The 6% commission on buying or selling a home is gone after Realtors association agrees to seismic settlement | CNN Business
www.cnn.com
The 6% commission, a standard in home purchase transactions, is no more.

The 6% commission, a standard in home purchase transactions, is no more.

In a sweeping move expected to reduce the cost of buying and selling a home, the National Association of Realtors announced Friday a settlement with groups of homesellers, agreeing to end landmark antitrust lawsuits by paying $418 million in damages and eliminating rules on commissions.

The NAR, which represents more than 1 million Realtors, also agreed to put in place a set of new rules. One prevents sellers’ brokers from setting buyers’ agents’ compensation, which critics say led brokers to push more expensive properties on customers. Another ends requirements that brokers subscribe to multiple listing services — many of which are owned by NAR subsidiaries — where homes are given a wide viewing in a local market. Another new rule will require buyers’ brokers to enter into written agreements with their buyers.

The agreement effectively will destroy the current homebuying and selling business model, in which sellers pay both their broker and a buyer’s broker, which critics say have driven housing prices artificially higher.

  • @TropicalDingdong
    18•9 months ago

    I mean it also just continuously inflates the price every transaction cycle because that cost gets baked into the loan.

    So you are adding substantial inflation to home prices with that 3-6% if the average home is bought and sold ~10 years.

    • @[email protected]English
      8•9 months ago

      There’s a broader concern to the American economy in discouraging labor mobility. There is a benefit to the country’s economy in having a mobile labor force and high transaction costs discourage labor mobility.

      It’s one argument to have more people renting, as there’s a lower cost to move for renters than owners.

      A country benefits if workers are relatively able and willing to move to wherever demand for labor is. If there’s an artificial barrier to such a move, then it makes it harder to connect workers and demand for labor; a worker would be artificially-inclined to work in a less-productive job that didn’t require a move and it’s harder for an employer who has some more-productive job to manage to get workers.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_mobility

      Labor or worker mobility is the geographical and occupational movement of workers.[1] Impediments to mobility are easily divided into two distinct classes with one being personal and the other being systemic. Personal impediments include physical location, and physical and mental ability. The systemic impediments include educational opportunities as well as various laws and political contrivances and even barriers and hurdles arising from historical happenstance.

      Increasing and maintaining a high level of labor mobility allows a more efficient allocation of resources and greater productivity.

      That being said, I understand that the American labor force has historically been relatively-mobile, though I recall reading that that has fallen off in recent decades (maybe it’s due to the process of urbanization starting to wrap up in the fairly-developed US, as I’m sure that urbanization drives some labor mobility – gotta move if one is to move to a city).

    • @[email protected]English
      1•9 months ago

      Can you explain this? I can’t make sense of it. If it’s a fixed rate, I don’t see how it adds to the inflation of the home value.

      • @Buddahriffic
        1•9 months ago

        If you buy a house for 100k, it has a 6k commission baked in the price, so the seller gets 94k. But that 94k only matters to that seller, you still need 100k to break even, plus another 6% to get into the green after your sale’s commission. So your break even price is now 106,360. And your buyer’s break even price will be 6% on top of that and so on.

        Because it’s a % of the price, it’s exponential growth. If it was a fixed number, it would just be linear growth.