Author Topic: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe  (Read 2337 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WTTCHMN

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 15
  • -Received: 331
  • Posts: 2077
Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions
Justice Department probe, civil lawsuits pose challenge to real-estate industry practices

https://www.wsj.com/articles/realtors-face-federal-scrutiny-of-broker-commissions-11632135601

Offline USCTrojanCPA

  • Your CPA Realtor
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 2611
  • -Received: 2104
  • Posts: 10311
  • Gender: Male
Can you post the article on here as I don't have a subscription to WSJ?   Thanks in advance.
Martin Mania, CPA
AgencyOne
CA BRE License # 01799007
CA CPA License # 107675
mmania001@yahoo.com
714-747-3884 cell

Often imitated....Never duplicated!
Have license, will travel!

Offline WTTCHMN

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 15
  • -Received: 331
  • Posts: 2077


WASHINGTON—The residential real-estate industry is bracing for a challenge to the commissions charged by its sales agents, one that could put downward pressure on the fees paid by home buyers and sellers.

The Justice Department is investigating home sale commissions, and in a wide-ranging executive order President Biden asked the Federal Trade Commission to adopt rules to address unfair or exclusionary practices in the real-estate industry.

“The litigation and the government attention that the industry is getting now is unprecedented,” said Stephen Brobeck, a senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America and a longtime critic of the industry.

At issue are the commissions real-estate agents earn for the sale of a home, typically around 5% to 6% of the sale price. For a home sale at the recent national median price of about $375,000, a 5% commission would be $18,750—or for a $1 million home, it would be $50,000.

Very high-end properties tend to have somewhat lower commission rates.

Home buyers end up contributing to these commissions as part of the purchase price, but often have little room to negotiate since it is the home sellers who generally set the commissions for agents on both sides of the deal.

Consumer advocates say this contributes to excessive commissions and point to the National Association of Realtors’ rules as the biggest roadblock to change. Those rules require sellers to offer commissions to would-be buyers’ brokers, which consumer groups say encourages sellers to offer high rates for buyer agents as a way to attract more potential buyers.

Industry critics also say that the fees are opaque to most buyers, and say the advent of online home search engines has diminished the traditional role buyers’ agents play in connecting buyers and sellers.

The National Association of Realtors says a tight sales market and rising prices have made real-estate agents more important than ever, and it says that commissions are fully negotiable and declining. The average national commission rate is currently in the range of 4.9% to 4.94%, according to industry news and research site RealTrends, down from 5.40% in 2012.

Several civil lawsuits challenging industry rules and practices around commissions have survived initial procedural challenges and drawn support from the Justice Department, putting added pressure on traditional broker fees.

The politically powerful real-estate industry has survived past challenges to its commission structure, but consumer advocates say rising home prices have exacerbated concerns about excessive fees.

The NAR says that the current commission structure also encourages more competition by giving all participants in local multiple-listing services equal access to information on available properties. It also helps make homes more affordable to first-time and lower-income buyers, the trade group says, because they don’t have to pay their own agents up front.

“NAR remains committed to advancing and defending independent, local broker organizations that provide for greater economic opportunity and equity for small businesses and consumers, including first-time, low- and middle-income home buyers,” said NAR general counsel Katie Johnson.

News Corp, owner of The Wall Street Journal, operates Realtor.com under license from the National Association of Realtors.

Under the Trump administration, the Justice Department and the National Association of Realtors reached a deal to provide more disclosure on broker fees and make them more competitive. But this summer, the Justice Department under President Biden said it was withdrawing from the settlement so that it could pursue a broader investigation into broker commissions.

The Justice Department said that Americans paid more than $85 billion in home sale commissions last year, and that industry practices “may harm home sellers and home buyers.” Last week, the NAR challenged the department’s withdrawal, saying it would fight a Justice Department civil subpoena.

The civil subpoena issued by the Justice Department in July largely focuses on NAR and industry policies that could be shaping the commission structure, according to court records. For example, the subpoena requires NAR to “submit all documents relating to any policy, guideline, rule, or practice: a. requiring listing brokers to make an offer of compensation to buyer brokers to list a home” on a multiple-listing service.

The subpoena also probes practices that could restrict marketing of non-MLS listings—another subject of recent private lawsuits.

In a further sign of the mounting risks to the industry, the Justice Department has taken sides against NAR and other industry defendants, filing statements in several civil lawsuits. The Justice Department statements generally dispute the NAR’s contention that a 2008 settlement with the department gave the government’s blessing to the current commission structure.

Mr. Biden also has pushed the Federal Trade Commission to launch its own review. The president said in a recent executive order targeting competition problems that the FTC should consider rules to curb “unfair tying practices or exclusionary practices in the brokerage or listing of real estate.”

The FTC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The Justice Department investigation could lead to an antitrust suit and eventual sanctions on the industry. The prospect of FTC action is more distant, given the procedural hurdles that the agency faces in adopting new rules.

The current Justice Department investigation began earlier this year. After the change in administrations, the department was eager to pursue a broader look at the industry and unilaterally withdrew from the settlement pact with NAR.

The department is concerned that an array of practices creates a closed marketplace for the buying and selling of homes, locking in higher fees and preventing maverick firms and agents from successfully offering lower-cost models.

These concerns are especially true at a time of potentially disruptive change in the industry, accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic, which for example saw a boom in virtual models for touring homes and navigating the real-estate market.

Several civil suits against the industry seeking class-action status have been filed by private law firms, including one by Cohen Milstein and Susman Godfrey filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago that survived initial procedural challenges but hasn’t yet been granted class-action status.

The lawsuit contends NAR rules stifle competition, which Ms. Johnson disputes. Realtors “already are competing on commission, from offering varied commission models to flat fees,” she said.

U.S. District Judge Andrea Wood in Illinois sided with the plaintiff home sellers in denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case.

“Plaintiffs’ allegations plausibly show that the Buyer-Broker Commission Rules prevent effective negotiation over commission rates and cause an artificial inflation of buyer-broker commission rates,” the judge wrote last year. “But-for Defendants’ conspiracy, each Plaintiff would have paid ‘substantially lower commissions.’”

—Brent Kendall contributed to this article.

Write to John D. McKinnon at john.mckinnon@wsj.com

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline fatduck

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 18
  • Posts: 171
i know a bit about some of the litigation in this area.  the main argument in the antitrust class action suits is that the way that broker commissions are paid (both buyer and seller agent paid from sale proceeds by escrow, rather than from buyer and seller respectively) is anti competitive.  basically because it makes it nearly impossible for the buyer to negotiate his agent's commission.  (seems to me that rebates serve that same purpose?  but those aren't legal in all states)

NAR cut a deal with the DOJ while trump was president that would only require them to provide some more disclosures about buyer agent commissions and some other stuff with no fundamental change to how commissions are paid.  DOJ pulled the deal off the table after biden became president.  so now it's back to the courts.

Online nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 151
  • -Received: 546
  • Posts: 2596
Interesting experiment but nobody will perform it.  In this market, a seller should be able to offer zero buyers commission.  Just make sure it’s listed in all the appropriate MLS, Redfin etc.

Offline Cares

  • Real Estate Broker & Mortgage Loan Originator
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 12
  • -Received: 231
  • Posts: 1199
Interesting experiment but nobody will perform it.  In this market, a seller should be able to offer zero buyers commission.  Just make sure it’s listed in all the appropriate MLS, Redfin etc.

I don't think any agent will just list your property for free on the MLS. There are services that you can pay a flat fee just for MLS listings and no additional service or support.

Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 1227
  • Posts: 2632
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
This is all much ado about nothing. There hasn't been significant realtor reform of any sort in decades. The NAR lobby is as strong as the Teachers or Nurses lobby. Expect only window dressing, similar to the Trump era settlement terms.
My .02c

SGIP

Offline fatduck

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 18
  • Posts: 171
Interesting experiment but nobody will perform it.  In this market, a seller should be able to offer zero buyers commission.  Just make sure it’s listed in all the appropriate MLS, Redfin etc.

I don't think any agent will just list your property for free on the MLS. There are services that you can pay a flat fee just for MLS listings and no additional service or support.
i think he means pay your seller 3% or whatever but offer 0% buyer agent share on MLS.

even in a hot market it's a bad idea to reduce your potential pool of buyers.  also some agents have buyer rep agreements that require buyers to pay the difference if seller offers a below-market split.

the hot market affects listing agents too.  easier to negotiate a lower total commission (split b/w seller and buyer agent) than just completely screw the buyer agent.

Online nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 151
  • -Received: 546
  • Posts: 2596
Interesting experiment but nobody will perform it.  In this market, a seller should be able to offer zero buyers commission.  Just make sure it’s listed in all the appropriate MLS, Redfin etc.

I don't think any agent will just list your property for free on the MLS. There are services that you can pay a flat fee just for MLS listings and no additional service or support.

Not zero seller’s commission, zero buyer’s commission.

Your seller agent paid normally by you, the seller.


Online nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 151
  • -Received: 546
  • Posts: 2596
Interesting experiment but nobody will perform it.  In this market, a seller should be able to offer zero buyers commission.  Just make sure it’s listed in all the appropriate MLS, Redfin etc.

I don't think any agent will just list your property for free on the MLS. There are services that you can pay a flat fee just for MLS listings and no additional service or support.
i think he means pay your seller 3% or whatever but offer 0% buyer agent share on MLS.

even in a hot market it's a bad idea to reduce your potential pool of buyers.  also some agents have buyer rep agreements that require buyers to pay the difference if seller offers a below-market split.

the hot market affects listing agents too.  easier to negotiate a lower total commission (split b/w seller and buyer agent) than just completely screw the buyer agent.

I suspect you’ll make up the difference offering the commission but that only because the agents are prioritizing their conflict of interest in getting paid.

Perhaps they should list it $X,XXX,XXX with 3% buyer commission paid by buyers.

More of thought experiment to highlight the the organization that increases the inefficiencies in information is also the one that profits from it and maintains monopolistic behavior that creates informational inefficiencies at the expense of the consumer.

But I agree with Soylent, this game isn’t going to change.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2021, 10:20:05 AM by nosuchreality »

Offline test

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 8
  • -Received: 406
  • Posts: 2266
Re: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe
« Reply #10 on: September 21, 2021, 08:35:02 PM »
This is all much ado about nothing. There hasn't been significant realtor reform of any sort in decades. The NAR lobby is as strong as the Teachers or Nurses lobby. Expect only window dressing, similar to the Trump era settlement terms.

Except NAR isn't paid with tax/theft dollars.

Offline sleepy5136

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 4
  • -Received: 34
  • Posts: 387
Re: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2021, 08:43:44 PM »
I think NAR should be worried about Zillow/Redfin. They are the disruptors and as they gain more market share, they will have a lot of power to potentially change the RE market and how things operate in the future. I'm not sure if there will be impacts to the traditional RE agents commission because of their dominance, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does. They are already buying up houses from homeowners. I'm not a fan of it, but I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more attention from the media/gov tbh.

Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 1227
  • Posts: 2632
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Re: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe
« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2021, 09:14:43 PM »
Not sure what you mean @Test about being paid by tax/theft dollars, but this much I do know - those who vote on issues impacting the Real Estate market are paid incentivised by lobbyists who through the only genuine superpower still available -  vast amounts of money - will never allow change to occur. 
My .02c

SGIP

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline fatduck

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 18
  • Posts: 171
Re: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2021, 09:38:26 PM »
Not sure what redfin and zillow are disrupting really. They seem to be pushing agent services which I assume is their high margin product. So they are trying to capture the commission market not revolutionize it.

Even the ibuying is primarily a lead generation tool. You can take their lowball cash offer or hey, why not let their agents list your house and make much more? Either way they win.

Offline sleepy5136

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 4
  • -Received: 34
  • Posts: 387
Re: Realtors Face Federal Scrutiny of Broker Commissions Justice Department probe
« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2021, 11:36:20 PM »
Not sure what redfin and zillow are disrupting really. They seem to be pushing agent services which I assume is their high margin product. So they are trying to capture the commission market not revolutionize it.

Even the ibuying is primarily a lead generation tool. You can take their lowball cash offer or hey, why not let their agents list your house and make much more? Either way they win.
They are slowly taking market share behind the scenes. They are trying to accumulate as much data as possible as well. Data is key going forward and the more one company has, the more power they have. Look at the amounts of data that the top tech firms have (Google/FB/Apple, etc). Don't underestimate the power of data.

 

Talk Irvine Links

[Recent Posts]
[FAQ / Rules]

Site Supporters


Recent Posts

Re: coronavirus by nosuchreality
[Today at 03:31:29 PM]


Re: Funny things Joe says... by CalBears96
[Today at 03:25:04 PM]


Re: Funny things Joe says... by CalBears96
[Today at 03:23:01 PM]


Re: Funny things Joe says... by morekaos
[Today at 02:58:57 PM]


Re: Funny things Joe says... by CalBears96
[Today at 02:51:55 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal