Let me start by offering two thoughts. First, I am NOT an attorney. Second, Real Estate fees or commissions are NEGOTIABLE by law. Brokers and their agents are REQUIRED to disclose their fees and how they are earned to their prospective clients. Local market may “appear” to establish a “range” of fees that work or do not work as far as listing and selling Real Estate but it is still the client’s choice as far as whom to hire and what they will pay. That being said, some consumers are better at negotiating than others. This plays out when offers are written, submitted and responded to.
Also, let me clarify two words which often appear to be similar. A BROKER runs the business and hires AGENTS to represent the BROKERAGE. Sellers and buyers sign contracts with BROKERS and typically have one or more, such as with a “team”, designated AGENTS working for them. Now to the article.
Real Estate fees are a “marketing expense”, a cost of doing business. What do sellers and buyers expect of their representatives? REALTORS have a Code of Ethics that mandates standards regardless of the amount of compensation, meaning that we cannot fail to perform in trade for lower commissions. Non-REALTORS have state license laws that likely mirror the Code of Ethics.
Generally speaking in my market, sellers agree to pay a negotiated fee to their agents if their property goes to settlement. Listing agents market their listings to the public through a variety of means. If the use the multiple listing service they typically offer some specified compensation to the buyer agent who successfully sells and settles their property listings. While the MLS does NOT require the offer of compensation, there are reasons to offer a market-oriented compensation to encourage property showings and offers that must be managed. The reason is simple: agents representing buyers are expected to have formal, written contracts and they should include any fees and how they are earned. While practices may vary, in my experience, buyer agents are willing to accept compensation from listing agents with the specific understanding that their buyer-clients will offset any difference between what the buyer agreed to pay their agent and what a specific listing agent is offering through the MLS. The key question is will a buyer be willing to pay anything directly to their agent AND pay a “fair market” price to the seller? Do they even have the funds but I will go into that later.
All that being said, there is NO STANDARD fee and COLLUSION between firms is against the law. However, competition is NOT! I read a number of studies and articles over the years in addition to working with many sellers who had been unsuccessful trying to sell their properties with other agents. It is my opinion that property listings that offer less compensation than their local competition tend to take longer to sell and often achieve lower prices.
The main point of this article is that some consumers think that buyers and sellers should each compensate their own brokers rather than forcing sellers to essentially provide the funds to their listing broker that typically result in buyer broker compensation as an incentive to show property listings. We can argue that the fees come from a sale that is paid for by the buyer but that is not the main point.
In addition to issues with transparency and logic, the typical scenario has led to unethical buyer brokers “pushing” listings with higher compensation. It also “seems” to suggest a conflict in terms of how the money flows but what is the alternative?
If we ever reach a point where buyers must compensate their own brokers, what will the effect be? Will prices be expected to come down? That would seem fair and would in theory not impact seller proceeds as the theoretical price reduction would be somewhat consistent with lesser fees paid their listing broker that now flow to the buyer broker.
However, the REAL question is this: how many buyers have the cash to pay their typical closing costs, including the mortgage “down payment” (typically a minimum of 3.5% of the purchase price) AND whatever they negotiate with their buyer broker? There would be some but NOT ALL. What happens to those who cannot? Does that exclude them from buying and owning their own home?
While the argument would be that the purchase price would be reduced somewhat consistent with the fee due the buyer’s broker, the difference is that mortgage financing has typically covered the purchase price INCLUDING the fee to the buyer broker.
In my experience, I have worked with many sellers who had to offer a “seller assist” to buyers who did not have the cash on hand to cover their total acquisition costs where the listing broker paid the buyer’s broker. Many of my buyers needed a “seller assist”. Mortgage financing has allowed such “concessions” or seller assists depending on the type of financing being used.
If I looked over my past transactions I would guess that making buyers compensate their own brokers, as logical as that might sound, would have eliminated ANY chance of their buying their own home.
As a simple example, if a buyer is buying a $100,000 home putting down 5% ($5000) and financing $95,000 with their buyer broker being compensated $5000, reducing the purchase price by $5000 to $95,000 with the same 5% down would only reduce the down payment by about $250, give or take. The buyer is “saving” only 5% of the $5000, NOT the whole $5000 they would need to pay their broker. Where is the buyer supposed to come up with the remaining $4750 to pay their own agent/ broker?
I have heard some chatter about mortgages including the buyer broker’s fee on top of the purchase price but that makes no sense. In that scenario, what would be the threshold for an appraisal to protect the lender in the event, however small, of a mortgage default?
As with many things that “appear to make sense”, BE CAREFUL what you wish for. There are ALWAYS consequences and the unintended ones can be painful!
Remember, when it comes to buying or selling what is typically your biggest asset requiring your largest overall investment in money, time and effort,
There is no time for inexperience, empty promises or false expectations.
HIRE WISELY: We are not “all the same”!