The Unfulfilled Promise of Lower Commissions

In March 2024, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) agreed to a landmark $418 million settlement that was supposed to revolutionize how real estate commissions are handled in the U.S. The deal aimed to dismantle the traditional 6% commission structure, which critics argued inflated housing costs by embedding fees into home prices. Home sellers, who typically foot the bill for both their agent and the buyer’s, were promised relief as the settlement prohibited listing agents from offering compensation to buyer agents via multiple listing services (MLS). This change, effective from August 2024, was heralded as a seismic shift that could save consumers billions annually.

Yet, as we approach the end of 2025, evidence suggests these anticipated savings have largely failed to materialize. Commissions remain stubbornly high, averaging around 5% to 6% in many markets, according to data compiled by industry analysts. Buyers and sellers report minimal negotiation power, with agents often steering conversations toward familiar fee structures. This persistence raises questions about the settlement’s real-world impact, prompting a deeper examination of structural barriers and behavioral inertia in the real estate sector.

Market Inertia and Workarounds

One key reason for the lack of change is the emergence of creative workarounds. Sellers are now offering “buyer concessions” or closing credits that effectively mimic the old commission splits, as noted in posts on X where real estate professionals discuss bypassing MLS restrictions. For instance, instead of advertising a 3% buyer agent fee on the MLS, listings might include incentives like covering closing costs, which indirectly compensate buyer agents. This practice, while compliant with the new rules, undermines the settlement’s intent to foster true negotiation.

Furthermore, the settlement required buyer agents to secure written agreements disclosing their fees upfront, but enforcement has been lax. A report from Morning Brew in April 2025 highlighted that in surveyed transactions, fees hadn’t dropped significantly, with many buyers still unaware they could haggle. Industry insiders point to the information asymmetry: most consumers lack the expertise to challenge entrenched norms, allowing agents to maintain higher rates.

Economic Pressures and Agent Resistance

High housing costs in 2025, exacerbated by persistent inflation and low inventory, have compounded the issue. With median home prices hovering above $400,000, even small percentage-based fees translate to substantial sums, making agents reluctant to lower them amid a slowdown in sales volume. According to Urban Institute analysis from 2024, while the settlement could eventually benefit lower-income buyers more, the transition has favored established brokerages that can absorb legal changes without slashing profits.

Agent resistance plays a pivotal role too. Many realtors, facing potential income drops, have doubled down on value propositions like market expertise and negotiation skills to justify fees. A CNN Business piece from the settlement’s announcement predicted this, noting the end of the 6% standard but warning of gradual implementation. X users, including finance influencers, echo this sentiment, with posts lamenting that the changes have “disrupted the model” without immediate cost reductions for consumers.

Regulatory Gaps and Future Outlook

Regulatory oversight remains inconsistent across states, contributing to the uneven rollout. In some areas like California, stricter interpretations have led to modest fee declines, but nationally, the Department of Justice’s ongoing scrutiny hasn’t yet forced widespread compliance. The Washington Post reported in 2024 that the deal could “upend rules inflating commissions,” yet 2025 data shows only a 0.5% average drop, per industry trackers.

Looking ahead, experts anticipate that as more flat-fee and discount brokerages gain traction—empowered by the settlement—competition could finally drive fees down. A WebProNews article from earlier this year suggested savings up to $50,000 through negotiation, but realization depends on consumer education. For now, the settlement’s promise of affordability in housing remains elusive, a reminder that structural reforms often unfold slower than anticipated.

Implications for Buyers and Sellers

For prospective buyers, the new rules mean potentially paying agent fees out-of-pocket, which could deter first-time purchasers already strained by high mortgage rates. Sellers, meanwhile, might see slight bargaining leverage, but many opt for traditional agents to ensure smooth transactions in a competitive market. Insights from USA Today underscore that while commissions could shrink, the spring 2024 homebuying season showed little immediate change.

Ultimately, the settlement’s full effects may take years to permeate, influenced by economic cycles and legal evolutions. As The Wall Street Journal explored in its recent deep dive, theories abound—from agent collusion to buyer inertia—explaining why costs haven’t budged. Industry insiders must watch for antitrust enforcements that could accelerate true reform, potentially reshaping real estate economics for the better.