A landmark $418 million settlement finalized in 2024 was widely expected to reshape how real estate agents are compensated, particularly on the buyer side of transactions. While the agreement has succeeded in making fee structures more transparent, it has not delivered the consumer savings many had hoped for. New industry data reveals that average buyer agent commissions have remained largely unchanged—and in some cases have even risen slightly—underscoring the resilience of long-standing market practices.
According to real estate industry reporting, the average commission rate for buyer agents reached 2.43% in the second quarter of 2025, up from 2.38% prior to the settlement. This modest increase stands in contrast to expectations that greater transparency and consumer awareness would pressure fees downward. The settlement, which required agents to disclose fee arrangements before conducting home tours, has improved clarity for buyers and sellers. However, the underlying commission model remains intact, with entrenched habits continuing to drive compensation norms.
One of the key obstacles to change is the industry’s deep-rooted resistance to altering long-standing practices. Many sellers continue to cover buyer-agent commissions in an effort to make their listings more attractive, sustaining the perception that buyers are not directly responsible for those costs. As a result, few buyers enter into negotiations over commission rates, reducing the competitive pressure needed to lower fees. Moreover, many consumers continue to view real estate agents as indispensable guides through an increasingly complex housing market. This belief in the value of professional representation provides further insulation for commission structures, even as transparency requirements bring costs into clearer focus.
Experts suggest that the impact of the settlement may take years to fully materialize. While greater disclosure has given consumers more information, meaningful change in the way buyers approach agent compensation will likely depend on a broader cultural shift in the housing market. Early indicators show that some buyers are beginning to forgo traditional agent relationships altogether, relying instead on digital platforms, discount brokerages, or direct-to-seller models. These alternative approaches could, over time, place pressure on commission rates, but their adoption remains limited for now.
Industry analysts point out that this dynamic reflects the delicate balance between regulatory reform and consumer behavior. Structural changes, such as mandated disclosure, can set the stage for more competitive outcomes. Yet without widespread buyer willingness to negotiate or explore nontraditional options, entrenched commission models remain difficult to dislodge. The settlement has introduced greater accountability and transparency, but those measures alone are not sufficient to overcome the inertia of a system that has been in place for decades.
In the broader context, this development underscores the complexity of real estate economics. Commissions are not merely a matter of fees—they are intertwined with seller strategies, agent incentives, and consumer psychology. For many buyers, the commission is an abstract cost bundled into the transaction rather than an explicit line item to be negotiated. Until that perception shifts, meaningful downward movement in rates is likely to be slow.
The settlement nonetheless represents a step toward modernization of real estate practices, pushing the industry toward clearer, more consumer-friendly disclosures. Whether it leads to lower costs, however, remains an open question. For now, the lesson of 2025 is that transparency does not always equate to savings—and that structural reform in real estate is as much about changing habits as it is about rewriting rules.
