Will a historic lawsuit change how we buy and sell homes in the Bay Area?

Currently, the NAR — the largest trade group in the United States, with more than 1.5 million registrants — requires members helping sell a home to offer a commission to the agent representing the buyer. That commission, often a share of the home price, is technically paid by the seller but is often included in a home’s listing, according to real estate listing site Realtor.com.

But a Missouri jury found on Oct. 31 that the NAR’s policy effectively prevented buyers from negotiating their agent’s fee in violation of antitrust law, and unnecessarily increased the costs incurred by sellers.

They ordered the NAR and its co-defendants, real estate brokerage firms Keller Williams Realty and Homeservices of America, to pay $1.8 billion in damages. The NAR, which has pledged to appeal the case, has asked the judge to reduce the damages charged.

In the San Francisco metropolitan area, where real estate brokerage site Zillow says the typical home costs more than $1.1 million, those commissions could run the seller about $60,000.

“With the rise of Redfin and Zillow and virtual home tours, that value-add from brokers has gone down,” said Jenny Schuetz, a housing researcher at the Brookings Institution. “Which raises questions about what services buyers are getting from brokers, and whether those services warrant a 3% fee — exactly the point of the lawsuit.”

Experts are still trying to sort out how the landmark ruling will affect the industry’s future. The ruling hasn’t changed the NAR’s compensation rules, and what happens now will probably depend on whether the judge in the case decides to require the NAR to alter its policy — or to ban commission sharing outright.

Some consumer advocates have suggested homes could become cheaper if sellers no longer need to consider the cost of buyers’ agents in their price. And buyers, like sellers, would be able to negotiate their agent’s commission.

It’s not clear which party would bear the brunt of the fee. Many buyers would probably offer less money for a home, said East Bay Realtor Megan Micco, to account for the cost of the commission.

Nikki Edwards, a South Bay Realtor with EQ1 Real Estate, expressed doubt that ending NAR compensation rules would substantially change Bay Area prices. Homes in the region rarely get cheaper, she explained, and it’s unlikely even a major change in how people buy and sell homes would alter that trajectory. Plus, factors such as low inventory and job availability affect home values more than agent fees, she said.

“Money will always be here in Silicon Valley, and there’s always going to be a buyer willing to pay the price for that property,” Edwards said.

Emma Morris, an East Bay Realtor with Red Oak Realty, said she doesn’t think the lawsuit will change the Bay Area market. Even if commission sharing were to go away entirely, most buyers — especially those in a complex housing market like the Bay Area’s — will still be willing to pay a premium for some kind of representation, she believes, and thus agents would still be in demand.

“Sellers are usually selling the biggest asset in their life and buyers are purchasing the biggest purchase in their life,” Morris said. “How quickly will they want that support system that Realtors provide to change?”

Still, even if the ruling does not dramatically change the cost of buying or selling a home, Schuetz of the Brookings Institution said the ruling is largely a win for both home buyers and sellers and could upend the system.

“If the ruling stands, it has the potential to shake up an industry that has been stubbornly resistant to changing technology and consumer preferences,” she said. “We don’t yet know exactly how things will shake out, but this is potentially a very big deal.”