What to do when association rules contradict the law? Alabama passed a law banning the signing of a buyer representation agreement before a home tour, which supersedes National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) rule changes since the settlement in 2024.
Louisiana could be the next state to effectively repeal that buyer agreement, as a similar bill has made its way into the Louisiana legislature.
The bill, labeled HB139, would make it so that a buyer’s representation agreement would not be needed between an agent and a prospective buyer before touring a home. An agreement would only be needed before a broker submits an offer on a property “on behalf of a buyer for compensation.”
HB139 would also mandate that a buyer’s brokerage fees be listed in “public advertisements,” but does not list what constitutes such advertisements. The NAR settlement and subsequent rule changes have made it so that compensation offers cannot be listed on MLSs.
Carla DeYoung—a broker at Tigerland Properties and supporter of the bill who has attended public legislative meetings on it—says to RISMedia about this provision that:
“If there is a compensation offered, it is to be publicized for all to see, okay, if it’s zero, it’s zero. If it’s a million dollars, it’s a million dollars, just whatever. It’s just so that everyone is on the same playing field and everyone knows no more hiding anything.
The bill states that sources of broker compensation may include but are not limited to funds from a buyer, a seller, a listing agent, a listing broker or brokerage or any combination thereof.”
HB139 has currently been deferred in committee, as of Tuesday, April 22, 2025. However, DeYoung tells RISMedia that “hopefully we’re going to get it back to be presented to them again,” suggesting continued will among supporters.
Those supporters do not include the Louisiana REALTORS® Association. In a conversation with RISMedia, Louisiana REALTORS® Chief Executive Officer Norman Morris said that the association opposed the law because it conflicts with the NAR settlement. He added that, if passed, HB139 could “potentially create further liability for MLS participants” and would have “created onerous and confusing obligations,” referring to the requirement that buyer’s brokerage fees be listed in public advertisements.
“Because (the bill) indicated that all buyer brokerage fees shall be listed in all public advertisements and if the buyer did not want those fees to be disclosed in a contractual form, it could potentially interfere with the wishes of the buyer and the contractual relationship,” says Morris, echoing the legislative update sent to Louisiana REALTORS® members upon the bill’s deferment.
The debate over this bill is not the first conflict its supporters and opponents have shared. Earlier in 2025, DeYoung led the filing of an antitrust lawsuit against NAR. The lawsuit, in which the Louisiana REALTORS® Association is named as a defendant, claims that requiring REALTOR® membership for MLS access is anti-competitive.
However, speaking to RISMedia, DeYoung stressed that the NAR lawsuit and her support for HB139 “have nothing to do with each other,” and claimed the Louisiana REALTORS® Association has insinuated otherwise. In the conversation, DeYoung did criticize the effects of NAR’s new rule about buyer rep agreements before a tour.
“You’ve got them locking into a contract and just walking somebody through a house. That’s not an agency relationship, that’s just walking someone through a house. There’s more to an agency relationship than walking through a house,” she says.
When asked about this perspective, Morris answered it is a matter of following the rules as they exist.
“MLS participants are bound by following the federal court guidelines in terms of presenting or having a buyer offer representative agreement in place prior to touring or showing a home. Certainly we want to be able to follow those guidelines so that we don’t create any further potential liability moving forward,” he says. He further claims that Louisiana members have largely accepted the new rules—he says that “at the association level,” Louisiana REALTORS® has not received significant pushback from members about following the settlement guidelines. “It seems to be working fairly well,” says Morris.
DeYoung claims that, “the public here has been misled” about HB139, specifically pointing fingers at the Louisiana REALTORS® Association. The association’s legislative update for members claimed that the bill was proposing “prohibiting buyer representation agreements prior to certain events.” The text of the bill states that a buyer’s representation agreement “may not be required” as a prerequisite for an agent to show a buyer a property, and that an agreement is only required prior to a broker submitting an offer.
Asked about if he expects HB139 to move forward past the deferment, Morris answers that: “(The bill) can be brought back up in terms of, with the voluntary deferment, but certainly we don’t expect that. But certainly it can be brought back up.”
The office of Louisiana Representative Shane Mack, the bill’s original sponsor, did not respond to RISMedia’s request for comment at press time.
