The 2024 NAR Settlement Changed Everything

In 2024, the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) reached a landmark legal settlement that upended how real estate commissions are structured and disclosed across the United States. One of the most common questions now being asked is “do you need a buyer agreement to see a home in Iowa?” The outcome affects how home buyers, sellers, and real estate professionals engage—and it’s prompting state-by-state law updates to align with new transparency and representation standards.

Iowa became one of the first states to codify these changes through House File 2326, effective April 19, 2024. The law clarifies when a written buyer-broker agreement is required and when a real estate agent can interact with a potential buyer without one.

For CPAs and financial advisors, this shift matters because representation rules now directly influence tax planning, entity structure, and investment timing for clients purchasing or selling real estate.

Understanding Iowa’s Buyer Agreement Rules: Do You Need a Buyer Agreement to See a Home in Iowa?

Under House File 2326, which amended Iowa Code §543B.56A, real estate brokers must have a written buyer-broker agreement in place before showing a property to a buyer they represent. However, that has led to confusion about whether you need a buyer agreement to see a home in Iowa at all—and in most cases, you don’t.¹

This ensures:

• Buyers know who represents them.
• Compensation terms are negotiable and transparent.
• Dual-agency conflicts are minimized.

However, the rule does not prevent buyers from viewing homes—or sellers from getting exposure. Instead, it clarifies the boundary between “working with” a buyer and performing “ministerial acts” (simple, factual interactions that don’t establish agency).

What Are “Ministerial Acts”?

Under Iowa Code §543B.5(1), a customer is someone “not being represented by a licensee but for whom the licensee may perform ministerial acts.”²

Ministerial acts are factual, administrative, or routine tasks that facilitate access to information or property without crossing into professional judgment or advocacy.

Examples include:

• Unlocking a listed home for an unrepresented buyer.
• Hosting an open house.
• Providing publicly available information like property disclosures, square footage, or price.

What’s not ministerial?

• Advising a buyer on what to offer.
• Preparing or presenting an offer on the buyer’s behalf.
• Negotiating inspection terms or contingencies.

Once an agent performs these non-ministerial activities, they are “working with” the buyer—and a written buyer agreement becomes mandatory.

What Does “Working With” Mean Under Iowa’s New Rules?

The new Iowa law and NAR’s 2024 rule changes require written buyer agreements when an agent is “working with” a buyer — but what does that actually mean?

According to the Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® (ICAAR) and the Iowa Real Estate Commission (IREC):

“Working with” refers to an MLS participant providing brokerage services on behalf of a buyer — such as identifying properties not already listed with their firm, arranging showings for those properties, preparing or presenting offers, negotiating terms, or performing other advocacy services for a buyer.

This is different from a listing agent scheduling or conducting a showing of a property they already represent on behalf of the seller. In that scenario, the agent is working for the seller, not the buyer, and the act of providing access to view the property is a ministerial act.

In contrast, simply:

• Talking with a buyer at an open house,
• Providing factual information about a property, or
• Giving an unrepresented buyer access to view a home that the agent has listed

does not constitute “working with” a buyer.
These are considered ministerial acts — routine, factual services that are allowed without a signed buyer-broker agreement.

This distinction matters because some agents are incorrectly telling consumers that merely unlocking a door or showing a home now requires a signed contract. Iowa law makes it clear: that’s false unless the agent is actually providing representation.

Iowa’s Approach: Balancing Transparency and Access

The Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS® (ICAAR) clarifies the practical rule of thumb:

“ ‘Working with’ does not refer to an MLS participant simply marketing their services, talking with a buyer at an open house, or by providing an unrepresented buyer access to a property they have listed. An MLS participant performing only ministerial acts, without the expectation of being paid for those acts, is not yet working for the buyer and therefore does not yet need to enter into a written buyer agreement.”³

This means that in Iowa—and likely in other states adopting similar frameworks—a listing agent can still show their own listing to an unrepresented buyer. Doing so is considered part of the marketing duty to the seller, not a representation of the buyer.

Iowa Real Estate Commission (IREC) Rule Updates

The Iowa Real Estate Commission (IREC) adopted new rules to enforce HF 2326 and align state practice with the national settlement:

Key Administrative Provisions

1. Definition Update –
   Ministerial acts are “informative in nature and not rising to the level of specific assistance on behalf of a consumer.”⁴
2. Penalties for Non-Compliance –
   IREC may impose civil penalties up to $2,500 for failing to have a written buyer agreement signed before showing a property.⁵
3. Offer Preparation No Longer Ministerial –
   The Commission explicitly removed preparing an offer for an unrepresented buyer from the list of permissible ministerial acts.⁶

These updates mirror NAR’s broader push for commission transparency and representation clarity, ensuring consumers know exactly when they’re being represented and by whom.

The National Context: How Other States Are Responding

The NAR settlement triggered nationwide changes.
States including Missouri, Illinois, Colorado, Minnesota, and Florida are in the process of revising broker-agency rules, adopting similar buyer-agreement requirements, and clarifying what agents can do without written representation.

While details vary, the underlying themes are consistent:

• Written buyer-broker agreements before showings.
• Negotiable commission structures—not fixed by MLS or local board policy.
• Mandatory disclosure of who the agent represents.

In some states, local MLSs have already updated their listing input systems to require clear “buyer compensation” disclosures and eliminate default co-broker commission fields.

Why This Matters for CPAs and Their Clients

For CPAs, understanding these real estate changes is about more than compliance—it’s about timing, documentation, and how deals flow financially.

1. Tax Planning for Sellers

Sellers must plan for closing costs, agent commissions, and timing around capital gain exclusions under IRC §121. Knowing that commission structures may differ (especially when buyers now negotiate their own agent fees) helps anticipate net proceeds and tax exposure.

2. Entity & Deduction Strategy for Investors

Clients using LLCs, partnerships, or S-Corps for investment property acquisition will need clarity on who pays agent fees and how those expenses are allocated. A buyer-broker agreement becomes part of the substantiation record for deductibility.

3. Coordination with Lenders

Since buyers may now pay part or all of their own broker compensation, loan underwriting documentation and closing disclosures may look different. CPAs can help ensure these amounts are recorded correctly for future tax reporting.

Practical Example: Do You Really Need a Buyer Agreement to See a Home in Iowa?

Imagine a buyer sees a property on Zillow and calls the listing agent directly:

“I’m not working with anyone—I just want to take a look.”

Under Iowa’s law (and similar ones emerging nationwide), you do not need a buyer agreement to see a home in Iowa if you’re simply requesting access or asking factual questions about the property:

• The listing agent can show the home without requiring a buyer agreement.
• The agent must disclose that they represent the seller, not the buyer.
• If the buyer later asks the same agent to help write or submit an offer, the agent must have the buyer sign a written buyer-broker agreement first.

This ensures transparency without denying consumers property access.

A Real-World Example: When Access Was Denied

Recently, I contacted a listing agent in Iowa about viewing a home I was interested in purchasing.

The agent’s response was: “I can’t show you the property unless you sign an exclusive buyer-broker agreement with me for 3.5% commission. Or you can find another realtor to represent you, and they can show you the home. It’s the law — it’s required now to show any home.”

I wasn’t asking for advice, representation, or to make an offer—just to view the property.

Under Iowa law, that kind of showing is considered a ministerial act, not representation. In this case, the agent appeared to prioritize their own potential commission over the seller’s best interest—using the law’s language to pressure a prospective buyer into signing an exclusive agreement. Doing so would have created a dual agency situation, allowing the same agent to represent both the buyer and the seller, and collect commissions from both sides.

By refusing to show the home unless a commission-bearing contract was signed—and by incorrectly claiming that it was a legal requirement—the listing agent:

• Misstated the requirements of Iowa Code §543B.56A, which applies only when an agent is working with a buyer, not merely providing access on behalf of a seller.
• Restricted market exposure for their seller (potentially breaching their fiduciary duty of loyalty and diligence).
• Imposed a fixed commission structure that is not permitted under Iowa Code §543B.56A(2)(e), which requires that all brokerage compensation be negotiable.

The Iowa Association of REALTORS® and Iowa Real Estate Commission (IREC) have both clarified that providing access to a listed property, answering factual questions, or marketing a home are ministerial acts — and do not require a written buyer agreement unless the agent is representing the buyer.

In short, the listing agent could have lawfully shown the property without forcing a 3.5% buyer-broker contract. Refusing to do so—and asserting it was “the law”—not only misleads consumers but also undermines the seller’s interests. It may violate both IREC rules on client duties (193E—11.3, 193E—12.2) and NAR’s Code of Ethics, Article 1, which requires REALTORS® to protect and promote their client’s best interests while treating all parties honestly.

The Fiduciary Issue: Why Refusing to Show a Home Without a Buyer Agreement May Breach Duty to the Seller

If a listing agent refuses to show a property to a ready, willing, and able buyer simply because that buyer hasn’t signed a buyer-broker agreement, the agent could be violating their fiduciary duty of loyalty and diligence to the seller.

The seller hired the agent to market and sell the property, and that includes providing reasonable access to prospective buyers. Denying access can harm the seller’s interest and could be a disciplinary issue under IREC rules or REALTOR® Code of Ethics, Article 1.

Key Takeaways for Home Buyers and Sellers

Final Thoughts: A Nationwide Shift Toward Clarity

While Iowa’s HF 2326 sets one of the clearest examples, the same principles are spreading across the country. If you’ve been told otherwise, remember this: you do not need a buyer agreement to see a home in Iowa unless you’re asking for representation or advice. The NAR settlement’s legacy is transparency—buyers and sellers now know exactly when an agency relationship begins and what they’re paying for.

For clients buying or selling property, this means:

• Ask early who the agent represents.
• Expect to sign a written buyer agreement if you want advice or negotiation help.
• Consult your CPA before finalizing the transaction to align tax implications, financing structure, and timing.

At Corridor Consulting, we help clients navigate the intersection of real estate, tax strategy, and wealth building—ensuring each property decision aligns with a broader financial plan.

Disclaimer

This article is for general informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Corridor Consulting, LLC is a CPA firm, not a law firm, and does not provide legal services. Readers should consult a licensed real estate attorney or their broker for specific legal guidance regarding contracts, representation agreements, or real estate law.

Footnotes

1. Iowa Code § 543B.56A(3), as amended by 2024 Iowa Acts, House File 2326.
2. Iowa Code § 543B.5(1) (definition of “customer”).
3. Iowa City Area Association of REALTORS®, Written Buyer Agreements – FAQs (2024).
4. Iowa Real Estate Commission — Rule 193E-2.1 (2025) “ministerial acts” definition
5. Iowa Real Estate Commission, Administrative Rule Ch. 18 (2025) (civil penalty authority).
6. Iowa REALTORS®, Administrative Rules Update, Sept. 2025.

What to Do if You Believe an Agent Misrepresented the Rules

If you believe a real-estate professional has misrepresented Iowa’s buyer-agreement rules or failed to meet their ethical obligations, you have several options for reporting your concerns.

You can visit the Iowa Professional Licensing Board (PLB) to verify an agent’s license and, if appropriate, file a complaint directly through their online system and search the agents name.

Additionally you can reach out to the Real Estate Commission, as well as the Real Estate (Appraisers & Management Companies) Licensure & Complaints program at 515-725-9039 to ask about submitting a concern or filing an anonymous complaint.