Enforcing Antitrust Laws in the Real Estate Industry

The Division is protecting consumers through its litigation and investigative efforts. This page describes the Division’s enforcement efforts in selected states.

On this page:

• Litigation
  • U.S. v. National Association of Realtors
  • U.S. v. Consolidated Multiple Listing Service, Inc.
  • U.S. v. Multiple Listing Service of Hilton Head Island, Inc.
  • U.S. v. Kentucky Real Estate Commission
• Investigations
  • Montana Rebate Ban
• West Virginia Rebate Ban
• South Dakota Rebate Ban

Litigation

U.S. v. National Association of Realtors

Issue: The Division challenged NAR’s MLS rules that inhibited competition from Internet-based brokers. On May 27, 2008, the United States announced a proposed settlement of its case against NAR.

NAR has agreed under the settlement to repeal the policies challenged by the United States and to replace those policies with rules that do not discriminate against innovative brokers who use the Internet to provide high-quality, low-priced brokerage services to consumers. The proposed settlement is subject to court approval.

Case filings: U.S. v. National Association of Realtors

Court decision: Memorandum Opinion and Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint of the United States (11/27/2006)

Press releases:

• Justice Department Announces Settlement with the National Association of Realtors (05/27/2008)
• Department of Justice Amends Antitrust Lawsuit Against National Association of Realtors (10/04/2005)
• Justice Department Sues National Association of Realtors for Limiting Competition Among Real Estate Brokers (09/08/2005)

U.S. v. Consolidated Multiple Listing Service, Inc.

Issue: The Division is challenging several rules mandated by the Columbia, SC multiple listing service that may reduce choice and raise prices for Columbia consumers. These include rules that:

• Require brokers to perform a prescribed set of services—such as negotiating a home’s sale price and attending the closing—even if the broker’s customer would prefer to perform some of these tasks on his or her own in order to save money on the real estate broker’s fee.
• Give Columbia real estate brokers the ability to exclude brokers from outside Columbia who could offer local consumers innovative brokerage options that better match their needs.

Case filings: U.S. v. Consolidated Multiple Listing Service, Inc.

Press release: Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Consolidated Multiple Listing Service of South Carolina for Restraining Competition Among Real Estate Brokers (05/02/2008)

U.S. v. Multiple Listing Service of Hilton Head Island, Inc.

Issue: In October 2007, the Division filed a lawsuit alleging that the Multiple Listing Service of Hilton Head Island, Inc. violated antitrust laws by enforcing certain rules that unreasonably restrain competition. These include rules that:

• Required member-brokers to maintain a physical office, reside within the MLS service area, and operate their offices during hours deemed reasonable by the MLS.
• Required prospective members to disclose their business history and prior employment and obtain letters of recommendation from three current broker-members.
• Authorized the MLS Board of Trustees to adopt mandatory commission guidelines and to impose discriminatory requirements on Internet-based brokers.

On May 28, 2008, the Division entered a Final Judgment that:

• Requires the Hilton Head MLS to cease enforcement of these rules.
• Prevents the MLS from passing new rules that would discriminate against innovative brokers.

Case filings: U.S. v. Multiple Listing Service of Hilton Head Island, Inc.

Press release: Justice Department Reaches Settlement with the Multiple Listing Service of Hilton Head Island Inc. (10/16/2007)

U.S. v. Kentucky Real Estate Commission

Issue: The Division challenged regulations that prohibited Kentucky real estate brokers from offering rebates and other inducements to consumers. The United States dismissed its lawsuit after the Kentucky Real Estate Commission agreed to rescind its rebate ban.

Case filings: U.S. v. Kentucky Real Estate Commission

Press releases:

• Justice Department Reaches Settlement with Kentucky Real Estate Commission (07/13/2005)
• Justice Department Sues Kentucky Real Estate Commission for Limiting Competition Among Real Estate Brokers (03/21/2005)

Investigations

Montana Rebate Ban

Issue: The Division investigated a regulation that prohibited Montana brokers from offering rebates and other inducements to consumers. In response to an investigation by the Division, the Montana Board of Realty Regulation repealed the regulation.

Press release: Montana Board of Realty Regulation Permits Real Estate Brokers to Offer Rebates to Consumers (04/01/2008)

West Virginia Rebate Ban

Issue: The Division investigated regulations that prohibited West Virginia brokers from offering rebates and other inducements to consumers. The West Virginia Real Estate Commission repealed the regulation.

Press release: West Virginia Real Estate Commission Permits Real Estate Brokers to Offer Rebates and Other Discounts (05/04/2006)

South Dakota Rebate Ban

Issue: The Division investigated rulings by the South Dakota Real Estate Commission that prohibited brokers in that state from offering rebates and other inducements to consumers. The South Dakota Real Estate Commission repealed the regulation.

Press release: South Dakota Real Estate Commission Permits Real Estate Brokers to Offer Rebates and Inducements (08/17/2005)

Back to Competition and Real Estate main page