There’s been a lot of confusion lately about real estate commissions — especially about who pays the buyer’s agent. Should the seller offer compensation, or should the buyer pay their agent directly?
The smart move for sellers is simple: offer a clear, fixed commission to the buyer’s agent — typically at least 2.5%.
Why? Because compensation drives showings.
When a seller offers a strong, upfront commission, buyer’s agents know they will be paid fairly for bringing a ready, qualified buyer. That certainty motivates agents to show the property with confidence and enthusiasm. Buyers benefit too — the cost is built into the purchase price, making the transaction cleaner and easier to understand.
Now imagine the opposite scenario. A buyer’s agent calls and asks, “What compensation are you offering?” If the answer is “0%” or “whatever the buyer will pay,” that creates immediate hesitation. The agent has to ask:
- Will I get paid?
- Do I need to negotiate my fee separately?
- How do I explain to my buyer that they may owe me thousands of dollars out of pocket?
That uncertainty can reduce showings — and fewer showings mean fewer offers.
Some sellers are tempted by agents who promise to list the home for a lower total commission, such as 4%, with no upfront offer to buyer’s agents. It sounds like savings. But if no compensation is offered to the buyer’s side, the listing agent keeps the full commission unless something is negotiated later. Meanwhile, the property may lose momentum because agents are wary of bringing buyers to a listing where payment is unclear.
In today’s market, exposure matters. Motivation matters. Simplicity matters.
Offering competitive buyer’s agent compensation is not illegal, unethical, or outdated. It’s strategic. It attracts agents, increases traffic, and ultimately improves the seller’s chances of receiving strong offers.
If you want maximum exposure and the best possible price, make it easy — and worthwhile — for agents to bring you buyers.
More clear version
Let’s stop pretending this is complicated.
If you are selling your home and you want top dollar, you should offer strong, upfront compensation to the buyer’s agent — period. Typically at least 2.5%.
This isn’t about being generous. It’s about being strategic.
Buyer’s agents are the gatekeepers to the majority of serious, qualified buyers. They decide which homes get priority. They decide which listings they’re excited to show. They decide where they invest their time and energy.
When you clearly offer competitive compensation, you remove friction. The agent knows they’ll be paid. The buyer isn’t blindsided by an unexpected fee. The process is smooth. Your home gets shown.
When you offer 0% — or say “the buyer can pay their own agent” — you introduce doubt and resistance into the process.
Now the agent has to think:
- Am I working for free?
- Do I have to negotiate my pay?
- Will my buyer need to come up with thousands of extra dollars?
Even if they show the home, the energy changes. And in sales, energy matters.
Some sellers are lured in by discounted listing pitches — “We’ll list for 4% and deal with buyer agent compensation later.” It sounds like you’re saving money. But in reality, you may be reducing demand before you even hit the market.
Here’s the truth: homes sell for the most money when multiple buyers compete. Multiple buyers compete when showings are strong. Showings are strong when agents are motivated and the process is simple.
Trying to “save” 2–3% on buyer’s agent compensation can easily cost you far more in reduced competition and weaker offers.
This is one of the largest financial transactions of your life. Why would you create obstacles between your home and the largest pool of motivated buyers?
If you want maximum exposure, maximum traffic, and maximum price, make it easy and worthwhile for agents to bring you buyers.
Strong compensation isn’t a giveaway.
It’s leverage.
NON AI version below.
Lately, there has been a lot of talk about how real estate commissions are paid. Who pays them? Does the seller pay them or does the buyer pay them? Should a seller offer to pay a buyers agent or or should the buyer pay them.
The short answer is that the seller should always offer a fixed compensation to the buyers agents. (usually not less than 2.5%)
The offer to pay 2.5% is the bait that brings showings. Buyers agents and buyers alike, love the simplicity of this. The buyer can look at homes and the costs are baked into the purchase price. The agent can show homes and has assurance that the seller will pay a fixed amount.
Often before showing homes, a buyers agent will call the listing agent and ask “what compensation are you offering to buyers agents?” If the listing agent says 2.5% or more the buyers agent is motivated to bring the buyer and try to sell the house. If the listing agent says “0% or whatever your buyer will pay you” this creates a red flag for the buyers agent. they ask themselves ” Do I wish to show a home and risk not getting paid?”. how can I explain to my buyer that they might have to pay me above and beyond the purchase price?
Why would a seller not offer (BAC) buyers agent compensation?. Lets say that a potential seller receives a call offering to list and sell the home for 4%. The agent says that they can negotiate buyer agent commissions when the offer comes in. So the seller agrees to the 4% and feels like he has struck a deal. The listing agent is entitled to the entire 4%. Nothing is offered to buyers agent! How shameful to not explain to sellers the power of offering compensation to buyers agents. I have even heard some agents claim that is it is disallowed, illegal and unethical to offer (BAC). Nothing is further from the truth.
Sarasota Home Sales Team 