Realtor fees have always been one of the most emotionally charged costs in a home deal because they are large, visible at closing, and often treated like a fixed tax even though they are not. The best way to reduce their impact is to stop thinking about the fee as a single number and start treating it as a bundle of services you can price, reshape, and negotiate. That mindset matters even more after the National Association of Realtors settlement changes that took effect on August 17, 2024. Under the new framework, MLS systems are no longer used to display offers of compensation to buyer brokers, and agents working with buyers generally need a written agreement in place before touring homes, which pushes the compensation conversation to the front of the process instead of the end.
A lot of consumers heard “settlement” and assumed commissions would immediately collapse. That has not been the dominant story so far. Redfin’s reporting has shown buyer agent commissions moving within a relatively narrow band, with a dip around late 2024 and then a return toward prior levels in 2025. Major coverage has also pointed out that average commissions did not suddenly plunge in the year after the changes, in part because consumer habits and industry norms do not reset overnight. If you are a buyer or a seller hoping the market will automatically hand you lower fees, you may be waiting a long time. The practical path is to reduce the impact of realtor fees by changing the shape of what you buy from an agent, when you negotiate it, and how the dollars flow through the deal.
Understanding what actually changed is useful because it reveals where your leverage now sits. When offers of compensation are not posted on the MLS, you cannot assume the buyer side is already pre-set in the background. And when written buyer agreements are expected before touring, the buyer is asked to commit earlier, which can feel uncomfortable but can also be powerful. It forces an explicit discussion about compensation, scope of work, and expectations at a moment when you still have the option to walk away and interview other agents. Transparency does not automatically lower fees, but it gives you a clean opening to negotiate them.
For buyers, the best strategies start with your buyer agreement. Instead of accepting a percentage that floats upward with home price, convert that percentage into a dollar figure and ask whether the scope of work truly scales with price. A two point something percent fee on a starter home and the same rate on a much higher priced home can represent a radically different number of dollars, even if the workload is not radically different. The goal is not to devalue professional representation. The goal is to match pay to complexity. If you know you are likely to buy at the top of your budget, a commission cap can be one of the most effective tools because it sets a maximum dollar amount while still allowing an agent to be compensated fairly. Caps also lower the anxiety buyers feel when they worry that shopping a bit higher automatically turns into a larger fee without any change in service.
Another buyer approach is to narrow the service bundle. Many buyers today do most of the browsing themselves, track listings obsessively, and only need support for pricing strategy, contract terms, inspection negotiations, and staying on schedule. If that sounds like you, ask for a reduced fee tied to a reduced scope. You can frame it as a division of labor: you will handle discovery and early screening, while the agent focuses on negotiation and execution. When an agent hears a concrete scope proposal instead of a vague request to “discount,” the conversation gets easier and more professional.
Buyers can also reshape compensation through performance alignment. A pure percentage is simple, but it does not always reflect what you value most, which is winning the right home on terms that protect you. A hybrid structure can sometimes work better, such as a smaller base fee with an additional success fee if the agent achieves a defined result, like negotiating a seller credit, protecting your appraisal contingency, or securing repairs or price concessions after inspection. Not every agent will agree, and local rules and brokerage policies vary, but the concept is worth raising because it shifts the discussion from “cut your pay” to “let’s align pay with outcomes.”
The largest fear buyers have in the post-change environment is that they will suddenly be forced to pay their agent out of pocket on top of everything else. In reality, the question is not simply who signs the agreement, but how the transaction is structured. Even with the MLS no longer serving as the platform for communicating buyer broker compensation, offers of compensation can still be arranged outside the MLS, and sellers can still offer concessions that help buyers cover costs. This matters because concessions provide a familiar lever: you can negotiate for a seller credit that helps cover closing costs, and those closing costs can indirectly ease the burden of agent compensation depending on how your agreement and your lender’s rules fit together. The key is to address it early, before you fall in love with a house and lose negotiating clarity.
Sellers, meanwhile, reduce the impact of realtor fees by treating commission as part of a broader net proceeds strategy rather than a sacred percentage. The seller has two separate decisions that people often lump together: what you pay your listing agent for listing-side work, and whether you offer any financial support that helps the buyer cover buyer-side representation. The settlement changes made it clearer that an MLS listing is not the place to communicate buyer broker compensation, but they did not eliminate a seller’s ability to offer buyer concessions, including closing cost concessions, in ways that can keep demand strong. Sellers should not view this as a moral issue. It is a marketing and liquidity decision. If you offer nothing, you may reduce the number of buyers who can comfortably make your home work, especially first-time buyers who are cash constrained. If you offer a thoughtful concession, you may increase the buyer pool and preserve price.
On the listing side, sellers often have more leverage than they realize, but only if they are willing to shop for representation the way they shop for contractors. You can interview multiple agents, compare marketing plans, and ask exactly which deliverables are included. Professional photography, pricing analysis, open house strategy, digital advertising, staging guidance, and negotiation support are real work, but not every listing needs the same intensity. A well-priced home in a high-demand area is a different product than a unique property that needs time and targeted marketing. If your home is likely to sell quickly, you can negotiate a lower listing fee because the time and cost to sell are lower and the odds of closing are higher. If your home is a tougher sell, you may still negotiate, but the conversation should focus on value, accountability, and structure. For example, a seller might agree to a fee structure tied to milestones, such as a rate that increases only if the home sells above a certain threshold, or a structure that protects the seller if the listing sits far longer than expected.
One of the most effective seller tactics is to ask for itemized clarity without turning it into hostility. Instead of saying, “Why do you charge that much,” ask, “What exactly do I get for that, and what would you remove if we lowered it.” When an agent has to explain their process in detail, you learn whether you are buying expertise or simply paying for access to an industry norm. Sellers who are comfortable doing parts of the process themselves, such as showings, scheduling, or simple buyer communications, can sometimes negotiate a lower listing fee by taking on those tasks, as long as the agent still controls negotiation and compliance steps that protect the transaction.
Another seller strategy is to reduce fee pressure by reducing deal friction. This sounds indirect, but it often saves money in practice because it protects the sale price and prevents expensive delays. A clean, well-prepared listing tends to attract stronger offers, fewer inspection surprises, and fewer weeks on market, which in turn reduces the temptation to chase price cuts and concessions. Sellers sometimes fixate on commission while ignoring the much larger value swing caused by poor pricing, weak presentation, or deferred maintenance that becomes leverage for the buyer later. If you want to negotiate realtor fees from a position of strength, make your home easy to sell.
The most overlooked tactic for both buyers and sellers is to negotiate using deal structure rather than just arguing about a percentage. People tend to treat commissions as a separate debate from price, concessions, repairs, and credits. In reality, it is all one economic package. Buyers can ask for credits that preserve cash, especially if their biggest stress is cash to close. Sellers can offer concessions strategically, not as a gift to the industry, but as a tool to protect price and speed. The post-change environment even nudges this direction because sellers can offer buyer concessions on the MLS, but those concessions cannot be conditioned on paying or retaining a cooperating broker. That encourages sellers to think in terms of buyer benefits rather than commission promises.
There is also a practical reason to focus on structure: it keeps negotiations professional. Asking an agent to “cut their commission” can trigger defensiveness, but proposing a cap, a narrowed scope, a milestone-based fee, or a credit-based transaction plan feels like normal deal-making. It gives the other side something concrete to accept, reject, or counter. It also signals that you respect the work while still insisting that the economics make sense.
Some consumers will choose alternatives, such as flat-fee listing services, discount brokerages, or going without an agent on one side. Those paths can reduce fees, but they replace fees with risk and effort, and the tradeoff is not always obvious upfront. A low-fee model can work well in a straightforward transaction, especially when the buyer and seller are sophisticated and the local market is calm. It can backfire when the deal becomes a negotiation contest, when inspection issues escalate, or when financing complications appear. The money saved on commission can be quickly eroded by a pricing mistake, a poorly handled repair dispute, or a delayed closing that forces a buyer to extend rate locks or forces a seller to carry the home longer than planned. The smartest way to use low-fee options is to be honest about your own capabilities, your time, and your tolerance for stress.
If you are wondering why commissions have not dropped dramatically even after rule changes designed to increase negotiation, it helps to remember that markets change when behavior changes. Many buyers still prefer an agent to guide them through a high-stakes purchase. Many sellers still prefer to offer something that helps buyers show up. Many agents still price their work based on local norms, their own business costs, and what competitors charge. And many consumers, even when they know fees are negotiable, avoid negotiating because they fear losing access, service, or deal momentum. That is why reports have shown only modest movement so far, not a commission collapse.
So the most realistic conclusion is not that realtor fees are doomed or that consumers are powerless. It is that fee reduction is now more personal than systemic. Buyers and sellers who reduce the impact of realtor fees are the ones who take the negotiation seriously, do it early, and do it with specificity. They shop for representation as deliberately as they shop for a mortgage. They treat compensation as a scope and structure decision, not just a percentage. They use caps, credits, and performance alignment to keep the dollars proportional to the work. And they protect the economics of the deal by reducing friction, because saving half a percent on fees is meaningless if you lose several percent in price through poor execution.
In the current environment, the most important skill is not learning a new commission rule. It is learning to negotiate representation the same way you negotiate everything else in a home transaction: calmly, clearly, and before you are emotionally committed. The paperwork now forces that conversation earlier for buyers, and the MLS no longer hides compensation signals in the background. That is your opening. If you use it well, you can lower your all-in costs without sacrificing the guidance that keeps a major financial decision from becoming an expensive lesson.
WhatsApp
Instagram
Threads
