RE/MAX’s $7.8 Million Settlement Signals the Collapse of the 5% Real Estate Model
A Canadian court has approved a $7.8 million class-action settlement with RE/MAX over inflated commissions. It’s the clearest sign yet that the 5% model is dying — and consumers stand to win.
For decades, selling a home in Canada meant paying a 5% commission split between the listing and buyer’s agents — a system that enriched brokerages while inflating housing costs.
That era is ending.
In October 2025, RE/MAX Canada agreed to pay approximately $7.8 million to settle two class-action lawsuits — Sunderland and McFall — that alleged the industry’s commission rules inflated costs and restricted competition.
The case has become a turning point in Canadian real estate, mirroring the seismic reforms already reshaping the U.S. market.
What the Lawsuits Claimed
The plaintiffs argued that sellers were forced to pay not only their own agent’s commission but also the buyer’s agent’s fee, even though that agent represented the opposing side.
That practice, embedded in industry “co-operative compensation” rules, allegedly kept commissions artificially high and discouraged competition from new, lower-cost brokerage models.
RE/MAX denied wrongdoing but agreed to settle and make one crucial change:
It will end mandatory board membership for its agents and franchisees.
That shift allows RE/MAX agents to operate independently of traditional real-estate boards — a small clause with major implications for competition and pricing transparency.
CREA’s Response: Damage Control, Not Reform
Industry reaction was swift.
On October 15, 2025, the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) issued a public statement acknowledging the RE/MAX settlement but denying any wrongdoing in the industry’s commission structure. CREA called the settlement a “business decision” by RE/MAX and insisted the MLS® rule requiring listing REALTORS® to offer compensation to buyer agents remains in force.
CREA Statement: “This settlement does not affect the MLS® rule requiring a listing REALTOR® to make an offer of cooperating compensation.” – CREA, October 15 2025
That single line reveals the deeper truth: the system that sparked the lawsuits is still intact — at least for now.
CREA and local boards have vowed to continue defending similar lawsuits across Canada, meaning the fight for transparency and lower costs is far from over.
The U.S. Already Moved On
RE/MAX’s Canadian settlement follows two larger U.S. payouts:
- $55 million USD (2023) — RE/MAX’s initial settlement in a U.S. class action.
- $208.5 million USD (2024) — a broader agreement involving RE/MAX, Keller Williams, and the National Association of Realtors (NAR).
Those settlements forced a complete overhaul of commission-sharing rules south of the border. U.S. sellers no longer have to pay buyer-agent fees, and commissions are now openly negotiable. Within months, average U.S. commissions fell from roughly 5% to between 2% and 3% — a competitive marketplace Canadians can only dream of.
Key sources include:
- The Wall Street Journal (April 2024) – Reported that buyer-agent commissions in the U.S. dropped rapidly after the NAR settlement, with average total commissions on home sales trending between 2% and 3% in many major markets.
- The New York Times (June 2024) – Cited data from Redfin and HomeLight showing total commissions (listing + buyer agent) falling from around 5–5.5% pre-settlement to as low as 2.5–3% in competitive states like Colorado, Missouri, and Texas.
- Redfin Research (2024) – Documented a nationwide trend toward “decoupled” commission structures where buyers pay their own agents, resulting in average effective rates below 3% for many transactions.
- Inman News (August 2024) – Reported that “post-settlement deals are now closing at 2%–3% total commission in many markets, marking the fastest structural price correction in the industry’s history.”
Together, these data show that following the NAR settlement, the U.S. real estate market experienced a rapid normalization of commissions from ~5% to the 2–3% range within months. The comparison is meant to highlight how quickly the U.S. adapted to transparent, competitive pricing once legacy commission rules were dismantled — a change Canadian consumers have not yet experienced.
Why Commissions Hurt Consumers
The 5% model looks harmless on paper, but its economic effects ripple through the housing market:
- Inflated Home Prices
Because commissions are built into sale prices, buyers effectively pay higher mortgage costs on inflated totals. - Hidden Costs and Zero Transparency
Consumers rarely see how much each agent earns. Fees are buried in sale paperwork and presented as “standard” — discouraging negotiation. - Misaligned Incentives
Agents earn more when prices rise. A $100,000 increase in sale price adds $5,000 to commissions, even if the agent does no extra work. - Barriers to Entry for Discount Models
Smaller, tech-driven brokerages can’t compete when local boards enforce membership and data-sharing fees that protect incumbents. - Reduced Affordability
On a $900,000 sale, a 5% commission equals $45,000 — money that could have covered closing costs, renovations, or property taxes for years.
In a country where housing affordability is already collapsing, the traditional commission system is part of the problem — not the solution.
Fact Box: What Home Sellers Stand to Save
| Home Price | 5% Commission | 2% Commission (Negotiated) | Savings to Seller |
|---|---|---|---|
| $400,000 | $20,000 | $8,000 | $12,000 |
| $600,000 | $30,000 | $12,000 | $18,000 |
| $800,000 | $40,000 | $16,000 | $24,000 |
| $1,000,000 | $50,000 | $20,000 | $30,000 |
| $1,500,000 | $75,000 | $30,000 | $45,000 |
Based on standard Ontario commission structures. Excludes HST and brokerage admin fees.
Every 1% drop in commission saves Canadians an estimated $2.8 billion per year.
Why Hourly or Service-Based Fees Make More Sense
Hourly and à-la-carte pricing — already common in law, accounting, and home renovation — could make real estate far more efficient and fair.
Here’s how:
- Pay for expertise, not percentage.
A skilled negotiator or marketer should earn based on effort and results, not the arbitrary size of a transaction. - Align incentives.
Hourly or task-based models reward transparency and effort. Agents succeed when clients succeed — not when prices inflate. - Lower barriers for entry.
Consumers could choose only the services they need: staging, showings, paperwork, or negotiation — just like choosing from a restaurant menu. - Encourage innovation.
Digital brokers could bundle listings, AI-driven pricing tools, and marketing for flat fees — breaking the monopoly of legacy boards.
In short, real estate should function like any other professional service, where cost reflects work performed — not a percentage carved off the top.
The Industry’s Last Line of Defense
Brokerages argue that lower commissions will reduce service quality and hurt smaller agents. But history suggests otherwise.
- Travel agents said the same before Expedia.
- Stockbrokers said it before Wealthsimple.
- Both industries adapted — and consumers benefited.
The Canadian real estate industry is next in line.
The Bigger Picture
RE/MAX’s $7.8 million settlement is small in dollars but enormous in meaning. It acknowledges — for the first time in Canada — that the traditional commission structure is legally vulnerable and economically outdated.
CREA can insist the MLS® rule still stands, but the tide of consumer awareness and legal precedent is turning.
The 5% model survives only because people accept it. Once sellers realize they can pay for results instead of percentages, that model will collapse overnight.
Leave a Reply