From Alabama to Texas: A patchwork of buyer agency laws emerges after NAR settlement

For many agents and brokers across the country, the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) commission lawsuit settlement agreement thrust buyer representation agreements into the forefront.

Under the terms of the settlement, which went into effect in August 2024, Realtors are required to have consumers sign a buyer agency agreement that outlinse the terms of the agent’s services and compensation prior to touring a property. This requirement marked a change for agents across the country — even those already accustomed to using buyer agency agreements — and sparked concern among others about getting a stranger they just met to sign a legally binding contract. 

This concern prompted several states to examine their buyer agency and disclosure laws. Alabama was one of the earliest movers in enacting legislation in response to the buyer agency agreement requirements outlined in NAR’s settlement. 

In March 2025, Alabama governor Kay Ivey signed into law a bill that ensures homebuyers only have to sign a buyer brokerage agreement prior to submitting an offer on a property — and not before touring a home with an agent. 

The law reaffirms Alabama’s existing Real Estate Consumers Agency and Disclosure Act (RECAD) framework, with emphasis on early discussions of brokerage services and compensation. But it prevents consumers from signing a contract with an agent early in their relationship. 

Chad Beasley, a Birmingham, Alabama-based agent for eXp Realty, said that in the year since the bill was passed, it has mostly felt like business as usual. 

“It was a pretty seamless change because it basically went back to the way we were doing things prior to the NAR settlement,” Beasley said. “In my business, I am always careful when meeting buyers for the first time to sit down and go over the real estate brokerage services disclosure form that is required.

“Even prior to the settlement, if it was someone who already knew they wanted to work with me, then we’d also sign the buyer representation agreement then, but now with the new law in place, that isn’t a requirement.”

Not having to follow the settlement requirement for buyer agency agreements has made meetings with new leads a lot more comfortable, Beasley said. 

“I just feel like requiring buyer representation agreements to show a home is a bit of a push too far,” he said. “If brokerage options are being disclosed properly and the consumer understands what capacity I am acting in, then as the relationship moves forward and we both decide we are comfortable working together, then we can sign that buyer representation agreement.

“I feel like it gives agents the freedom to work their business how they want to, and take the time they need to build those relationships before taking that next step.” 

Exploring risk tolerance

Jeremy Walker, CEO of the Alabama Association of Realtors, which backed the bill, shared a similar sentiment.

“You want to be able to establish a relationship with a professional you’re going to be working with. That’s one of the biggest complaints from consumers,” Walker said on an episode of Capitol Journal in February 2025. “They may see a property listed, or know someone and want to work with them and see a property, but they don’t want to be forced into a buyer agreement too soon.

“They want to get to know you before they say, ‘Hey, I want to work with you.’ And that’s where we want to get that part right,” Walker added.

Beasley acknowledged that it is a risk to tour a property without having a buyer representation agreement as an agent may not be paid for that work. This is why he will typically only show two properties to a client without having a signed agreement. 

“After a while you need that representation agreement, because there are questions I can’t answer and there are things that buyers shouldn’t be telling me if I am not representing them,” Beasley said. 

He added that other agents may be more willing to show several properties to a buyer before signing an agreement, but his risk tolerance usually sits at the two-property threshold. Still, Beasley said he is grateful that the new law allows him and other licensees in the states to decide what makes the most sense for their businesses. 

“I do take measures to protect myself, and I ask a lot of questions to make sure that buyer isn’t working with another agent or just using me to open a door when they plan to submit an offer on that property with another agent,” he said. “I do think it is neat to see that Alabama was on the forefront of this, and to see that other states are following makes it feel like this was a pretty good idea.”

Texas takes a different tact

Texas is another state that acted quickly in adjusting its laws related to buyer agency agreements. But the Lone Star State took the opposite approach to Alabama.

Under the updated version of the state’s real estate license law, agents must enter into a written agreement with a prospective buyer before taking any substantive action. This means that while an agent could unlock the door to a property for a buyer without having a signed agreement, the agent cannot offer any advice or opinions on the property, bringing the state law more in line with the terms of the NAR settlement. 

The law went into effect at the start of 2026.

Brandy Wuensch, the broker-owner of City View Realty Group and immediate past president of the Austin Board of Realtors (ABoR), said she is grateful for the clarity and transparency the law provides consumers about agent roles and compensation. 

“There was a lot of confusion among agents and consumers, and a lot of out-of-date practices. And with the industry evolving quickly over the past couple of years, I think this legislation helped formalize the expectations so both agents and consumers could better understand how representation is structured,” Wuensch said.

“It reinforced professionalism in the industry, and ensured that agents are clearly communicating their value and making sure that they are more intentional in explaining who they represent, how they are compensated and what services they provide.” 

Wuensch added that she feels the law reinforces best practices that agents should already have been following. As much as the law helps increase transparency for consumers, Wuensch also feels that the law protects agents.

“For agents, it really reinforces the importance of formal representation and professional standards, and it helps legitimize the work that we do and ensures that we are not operating in gray areas,” she said. 

Kelea Youngblood, the chief marketing officer of Unlock MLS and ABoR, views the new law as a step toward “modernization.” 

“It brought Texas agency law closer to how the market was already operating, and it clarified when a license holder is and is not representing a buyer,” Youngblood said. “It was a meaningful step toward clearer expectations and more transparency for consumers.” 

Meanwhile, in Oklahoma and Mississippi…

While the law in Texas closely aligns with the terms of the NAR settlement, the state’s neighbor to the north, Oklahoma, is currently contemplating two bills that seek to do the opposite of what the Texas law has done.

Under the two bills, SB 1217 and SB 1225, a broker must disclose any information pertaining to their compensation or fees charged prior to providing a client with the services they plan to charge for. Additionally, brokers and agents are not required to procure a buyer broker agreement before showing a property. 

In an email, Bryan Hutchinson, the CEO of Oklahoma Realtors, told HousingWire that the association is not publicly opposing SB 1217, which stipulates that an agent is not required to have a buyer sign a representation agreement to show a property. 

“​​Ultimately, whatever decision legislators make, our association knows that we will work with OREC (Oklahoma Real Estate Commission) to communicate and enforce the law,” Hutchinson wrote. “However, SB 1217 is inconsistent with the adopted legislative position of Oklahoma Realtors. The association believes the legislation, as drafted, will confuse Realtor members who are licensees and potentially confuse consumers who will receive mixed messaging.

“Because of these inconsistencies and potential for confusion in the marketplace,  Oklahoma Realtors does not support SB1217, rather it has chosen to monitor the legislation.” 

Hutchinson added that the association encourages its members to follow the terms of NAR’s commission lawsuit settlement. 

In contrast, Mississippi Realtors supported SB 2713, which was signed into law in March 2026. The law makes it optional for a buyer’s agent to sign an agreement to provide a home tour.

Under the law, licensees are required to have a brokerage agreement signed with their clients only prior to listing a home for sale, or when submitting an offer on a property if they’re going to be compensated for the services provided.

“SB 2713 protects consumers by requiring Mississippi licensed real estate agents to include relevant terms and a clear disclosure of compensation in written brokerage agreements before listing or submitting an offer on residential property. This new law provides buyers and brokers maximum flexibility in finalizing terms of their relationship before negotiations begin involving a property,” DeShawn Davis, the 2026 president of Mississippi Realtors, wrote in an emailed statement. 

Davis added that NAR’s settlement defers to state law on the requirement of written agreements for buyers touring a home.

“With SB 2713, Mississippi surpasses the protections in the NAR settlement by requiring written agreements for sellers and buyers working with any licensed real estate agent, irrespective of Realtor membership,” Davis wrote. “At the same time, SB 2713 gives consumers and agents greater flexibility in forging business relationships while enhancing transparency and consumer choice.”

While other states are taking a different approach to buyer agency agreements with their laws and proposals, Youngblood said the most important thing is that any new law enacted provides more clarity and transparency for consumers. 

“I think states are all solving the same issue — just in different ways,” Youngblood said. “I think Texas chose early clarity and to be on the front end, and I believe that Texas’s choice is more structured, which I think can serve consumers well when it is paired with strong education for agents.

“So, making a choice to favor a more statutory framework, I think, was a positive one.”