Colluding for higher commissions: Gauging the fallout of a major judgment against brokers
Imagine you had a unique database with complete information on every property in the U.S. Hundreds of thousands of real estate professionals would want access to your info, and you could charge them a fortune for access.
Or you could think bigger. Why not leverage your database to generate above-market sales commissions for everyone involved?
You might pay a lot of money to maintain this goldmine...
There's a problem with this scheme, though.
Coordinating to promote higher charges would constitute a cartel, which is illegal under U.S. antitrust laws. You wouldn’t go to jail, but the damages would be extreme because (i) the real estate market is huge and (ii) antitrust damages are tripled in litigation.
This is exactly what happened to Realtors in a Missouri courtroom last week. After a two-week trial, jurors needed less than three hours to find the National Association of Realtors and related defendants liable for conspiring to maintain high commission rates. The damages (which cover sales in Missouri, Illinois, and Kansas between 2015 and 2022) could exceed $5 billion.
From the New York Times:
A federal jury ruled on Tuesday that the powerful National Association of Realtors and several large brokerages had conspired to artificially inflate the commissions paid to real estate agents, a decision that could radically alter the home-buying process in the United States.
The realtors’ group and brokerages were ordered to pay damages of nearly $1.8 billion. The verdict allows the court to issue treble damages, which means they could swell to more than $5 billion.
It’s a decision that has the potential to rewrite the entire structure of the real estate industry in the United States, lowering the cost of moving homes by reducing commissions.
NYT, 10/31/23
Plaintiff's claims
Recommended by LinkedIn
Plaintiff's example of how the NAR and its members collude, from a defendant's training manual
Sample commissions on sale of $500,000 home
Missouri's antitrust law
The NAR will certainly appeal the verdict. And, as is true with many damage awards, perhaps the NAR will make progress on appeal and/or in a parallel case scheduled to go to trial next year.
Either way, last week's case will almost certainly mark a definitive pivot in the path of the residential real estate business.
Here's how we could see this playing out...
Winners
Losers
Commercial real estate spillover effects?
Residential real estate may be similar to commercial real estate on the surface, but there are key differences. One of them is information. Although there are certainly powerful trade organizations in commercial real estate, there's nothing like the National Association of Realtors or the MLS systems in CRE.
CoStar you say? Sure, it's somewhat like an MLS in that it houses a lot of property info. But CoStar originates much of that information and charges subscription fees and, unlike NAR, doesn't regulate membership rules that promote fixing commission rates. Consequently, we don't see many direct parallels to this situation in commercial real estate.
However, one effect could be a moderate move of residential agents into commercial real estate. They're already licensed, and they may see increased value in getting paid for more specialized knowledge and skills.
Real Estate Appraiser, former area manager of National City mortgage division, owner of mortgage brokerage, 20 years in broadcast ownership, sales and management.
1yHow on earth would the buyer having to pay his own agent be a tax? The buyer pays the appraiser, the attorney, the home inspector. If a buyer can't afford to pay for representation, he/she probably should not be buying the home. The seller certainly should never have been obligated to pay for the buyer's agent.