The National Association of Realtors and 30 real estate brokerage companies have agreed to pay $120.3 million to settle a nationwide lawsuit accusing them of keeping home-sale commissions artificially high. The money is earmarked for people who bought a home listed on a multiple listing service and paid a commission as part of the deal, a group that stretches back as far as 2006 in some states. A federal judge in Chicago is overseeing the case, and the fund will not move until eligible buyers actually file a claim.
For a household still paying off a mortgage, the settlement is an unusual chance to recover money spent years ago on a fee almost no buyer negotiated directly. Nobody gets paid automatically. Every eligible buyer has to submit a claim form, and the window to do it is closing fast.
How the $120.3 Million Fund Breaks Down Among 30 Brokerages
The payout resolves Tuccori et al. v. At World Properties, LLC et al., No. 1:24-cv-00150, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. According to the official settlement website, the defendants have agreed to pay a combined $120,334,500 into a Global Settlement Fund. The case names the National Association of Realtors and 30 separate brokerage defendants, ranging from national franchise networks to single-state firms. NAR is contributing the largest single share, $52,250,000. HomeServices of America and its affiliated brands BHH Affiliates and HSF Affiliates together owe $30 million, Anywhere Real Estate owes $9,602,500, and Hanna Holdings owes $8.25 million.
The remaining defendants, a mix of national franchise networks and smaller regional brokerages, agreed to individually set amounts: Compass is contributing $7,331,250, eXp World Holdings $4,335,000, Douglas Elliman $2,041,250, Engel & Völkers $800,000, @properties $750,000, The Real Brokerage $750,000, HomeSmart International $600,000, Shorewest Realtors $465,000, United Real Estate Holdings $487,500, Realty ONE Group and Kempa and Associates $500,000, Baird & Warner $264,000, Fathom Realty $250,000, Vanguard Properties $235,000, the Keyes Company and Illustrated Properties $200,000, Real Estate One $180,000, NextHome $155,000, Realty Executives $135,000, Side and Umro Realty Corp, doing business as The Agency, $300,000 each, Equity Real Estate $90,000, and Silvercreek Realty Group $63,000. None of the defendants has admitted wrongdoing, and the settlement site notes that no court has decided who is right.
Free retirement updates: Miss an enrollment or claim deadline and it may be gone. Our free Retirement Shield newsletter keeps readers ahead of the ones that matter. Get the free newsletter.
Who Qualifies as a Member of the Settlement Class
Eligibility hinges on one thing: whether a home purchase happened during the relevant “Class Period” for the specific brokerage or MLS involved, and those windows vary by state. For most of the country, the period tied to the National Association of Realtors and the largest brokerage defendants runs from January 25, 2019 through June 25, 2026. A handful of states have periods reaching back much further, including 2006 for Puerto Rico purchases and 2011 for Rhode Island and Louisiana, tied to the same group of defendants. A separate, earlier set of Class Periods applies to a second group of regional brokerage defendants named in the case, generally starting between December 2017 and December 2019 depending on the state, and also running through June 25, 2026.
Home sellers are excluded from this fund. According to the settlement’s eligibility page, anyone already covered by the earlier Burnett, Gibson, Keel, or Hooper seller settlements cannot collect from this fund too, even if that same person also bought a home during the relevant window. This settlement was built specifically for buyers, a group the earlier commission cases largely left out.
The October 27 Deadline — And What Happens Before and After It
Claims must be submitted online or postmarked by October 27, 2026. Filing requires proof that a commission was paid, typically a closing or settlement statement from the purchase. The claim form is available directly through the settlement website, and mailed claims go to a post office box in Portland, Oregon.
Two earlier deadlines apply only to buyers who want out of the settlement rather than into it: anyone who wants to exclude themselves from the class, or formally object to its terms, must act by September 17, 2026. A final approval hearing is scheduled for November 2, 2026, before U.S. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins. If the settlement is approved, payments will not arrive in one lump sum — the fund will be paid into the settlement over several years, and class members will receive their pro rata share in multiple installments once the administrator calculates each payout based on the number of properties purchased and the commissions paid on them.
Any payout will also be reduced by court-approved deductions before it is divided among claimants. Class Counsel has said it will ask the court for attorneys’ fees of up to one-third of the Global Settlement Fund, plus reimbursement of litigation costs, and the final amount is subject to the judge’s approval rather than the amount the lawyers request.
The Commission Case That Started With Home Sellers
This buyer settlement follows a wave of earlier antitrust cases, including Burnett v. The National Association of Realtors, that accused the trade group and major brokerages of enforcing rules that kept commissions elevated nationwide. Those earlier cases were brought on behalf of home sellers, who typically pay both the listing agent’s and the buyer’s agent’s commission out of sale proceeds. The complaint behind this settlement makes a parallel argument on behalf of buyers, alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act and state consumer-protection laws tied to the same underlying commission structure. The defendants dispute the allegations, and the settlement resolves the case without any finding of liability.
This article was produced with AI assistance and reviewed by a human editor. Figures are linked to their primary sources; where a claim could not be verified from the public record, we say so.
More Financial Reading
