale. A reduction in commissions could help further drive demand, National Association of Home Builders CEO Jim Tobin told Yahoo Finance Live.
“As commissions come down, I hope we will see costs to builders come down as well,” Tobin said. “That translates into lower home prices for consumers.”
Shares of Lennar (LEN), Toll Brothers (TOL), and PulteGroup (PHM) have rallied to record highs this year, powered in part by the NAR settlement but also on the prospect for Fed rate cuts. Toll Brothers is up about 25%, while Lennar and PulteGroup are up 12% and 14%, respectively.
Brokerage models ‘at risk’
While homebuilder stocks have clocked gains in the past week, investors dumped shares of Zillow (Z), Redfin (RDFN), and Compass (COMP) on fears a change to agent fees will be costly for major brokerages.
Analysts warn of downside risk ahead, arguing the shift in cost structure is only partially priced in at current levels.
In a note to clients, Morgan Stanley’s Matt Cost wrote that while there is a “credible bull case where commission levels remain stable”, shares of Zillow, RE/MAX, and Compass “could decline further to the extent the market fully prices in material downside to commission rates going forward.”
Cost emphasized Compass as the brokerage most at risk, given “substantially all of its revenue is tied to broker commissions.”
But the new changes don’t signal doom and gloom for all listing platforms. In an environment where more buyers will do the house hunting themselves, platforms that help sellers advertise their listings have room to grow.
KBW’s Tomasello thinks that CoStar Group (CSGP) is a “winner” and “key beneficiary” because it caters to seller agents — a focus he expects other platforms to pursue.
“Real estate portals that have historically relied more on the buy-side piece of this commission pool for their revenue models, [such as] companies like Zillow, Realtor.com, may need to reconsider the role that they play in the housing market and potentially shift that focus more to the sell side in terms of advertising homes,” Tomasello said.
CoStar shares rallied 8% after the NAR settlement was announced last Friday. Shares are up 12% year to date.
Seana Smith is an anchor at Yahoo Finance. Follow Smith on Twitter @SeanaNSmith. Tips on deals, mergers, activist situations, or anything else? Email seanasmith@yahooinc.com.
Real estate commissions have survived the rise of the Internet and decades of attacks from disruption-minded discounters. But a flood of legal challenges to the existing brokerage model poses a new threat to the status quo.
An industry-shaking lawsuit making its way through the federal court system could upend the long-established way of paying commissions — namely, the custom of home sellers footing the bill for both their own agent and their buyer’s. This typically totals 5 to 6 percent of the home’s sale price, taking away a hefty chunk of the seller’s proceeds. In October 2023, a federal jury in Missouri found that the National Association of Realtors (NAR), along with several large brokerages, conspired to inflate Realtors’ commissions.
How might real estate commissions change?
It’s unclear exactly how or when that verdict will affect commissions, but the case’s price tag alone — $1.8 billion in damages, with the potential of billions more — is roiling the industry. Some predict big changes: One possibility is that home sellers will no longer pay both the listing agent and the buyer’s agent, so homebuyers who want representation might have to pay their own agents separately.
“The Missouri verdict and other court cases may lead to a revolution in our industry, not just reform,” Glenn Kelman, CEO of brokerage firm Redfin, told investors in a recent earnings call.
“The bulwark is falling apart,” said Brad Case, a housing economist at Middleburg Communities who has also worked for mortgage giant Fannie Mae and the Federal Reserve. “The Realtors have held this situation together for 100 years, but it’s not tenable for the long term.”
Some see the federal verdict as a sign that the real estate industry finally will have to give in to pressures for discounts. Others say it will be years before the verdict will translate to savings for homebuyers or sellers. Stephen Brobeck, senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America, expects commissions will ultimately fall below 4 percent, maybe even to 3 percent. But he doesn’t see that happening anytime soon.
“Any change is going to happen slowly,” Brobeck said. “The old guard is going to try to keep the old rates.”
How much do commissions cost?
If a homeowner sells a property for $400,000, about average for existing homes in the United States, a 5 percent commission amounts to $20,000. That amount is then split between the seller’s own agent and their buyer’s agent (which hardly matters to the seller, who still has to pay the full amount regardless).
Long ago, 6 percent was the going rate for real estate commissions; 3 percent to each agent. But after decades of competition and regulatory scrutiny, the typical commission now is slightly less than 5 percent, according to data from Anywhere Real Estate, the parent of Coldwell Banker, Century 21 and other large real estate brands. In its filings with securities regulators, publicly traded Anywhere reports that its average commission “side” — half the commission — is currently about 2.4 percent.
While commissions briefly rose during the Great Recession and again in 2023, rates in general have been falling steadily for decades. For Realtors, this decline in commission rates has been offset by rising home prices: They’re getting a smaller piece of the pie in terms of their percentage-based fee, but the pie is getting bigger.
About the NAR lawsuit
In the case that went to trial in 2023, Missouri home sellers alleged antitrust violations by NAR and four major brokerages: Keller Williams, Anywhere, RE/MAX and HomeServices of America. Anywhere and RE/MAX settled before trial — paying $83.5 million and $55 million in damages, respectively — while the other defendants opted to take their chances in the courtroom.
The jury ruled against the industry, and a judge ordered NAR and the two remaining brokerage firms to pay $1.8 billion in damages to home sellers. That figure could eventually balloon to $5 billion.
Keller Williams has since settled as well, for $70 million, while NAR and the remaining defendant are appealing. But if the verdict stands, it could mean that a home seller would no longer be required to pay the agent who represents their buyer.
Keep in mind:
If the verdict stands, home sellers might no longer be required to pay the agents who represents their buyers.
The success of the Missouri suit, filed on behalf of hundreds of thousands of home sellers in that state, has spawned similar legal complaints in Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania and elsewhere. However, it could be years before those suits are settled and the fallout comes into focus.
Other dramas
NAR is also facing other headwinds in addition to the antitrust lawsuit and related cases. A sexual harassment scandal led to the resignation of the organization’s then-president in 2023, and the organization’s next president and longtime CEO have since stepped down as well.
All the drama has created unease and unrest in the ranks. Redfin cut ties with the trade group, requiring many of its brokers and agents to cancel their memberships, and other brokerages have followed suit. In addition, two influential real estate agents have announced the launch of a competing trade group, known as the American Real Estate Association (AREA).
One of the new group’s cofounders, Jason Haber — a broker/agent at Compass in New York City and an outspoken NAR critic — described AREA as an alternative, not a replacement. “We’re not trying to replace NAR. We’re not trying to replicate NAR,” he said. “They have a 108-year head start.”
A ‘perfectly competitive’ industry?
The residential real estate industry long has presented a dichotomy. On the one hand, it has essentially controlled the marketing of properties for sale through a nationwide network of multiple listing services (MLSs). That reality has led to grumblings about collusion and price-fixing, along with scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Justice.
On the other hand, real estate sales is a relatively easy business to get into, as evidenced by NAR’s membership rolls of more than 1.5 million agents. To earn a real estate license, an agent typically needs to take a couple of classes and pass a state exam. No college degree is required, and the costs of entry are modest.
Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist, points to these low barriers to entry as evidence that competition is alive and well: “Real estate is a perfectly competitive industry,” Yun said during the organization’s annual conference in November.
Brobeck, the consumer advocate, disagrees with that assessment. “It’s not a free market right now,” he said. “There’s intense competition for clients. But there’s no competition on rates. In a normal marketplace, you compete based on marketing, but also on the price you charge.”
Meanwhile, the industry mantra long has held that commissions are negotiable, suggesting that sellers and buyers call the shots when it comes to how much they pay agents. In practice, though, consumers buy or sell a home only once every 5 to 10 years, and many aren’t knowledgeable enough about the process to successfully negotiate the rate down.
“Consumers are at a disadvantage,” Brobeck said. “They buy and sell homes infrequently, and they’re mostly concerned about sale price and timing.”
Historically, discounters have not succeeded
For decades, detractors have predicted the demise of real estate commissions. These fees were sure to go the way of stockbrokerage commissions and travel agency fees, the naysayers said. Instead, real estate commissions have proven stubbornly resilient.
It’s not for a lack of trying. Many disruptors have seen commissions as a problem to be solved, but most have fallen short of reshaping the industry.
In the early 2000s, for instance, a splashy discounter known as YourHomeDirect (and later Foxtons) offered 2 percent commissions in New York and New Jersey. But after advertising heavily and gaining market share, it ultimately collapsed.
A decade later, London-based Purplebricks pushed into the U.S., wooing sellers with a flat fee of $3,200. It, too, overestimated demand and pulled out of the U.S. market in 2019.
One high-profile discounter, Seattle-based Redfin, has achieved greater staying power. It launched as a cheaper alternative to traditional brokers and touted listing fees of just 1 percent, although it has since shifted to focusing on 1.5 percent listing fees.
How home sellers can save on commission
If you’re not keen on paying 5 or 6 percent of your home’s sale price, here are some alternative options:
- Go it alone: Sell your home without an agent in a “for sale by owner” transaction. Between July 2022 and June 2023, 7 percent of home sales were sold by owners without the help of an agent, according to NAR data. But selling without professional help is a lot of work to do on your own, and it only saves you one agent’s commission — you’ll still have to pay your buyer’s agent.
- Negotiate: If you don’t want to go it alone, ask agents about their commission rates upfront and compare the terms of each person you talk to. If you think the fee is too high, see if they’re willing to lower it. If both agents in the transaction are from the same brokerage, you might have more leverage to negotiate.
- Hire a discount agent: A low-commission real estate agent will likely charge much less than a traditional agent would — usually 1 to 1.5 percent of your home’s sale price. (However, you might not receive the personalized attention you would with a traditional Realtor.) There are also brokerages and agents who work on a flat-fee basis, earning a preset amount on the sale rather than a percentage of the sale price.
- Sell to a cash-homebuying company: These companies, which often advertise “we buy houses,” pay in cash, close quickly and typically charge no fees. However, if you sell this way you’re likely to get a lower price for your home than you would with a traditional sale.