NAR Settlement FAQs

• If you are an NAR member as of the date of the class notice, you are covered by the settlement unless:
  • You are an employee of: eXp Realty, LLC; eXp World Holdings, Inc.; Hanna Holdings, Inc.; HomeSmart International, LLC; Howard Hanna Real Estate Services; Redfin Corporation; United Real Estate; or Weichert, Realtors® OR
  • You are associated with HomeServices of America or one of its affiliates. HomeServices of America announced its own settlement on April 26, 2024.
  • Class notice will be sent out no earlier than August 17, 2024.

• To be covered by the settlement, you must be an NAR member as of the date of class notice.
• You will not be covered by the settlement—regardless of prior membership length—if you resign your membership, if your membership is terminated, or if your membership becomes inactive prior to the date of class notice.
• Class notice will be sent out no earlier than August 17, 2024.

• Except for members affiliated with HomeServices of America and employees of the remaining corporate defendants named in the cases covered by this settlement, members affiliated with brokerages with an NAR member as principal whose transaction volume in 2022 was $2+ billion are covered by the release. 
• Individual members and all brokerages with an NAR member as principal with a residential transaction volume in 2022 of $2 billion or below are released from liability in the proposed settlement agreement. No further affirmative steps are required.

• The agreement provides a mechanism for nearly all brokerage entities that had a residential transaction volume in 2022 that exceeded $2 billion and MLSs not wholly owned by REALTOR® associations to obtain releases efficiently if they choose to use it.
• While we would have preferred to protect all industry players, ultimately NAR could not persuade the plaintiffs to include the largest brokerages, particularly given the significant settlements that other corporate defendants have already reached.
• Individual members and all brokerages with an NAR member as principal whose residential transaction volume in 2022 was $2 billion or below are released from liability in the proposed settlement agreement. No further affirmative steps are required.

• NAR fought to include all members in the release and was able to ensure more than one million members were included.
• Despite NAR’s efforts, agents affiliated with HomeServices of America and its related companies—the last corporate defendant still litigating the Sitzer-Burnett case—are not released under the settlement, nor are employees of the remaining corporate defendants named in the cases covered by this settlement. HomeServices of America announced its own settlement on April 26, 2024.
• Plaintiffs would not agree to include these members and employees of the corporate defendants in the NAR’s release
• NAR secured in the agreement a mechanism for nearly all brokerage entities that had a residential transaction volume in 2022 that exceeded $2 billion and MLSs not wholly owned by REALTOR® associations to obtain releases efficiently if they choose to use it.

• Throughout the settlement process, we engaged with a diverse range of stakeholders and considered their perspectives and interests while fighting to protect all industry players as best we could.
• As is common in negotiating a complex settlement, there is a need to maintain confidentiality and effectively navigate complex legal considerations, which restricted the extent of the information that NAR could share more broadly.

• The agreement would release all state/territorial and local REALTOR® associations from liability for the types of claims brought in these cases on behalf of home sellers related to broker commissions, and would also require their compliance with the practice changes agreed to in the settlement.

• Yes.

• Absolutely not. NAR fought to include as many people and companies in the release as possible and achieved a release for everyone it could. Over one million members are covered, as are tens of thousands of REALTOR® businesses. 
• The scope of the release makes clear that NAR looked out for its members. Ultimately, NAR was able to ensure that agents, even those at brokerages that are not covered, are among the more than one million members released.
• Despite NAR’s efforts, plaintiffs would not agree to include everybody.
• Those that are not released—the largest companies in our industry—are no worse off now than they were before the settlement.
• In fact, many are better off, as thousands of their independent contractor real estate agents are released by the settlement.
• However, they can choose whether to use the mechanism NAR negotiated.
• Our options included reaching a settlement or continuing to appeal the Sitzer-Burnett verdict and litigate the related cases. The latter could have led to our filing for Chapter 11 protection, leaving all members, associations, MLSs, and brokerages exposed.

• NAR secured in the agreement a mechanism for nearly all brokerage entities that had a residential transaction volume in 2022 that exceeded $2 billion to obtain releases efficiently if they choose to use it. However, the remaining defendants in the actions covered by the Agreement cannot use the opt-in mechanism.
• Broadly speaking, the opt-in provides two paths:
  • Option 1: A brokerage can elect to pay an amount based on a predetermined formula based on that brokerage’s residential transaction volume.
  • Option 2: A brokerage can elect to participate in non-binding mediation within 110 days following preliminary approval of the settlement.
  • Brokerages can also choose not to participate in this settlement.
• In order to be released under the settlement, eligible brokerages must agree to and execute Appendix C – Brokerage “Opt In” Agreement and return it—along with the required documentation and indication noted in paragraph 20 of Appendix C—to the email addresses realtorsoptin@jndla.com, realtorsoptin@cohenmilstein.com, and nargovernance@nar.realtor within 60 days of the filing of the motion for preliminary approval (by June 18, 2024).
• All agreements reached through this mechanism would be subject to court approval.

• For MLSs that are not wholly owned by a REALTOR® association, the agreement includes a mechanism to obtain a release efficiently if they so choose.
• The agreement provides two paths:
  • Option 1: The MLS can elect to pay an amount based on a pre-determined formula based on number of MLS subscribers.
  • Option 2: The MLS can elect to participate in non-binding mediation within 110 days following preliminary approval of the settlement.
  • Non-REALTOR® MLSs can also choose not to participate in this settlement.
• Under both options, participating non-REALTOR® MLSs would agree to be bound by the practice changes set forth in the settlement agreement, including and not limited to the adoption of a rule prohibiting offers of compensation on that MLS.
• Non-REALTOR® MLSs must:
  • Execute Appendix D – Non-REALTOR® MLS “Opt In” Agreement by June 18, 2024, which is 60 days from the filing of the Motion for Preliminary Approval.
  • Return the executed Agreement—along with the required indication noted in paragraph 20 of Appendix D—to the email addresses realtorsoptin@jndla.com, realtorsoptin@cohenmilstein.com, and nargovernance@nar.realtor.
  • Choose between the options to either pay a per-subscriber fee to the Settlement Fund or pay an amount agreed to in a non-binding mediation.
  • Implement practice changes as soon as practicable but not later than September 16, 2024, which is 150 days from the filing of the Motion for Preliminary Approval.
• NAR recommends all MLSs opting into the settlement implement the practice changes by August 17, 2024.

• REALTOR® MLSs must:
  • Execute Appendix B by June 18, 2024, which is 60 days from the filing of the motion for preliminary approval.
  • Return the executed REALTOR® MLS “Opt In” Agreement Appendix B to the email addresses realtorsoptin@jndla.com, realtorsoptin@cohenmilstein.com, and nargovernance@nar.realtor.
  • Implement the practice changes by August 17, 2024, to be in compliance with mandatory NAR policy.

• The MLS would not be covered by the release of the proposed settlement agreement.

• The policy changes, agreed to by NAR leadership, were reviewed and updated with the changes as outlined below:
  • Eliminate and prohibit any requirement of offers of compensation in the MLS between listing brokers or sellers to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives.
  • Retain, and define, "cooperation” for MLS Participation.
  • Eliminate and prohibit MLS Participants, Subscribers, and sellers from making any offers of compensation in the MLS to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives.
  • Require the MLS to eliminate all broker compensation fields and compensation information in the MLS.
  • Require the MLS to not create, facilitate, or support any non-MLS mechanism (including by providing listing information to an internet aggregator’s website for such purpose) for Participants, Subscribers, or sellers to make offers of compensation to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives.
  • Prohibit the use of MLS data or data feeds to directly or indirectly establish or maintain a platform of offers of compensation from multiple brokers or other buyer representatives.  Such use must result with the MLS terminating the Participant’s access to any MLS data and data feeds. 
  • Reinforce that MLS Participants and Subscribers must not, and MLSs must not enable the ability to filter out or restrict MLS listings that are communicated to customers or clients based on the existence or level of compensation offered to the cooperating broker or the name of a brokerage or agent.
  • Require compensation disclosures to sellers, and prospective sellers and buyers. 
  • Require MLS Participants working with a buyer to enter into a written agreement with the buyer prior to touring a home.

• MLSs have always provided significant value beyond communicating offers of compensation.
• MLSs:
  • Enable comprehensive marketplaces: Access to inventory and widespread advertising incentivizes local broker participation.
  • Ensure reliable data access: NAR guidelines for local MLS broker marketplaces enable hubs of trusted, verified information where all participants have equitable access.
  • Create connections: Local MLS broker marketplaces create the largest opportunity for connections between real estate agents with properties to sell and those with clients looking to buy.
  • Advance small business: Compiling housing information that is accessible to all businesses, in one place, allows smaller real estate brokerages to compete with larger ones.
  • Encourage entrepreneurship: Because of lower barriers to entry enabled by local MLS broker marketplaces, new market entrants can advance technology, consumer service and other innovations.

• The definition has been amended to remove any references to offers of compensation and to establish that a Participant has the duty to cooperate, which is to share information on listed property and to make property available to other brokers for showing to prospective purchasers and tenants when it is in the best interest of their clients.

• Yes, all MLS policies will continue to be in effect and subject to enforcement by their local MLSs.

• On August 17, NAR’s mandatory MLS policy changes, which implement the settlement’s required practice changes, will take effect.
• Our settlement requires NAR to implement the practice changes no later than the date of class notice. Through the preliminary settlement approval process, we now know the earliest date of class notice is August 17, 2024.
• Additionally, to comply with NAR’s mandatory national MLS policies, REALTOR® MLSs must implement the practice changes by August 17.
• NAR shared these practice changes in early May to provide a three-month window for NAR members and MLSs to prepare to implement these changes.

• Our settlement requires NAR to implement the practice changes no later than the date of the class notice. Through the preliminary settlement approval process, we no longer have to estimate the date of the rule change, and now know the earliest date of the class notice is August 17, 2024.

• MLSs that have opted into the settlement agreement have until September 16, 2024, to implement the necessary policy changes and to be considered Released Parties under the settlement, as provided in the relevant appendices they executed. However, in accordance with mandatory NAR policy, REALTOR® MLSs must implement the practice changes by August 17, 2024.  If they do not, they will not be in compliance with NAR mandatory policy. NAR recommends all MLSs opting into the settlement implement the practice changes by August 17, 2024.NAR’s accelerated rule change process, during which it released the exact language of the practice changes in early May, gives MLSs over three months to implement the changes by August 17, 2024.

• Our settlement requires NAR to implement the practice changes no later than the date of the class notice. Through the preliminary settlement approval process, we no longer have to estimate the date of the rule change, and now know the earliest date of the class notice is August 17, 2024.

• While NAR has long maintained—and we continue to believe—that cooperative compensation and NAR’s current policies are good things that benefit buyers and sellers, we also acknowledge that continuing to litigate would have hurt members and their small businesses, so have agreed to put in place a new rule prohibiting offers of compensation on the MLS.
• This is consistent with NAR’s long-maintained position that prohibiting all offers of cooperative compensation entirely would harm consumers and be inconsistent with real estate laws in the many states that authorize them.
• We believe this agreement provides a path forward for our industry and NAR.

• As always, the consumer chooses whether to use a real estate professional. Research has confirmed that consumers find great value in the services provided by a buyer broker, and we continue to believe it is imperative for buyer brokers to clearly articulate what services and value they are providing to consumers.

• No. We have long believed that it is in the interest of the sellers, buyers, and their brokers to make offers of compensation—but using the MLS to communicate offers of compensation will no longer be an option.
• The types of compensation available for buyer brokers would continue to take multiple forms, including but not limited to:
  • Fixed-fee commission paid directly by consumers
  • Concession from the seller
  • Portion of the listing broker’s compensation
  • Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they represent

• Offers of compensation will continue to be an option consumers can pursue off-MLS through negotiation and consultation with real estate professionals.
• The types of compensation available for buyer brokers would continue to take multiple forms, including but not limited to:
  • Fixed-fee commission paid directly by consumers
  • Concession from the seller
  • Portion of the listing broker’s compensation
  • Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they represent

• Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they represent.

• Listing brokers should inform their clients that offers of compensation will no longer be an option on an MLS.
• This change will not prevent offers of cooperative compensation off an MLS. And it will not prevent sellers from offering buyer concessions on an MLS (ex. concessions for buyer closing costs).
• Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they serve.

• No. Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they represent, as NAR’s policy has required for decades.

• Offers of compensation could continue to be an option consumers can pursue off-MLS through negotiation and consultation with real estate professionals. And sellers can offer buyer concessions on an MLS (for example—concessions that can be used for buyer closing costs).
• The settlement does not change the ethical duties that NAR members owe their clients.
• REALTORS® are always required to protect and promote the interests of their clients and treat all parties in a transaction, honestly (Article 1, COE).
• NAR members will continue to use their skill, care, and diligence to protect the interests of their clients.
• NAR remains dedicated to promoting transparency in the marketplace and working to ensure that consumers have access to comprehensive, equitable, transparent, and reliable property information, as well as the ability to have affordable professional representation in their real estate transactions.

• This settlement allows compensation to remain a choice for consumers when buying or selling a home.
• NAR continues to believe that offers of compensation help make professional representation more accessible, decrease costs for home buyers to secure these services, increase fair housing opportunities, and increase the potential buyer pool for sellers.
• The settlement does not change the ethical duties that NAR members owe their clients.
• REALTORS® are always required to protect and promote the interests of their clients and treat all parties in a transaction honestly (Article 1, COE).
• NAR members will continue to use their skill, care, and diligence to protect the interests of their clients.

• MLS Participants must make this disclosure, but active agreements do not need to be amended to accomplish this. MLS Participants can do a separate disclosure to satisfy the requirement.

• If the listing agreement instructs the listing broker to make an offer of compensation without reference to the MLS, no change to the listing agreement is needed, as the listing broker can comply with that instruction without violating the MLS policy change.
• But if the listing agreement specifies that offers of compensation be made “on the MLS,” then the listing broker should work with the seller to amend the listing agreement before the MLS policy change is implemented, to make it clear the listing broker will not make an offer of compensation on the MLS and will not be violating the listing agreement by failing to make an offer of compensation on the MLS.

• If the sales contract is executed before the MLS policy change, the buyer broker should be able to rely upon the offer of compensation even if closing occurs after the date of the policy change.
• But if a sales contract is not executed before the date the participant’s MLS implements the policy changes, the offer on the MLS will not be valid and buyers and buyer brokers may wish to protect themselves in writing with the listing broker or seller through a broker agreement or by including the offer of compensation in the sales contract.

• After the new rule goes into effect, listing agreements should be amended to reflect that offers of compensation cannot be communicated via the MLS.
• The settlement expressly provides that sellers may communicate seller concessions—such as buyer closing costs—via the MLS provided that such concessions are not conditioned on the use of or payment to a buyer broker.

• Only if they choose to opt into the proposed settlement.

• The buyer broker may not receive compensation for brokerage services from any source that exceeds the amount or rate agreed to in the agreement with the buyer.

• No. A buyer can always ask their buyer broker to make it a term of an offer to purchase that the seller pay certain compensation to the buyer broker.
• Standard of Practice 16-16 prohibits a REALTOR® from attempting to modify the terms of a listing agreement through the terms of an offer because the listing agreement is a contractual matter between the seller and the listing broker. However, the seller and the listing broker may independently choose to amend the listing agreement or take any other action they deem appropriate based on the seller’s negotiations with the buyer. Standard of Practice 16-16 also prohibits a REALTOR® from delaying or withholding delivery of a buyer’s offer while attempting to negotiate a buyer broker compensation.

• Yes

• No. The new MLS policies prohibits any information about compensation in the MLS.

• Yes, MLS Participants may augment MLS data or data feeds with offers of compensation to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives for only listings of their own brokerage.

• No, use of MLS data or data feeds to directly or indirectly establish or maintain a platform of offers of compensation from multiple brokers to buyer brokers or other buyer representatives is prohibited.

• Yes.

• Yes, REALTORS® are bound to arbitrate or mediate pursuant to Article 17 of the Code of Ethics, and for MLS Participants who are non-REALTORS® they are bound to arbitrate or mediate pursuant to their MLS’s local rules.

• The written agreement must include: 

1. A specific and conspicuous disclosure of the amount or rate of compensation the Participant will receive or how this amount will be determined, to the extent that the Participant will receive compensation from any source. 
2. The amount of compensation in a manner that is objectively ascertainable and not open-ended.
3. A term that prohibits the Participant from receiving compensation for brokerage services from any source that exceeds the amount or rate agreed to in the agreement with the buyer; and 
4. A conspicuous statement that broker fees and commissions are not set by law and are fully negotiable.

The MLS will be responsible for enforcing the rule regarding written agreements, like the MLS enforces other existing rules.

• The “working with” language is intended to distinguish MLS Participants who provide brokerage services to a buyer—such as identifying potential properties, arranging for the buyer to tour a property, performing or facilitating negotiations on behalf of the buyer, presenting offers by the buyer, or other services for the buyer —from MLS Participants who simply market their services or just talk to a buyer—like at an open house or by providing an unrepresented buyer access to a house they have listed. 
• If the MLS Participant is working only as an agent or subagent of the seller, then the participant is not “working with the buyer.” In that scenario, an agreement is not required because the participant is performing work for the seller and not the buyer.
• Authorized dual agents, on the other hand, work with the buyer (and the seller).

• Written buyer agreements are required before a buyer tours a home for sale listed on the MLS.
• Touring a home means when the buyer and/or the MLS Participant, or other agent, at the direction of the MLS Participant working with the buyer, enter the house. This includes when the MLS Participant or other agent, at the direction of the MLS Participant, working with the buyer enters the home to provide a live, virtual tour to a buyer not physically present.
• A “home” means a residential property consisting of not less than one nor more than four residential dwelling units.

• No. MLS Participants and buyers will still be able to enter into any type of professional relationship permitted by state law.
• NAR policy does not dictate:
  • What type of relationship the professional has with the potential buyer (e.g., agency, non-agency, subagency, transactional, customer).
  • The term of the agreement (e.g., one day, one month, one house, one zip code).
  • The services to be provided (e.g., ministerial acts, a certain number of showings, negotiations, presenting offers).
  • The compensation charged (e.g., $0, X flat fee, X percent, X hourly rate).

• All MLS Participants working with a buyer must have a buyer written agreement prior to touring, unless state law requires an agreement earlier in time.

• No. The new rule will cover every type of relationship where an MLS Participant is working with a buyer.

• No. If the MLS Participant is working only as an agent or subagent of the seller, then the participant is not working for the buyer. In that scenario, an agreement is not required because the participant is performing work for the seller and not the buyer.

• Yes. The obligation is triggered once the MLS Participant is working with that buyer and has taken them to tour a home, regardless of what other acts the MLS Participant performs.
• But an MLS Participant performing only ministerial acts—without the expectation of being paid for those acts and who has not taken the buyer to tour a home—is not working for the buyer.

• Yes, regardless of whether it is an agency or non-agency relationship, the obligation is triggered once the MLS Participant works with that buyer and has taken her to tour a home.

• Yes. If an MLS Participant is working as an agent for a buyer, a written agreement is required.

• Yes. If an MLS Participant is working as an agent for a buyer, a written agreement is required.

• No, you must still comply with all your state and local legal requirements. MLS policies and rules are subject to state and local laws and regulations.

• Written buyer agreements will be required of all MLS Participants working with buyers prior to touring a home, unless state law requires a written buyer agreement earlier in time.

• No, the MLS is not required to receive a copy but can request it as a matter of their local enforcement.

• No. NAR policy does not dictate:
  • What type of relationship the professional has with the potential buyer (e.g., agency, non-agency, subagency, transactional, customer).
  • The term of the agreement (e.g., one day, one month, one house, one zip code).
  • The services to be provided (e.g., ministerial acts, a certain number of showings, negotiations, presenting offers).
  • The compensation charged (e.g., $0, X flat fee, X percent, X hourly rate).
• Compensation continues to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between MLS Participants and the buyers with whom they work.

• NAR policy will not dictate the compensation agreed between buyers and buyer brokers (e.g., $0, X flat fee, X percent, X hourly rate).
• Under the settlement, any compensation agreed to must be objectively ascertainable and not open-ended.
• For example, the range cannot be “buyer broker compensation shall be whatever amount the seller is offering to the buyer.”

• Yes. MLS Participants working with a buyer after the effective date of the policy should take steps to ensure that the buyer has agreed to the necessary terms required by the settlement agreement.

• Yes. MLS Participants working with a buyer after the effective date of the policy should take steps to ensure that the buyer has agreed to the necessary terms required by the settlement agreement.

• No. Unlike the settlement agreement’s requirements that compensation in buyer agreements be objectively ascertainable and not open-ended, listing agreements can be structured however the seller and listing broker agree, so long as the listing agreement complies with the law, pre-existing MLS policy, and “specifies the amount or rate of any payment” from the seller to the listing broker.

• No, MLSs will continue to have local discretion on seller concessions. This includes determining what local rules to have about seller concessions, except under the settlement the MLS must ensure that the seller concessions are not limited to or conditioned upon the retention of or payment to a cooperating broker, buyer broker, or other buyer representative.

• Yes, it is a matter of local discretion which may depend on the MLS’s technological capabilities and what the MLS deems to be in the interests of its market.

No, it is a matter of local discretion for each MLS.

• No. The new rule would prohibit offers of compensation on the MLS.

• Yes, it is a matter of local discretion which may depend on the MLS’s technological capabilities and what the MLS deems to be in the interests of its market.

• As a general matter, seller concessions usually aren’t binding until they are established in an executed contract such as a listing agreement or a purchase contract. 

• This is a matter of local discretion. But the MLS must ensure that the seller concessions are not limited to or conditioned upon the retention of or payment to a cooperating broker, buyer broker, or other buyer representative.

• Yes, Policy Statement 8.5 was enacted in 2021. It has only been amended for clarification purposes and to ensure consistency with the proposed settlement agreement.

• Filtering out listings means to remove listings or block MLS listings from being communicated to customers or clients based on the amount of compensation offered, the existence of an offer of compensation, or based on the listing firm or listing agent.
• Participants have the duty to cooperate which is to share information on listed property and to make property available to other brokers for showing to prospective purchasers and tenants when it is in the best interest of their clients.

• Yes, “ranking” or “sorting” listings is the ability to organize a list of MLS listings in a particular order. Examples of criteria that may be used to rank or sort may be the property sales price, the number of bathrooms or bedrooms, the property location, etc. Ranking or sorting must not involve the removal or the blocking of MLS listings which prevent the communication of those listings to a client or customer.

• Since offers of compensation may no longer be communicated on the MLS, it should not have any functionality related to broker compensation.
• As for filtering based on listing firm or listing agent, just like the inability of Participants or Subscribers to withhold listings based on those criteria in IDX and VOW displays, MLSs cannot enable that same ability within other MLS functions that provide listing data to consumers.
• An MLS must take appropriate action if it becomes aware that a Participant or Subscriber acts inconsistently with this MLS policy.

• The proposed settlement agreement—like the Sitzer-Burnett lawsuit and the copycat lawsuits—is focused on residential real estate transactions. That means most commercial transactions will not be affected.
• In many markets, commercial listings appear in commercial information exchanges (CIEs) and not multiple listing services (MLSs), and do not include an offer of compensation.
• The settlement prohibits offers of compensation on an MLS and requires MLS Participants working with buyers to enter into written agreements with their buyers. These practice changes will go into effect August 17, 2024.

• No. That practice change prohibits offers of compensation on the MLS and it prohibits MLSs from allowing third parties to use MLS data to facilitate a platform for multiple brokerages to make offers of compensation.

• No. The settlement and the practice changes it requires are focused on residential transactions, not commercial transactions, or leases.

• No. The settlement and the practice changes it requires are focused on residential transactions, not commercial transactions, or leases.

• This settlement would preserve the choices consumers have regarding real estate services and compensation.
• After the new rule goes into effect, listing brokers and sellers could continue to offer compensation for buyer broker services, but such offers could not be communicated via the MLS.
• MLS Participants acting for buyers would be required to enter into written agreements with their buyers before touring a home. These agreements can help consumers understand exactly what services and value will be provided, and for how much.

• As NAR has maintained throughout the litigation, nothing in NAR’s current policies (including the MLS Model Rule) has increased costs for buyers or sellers.
• This settlement would preserve the choices consumers have regarding real estate services and compensation. After the new rule goes into effect, listing brokers and sellers could continue to offer compensation for buyer broker services, but such offers could not be communicated via the MLS.
• The settlement expressly provides that sellers may communicate seller concessions—such as buyer closing costs—via the MLS provided that such concessions are not conditioned on the use of or payment to a buyer broker.

• One of the critical advantages of this agreement is that NAR would be able to pay the settlement amount over time.
• We will determine how to allocate funds as they become due, working closely with our Finance Committee.

• We are confident that this agreement provides a path for NAR to move forward and continue our work to preserve, protect, and advance the right to real property for all.
• NAR fought to include all members in the release and was able to ensure more than one million members were included.
• We will continue to deliver unparalleled value to, and advocacy on behalf of, REALTORS®, including through our learning opportunities and resources, research, and member tools.

• The settlement was signed off by NAR’s Leadership Team, in consultation with outside legal and financial experts, and in accordance with NAR’s governance procedures.
• Throughout the settlement process, we engaged with a diverse range of members and considered their perspectives and interests while fighting to protect all industry players as best we could.
• As is common in negotiating a complex settlement, there is a need to maintain confidentiality and effectively navigate complex legal considerations, which restricted the extent of the information that NAR could share more broadly.

• Since the litigation began, we have consistently worked to reach a resolution with the plaintiffs.
• In the months since the Sitzer-Burnett verdict, we redoubled those efforts.
• As is common in negotiating a complex settlement, there is a need to maintain confidentiality and effectively navigate complex legal considerations, which restricted the extent of the information that NAR could share more broadly.
• We have always wanted to reduce the significant strain on our members and provide a path forward for the industry and, from the beginning of this litigation, we had two goals:
• Secure a release of liability for as many of our members, associations, and MLSs as we could; and
• Preserve the choices consumers have regarding real estate services and compensation.
• This proposed settlement achieves both of those goals and provides a path for us to move forward and continue our work to preserve, protect, and advance the right to real property for all.
• Ultimately, while NAR continues to believe that it is not liable for the home seller claims related to broker commissions and that we have strong arguments challenging the Sitzer-Burnett verdict, we decided to reach this settlement to put claims to rest for over one million NAR members and other parties who would be released under the agreement.
• NAR has been proactive in publicly advocating our position throughout the litigation. We have published multiple op-eds and provided our perspective to various news outlets reporting on NAR and the challenges our industry faces.
• We have also consistently updated Competition.Realtor—our online hub of information about how REALTORS® and local MLS broker marketplaces create competitive, efficient, pro-consumer markets—with new information, materials, and FAQs pertinent to the litigation.

• This settlement was heavily negotiated and is based on NAR’s ability to pay.
• NAR has secured a release of liability for over one million NAR members, all state/territorial and local REALTOR® associations, all REALTOR® MLSs, and all brokerages with an NAR member as principal that had a residential transaction volume in 2022 of $2 billion or below.
• There are strong grounds for the court to approve this settlement because it is in the best interests of all parties and class members.

• We are confident that this agreement provides a path for us to move forward and continue our work to preserve, protect, and advance the right to real property for all.
• The settlement amount is a substantial sum, and it will be incumbent on NAR to use our remaining resources in the most effective way possible to continue delivering on our core mission.
• The Finance Committee and Strategic Planning Committee will remain critical in reviewing and providing guidance about NAR’s operating budget to help ensure we will continue to deliver unparalleled value to and advocacy on behalf of REALTORS®, including through our learning opportunities and resources, research, and member tools.

• This settlement was heavily negotiated, and the amount is based on NAR’s ability to pay.
• One of the critical advantages of this agreement is that NAR would be able to pay the settlement amount over time.
• We will determine how to allocate funds as they become due, working closely with our Finance Committee.

• One of the critical advantages of this agreement is that NAR would be able to pay the settlement amount over time.
• The settlement amount is a substantial sum, and it will be incumbent on NAR to use our remaining resources in the most effective way possible to continue delivering on our core mission.
• The Finance Committee and Strategic Planning Committee will remain critical in reviewing and providing guidance about NAR’s operating budget to help ensure we will continue to deliver unparalleled value to, and advocacy on behalf of, REALTORS®, including through our learning opportunities and resources, research, and member tools.

• NAR will not change membership dues for 2024 or 2025 because of this payment.