A recent report indicates that some real estate agents in the Las Vegas Valley are finding ways to circumvent a court settlement aimed at reducing commissions, leading to even higher earnings for agents.
According to multiple real estate professionals who spoke to the Las Vegas Review-Journal on the condition of anonymity, the situation has turned the supposed intent of the settlement on its head.
“Thanks to the settlement, agents are now making more money than ever before,” one agent stated. “Agents are just using loopholes and workarounds or negotiating directly with the other agent.”
The claims come in light of data from Clever Real Estate which revealed that agent commissions have risen by 0.12 percent since 2024, now averaging 5.44 percent. The study surveyed over 800 agents nationwide in April and noted that commissions in Nevada have surged to an average of 5.6 percent, significantly up from 3.5 percent a year ago.
For instance, based on the median home sale price in Southern Nevada of $485,000 and the average commission rate of 5.6 percent, the total commission on such a transaction would amount to $27,160, split between the two real estate agents involved.
This surge in commission rates is raising eyebrows, particularly after the National Association of Realtors (NAR) settled a class-action lawsuit last year. The lawsuit alleged collusion among real estate agents to fix commission rates between 5 and 6 percent.
As part of the $418 million settlement, NAR agreed to implement several significant changes. These included prohibiting seller’s agents from advertising commission fees to buyer’s agents through Multiple Listing Services (MLS)—the main platforms for home listings. Additionally, buyers are required to sign a contract with a real estate agent upfront before viewing homes, which took effect last August.
The allegations made in the lawsuit suggested that NAR maintained monopolistic control over the MLS to uphold high commission rates. The settlement forbids agents from setting their commissions via the MLS and removes the mandate for agents to join the MLS altogether. Notably, however, NAR did not admit to any wrongdoing as part of the settlement.
Agents in the Las Vegas area, along with others across the country, have expressed that they need to adapt to these changes by employing various strategies to sidestep the court settlement, including the implementation of touring agreements—without a commission listing—as a replacement for buyer-broker agreements prior to home tours.
Buyer’s agents are often heard using the phrase “open the door and charge them four,” indicating a potential 4 percent commission for themselves after showing homes. After completing the showings, these agents present the buyer-broker agreement, which includes the commission details.
One agent shared with the Review-Journal that the increase in commissions might be linked to the current tight real estate market, where sellers are pressured to accept any offers amid a high inventory of listings and a low rate of sales.
George Kypreos, President of Las Vegas Realtors, declined to comment on the rising commission rates through a spokesperson.
Expectations following the NAR settlement suggested that commissions would significantly decrease, especially when compared to those in most developed countries, where averages are notably lower. For instance, countries like the United Kingdom (1.3 percent), Australia (2.5 percent), and the Netherlands (2.0 percent) have commission rates far below those seen in the United States.
In an email response to the Review-Journal, a spokesperson for NAR noted that the settlement aimed to enhance transparency regarding agent compensation for consumers.
“Members of NAR are entrepreneurs who provide great value to buyers and sellers before, during, and after the transaction,” the statement read. “They deserve to be appropriately compensated for their work, just like anyone else who provides a service.”
Furthermore, the statement emphasized that compensation is a matter of direct negotiation between an agent and their client and reminded readers that NAR members must adhere to their Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice, which calls for serving clients’ best interests.
Brandon Roberts, President of Nevada Realtors, responded to the findings of the Clever Real Estate study, suggesting it brings a significant conversation topic to the forefront following the NAR settlement.
“It’s essential to acknowledge that real estate commissions have always been—and remain—fully negotiable,” Roberts stated. “What we’re observing with service rates reflects a combination of market forces, consumer preferences, and the ongoing value agents bring in navigating clients through complex transactions.”
Roberts added that the NAR settlement is geared towards fostering transparency and consumer choice rather than imposing strict compensation regulations.
“While the settlement bars offers of compensation through listing platforms, it does not restrict buyers and sellers from negotiating payment directly with agents,” he affirmed, noting that in many situations, consumers prefer the traditional compensation models due to their value for full-service representation.
He concluded by acknowledging that concerns requiring scrutiny regarding attempts to exploit the settlement’s spirit should be taken seriously, while also clarifying the difference between lawful, negotiated agreements and intentional system abuse.
image source from：reviewjournal
