Real estate commission practices remain under legal scrutiny after a federal appeals court upheld major industry settlements in August and September. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the nationwide Sitzer/Burnett settlement on Aug. 19 and allowed related Gibson settlements to stand on Sept. 1. An objector then sought another appeals court hearing, keeping compensation practices in the industry spotlight.
The renewed attention comes as Gallup’s latest available professions survey shows relatively weak public perceptions of real estate agents. Just 17% of Americans rated agents’ honesty and ethical standards as “high” or “very high.” That figure is easy to overstate: Gallup did not ask whether Americans trust real estate agents, and 56% rated the profession “average,” compared with 26% who chose “low” or “very low.”
What the 17% figure actually shows
Gallup conducted the survey Dec. 1–15, 2025 and published the results in January. Real estate agents were statistically close to their historical low for positive honesty-and-ethics ratings, but the largest share of respondents placed them in the middle.
Consumers who recently completed real estate transactions report a different experience. The 2026 Home Buyers and Sellers Generational Trends report found that 88% of buyers purchased through an agent, while 91% of sellers worked with one. Among buyers, 91% said they would use their agent again or recommend that agent to others.
The figures are not directly comparable: Gallup surveyed the general public, while NAR examined recent buyers and sellers. Together, they point to a gap between broad perceptions of the profession and the experiences reported by consumers who actually hired an agent.
Referral fees add another trust concern
Separate research on financial incentives points to another area where consumers expect transparency. A November 2025 consumer survey commissioned by IPX1031 asked 923 US adults about referral fees and financial incentives. Seventeen percent identified real estate as an industry where hidden incentives felt especially problematic.
Forty percent said referral fees made professional recommendations harder to trust. Eighty-six percent said they would be more likely to hire a professional who disclosed referral or commission arrangements, while 88% said disclosure was especially important for major financial decisions such as buying a home or investing.
Disclosure does not make every referral arrangement permissible. Federal RESPA rules prohibit certain payments for settlement-service referrals involving federally related mortgage loans, although the law provides exemptions. State law and brokerage policies may impose additional requirements.
Where agents face the trust test
Compensation is one of the most visible areas where consumers assess an agent’s value. Recent disputes over buyer-agreement fees have added attention to what clients agree to pay and what services they receive in return.
Pricing recommendations, negotiation strategy, and referrals create similar opportunities for scrutiny. Agents and brokerages can explain how compensation works, identify relevant financial relationships, outline representation services, and support pricing recommendations with market data. Agent-to-agent referral fees also carry brokerage and licensing considerations.
What agents can take from the data
The 17% figure is best understood as a broad measure of public perception, not a direct reading of whether clients trust their individual agents. Most respondents rated the profession “average,” while recent buyers and sellers continue to use agents at high rates. For working agents, credibility is more likely to be judged through transparent fees, well-supported advice, and clear explanations of what representation includes.