Isn’t it about time the feds stepped in?
Rebuffed by state lawmakers in Alabama, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas the Department of Justice (DOJ) may get some support and muscle for its efforts to oppose state mandated minimum service legislation in the real estate industry. The Antitrust Modernization Committee (AMC) created by Congress in 2004 to study whether or not U.S. federal antitrust laws need updating may provide relief against state agencies that are in support of monopolizing real estate services.
In light of the effective elimination of newer, innovative real estate business models in some states by the passage of minimum service laws, the AMC findings couldn’t come at a better time. What could happen as a result of these findings is a modification of the federal antitrust laws to make professional real estate licensure board members (generally traditional real estate brokers) liable for creating their state regulations policies based on their own financial interests.
It is to be seen whether or not the commissions findings give the DOJ any real teeth, but it’s obvious to many that the National Association of Realtors (NAR) as well as state real estate regulatory boards, both of whose memberships are dominated by traditional real estate brokers, are attempting to limit competition in real estate by the lobbying for legislation, in the case of NAR’s state and local counterparts, and creation of regulatory policies, in the case of state licensing boards, that requires real estate practitioners to offer bundled services after the traditional real estate brokerage model. Where these efforts have been successful in legally requiring these bundled services consumers can no longer elect to purchase just an MLS listing for a flat fee without purchasing other enumerated services such as contract negotiation and transaction management.
See Also
- U.S. antitrust law up for debate
Possible changes to ’state action doctrine’ could impact real estate measures
