The bulk of selling cost was the commission in my case, 5%. Transfer tax is equally split between the seller and the buyer, 1% each. The title insurance is paid by the buyer. After the commission and the transfer tax, not much, a few hundred if that. Notary fee, registering the sale with the town, etc.
When I bought a property in a low tax state, the only thing I had to pay was the title insurance. I am guessing I had to pay the prorated property tax but it was so low and barely noticeable. Closing was painless. It was an eye opener.
Depends on the market. In a sellerâs market the list price includes the sellerâs costs so once those costs are backed out the seller has a fairly accurate idea of his net proceeds. In a buyerâs market itâs the reverse and the seller is more vulnerable as far as net proceeds. For example, when I started practicing in the early nineties there were many sellers who had to bring money to closing because they couldnât sell their homes for enough to cover the mortgage payoff and closing costs.
Yeah, Iâve sold one - and I couldnât sell it. My company bought and they lost $75K on the sale.
Most got hosed on the company purchase (the entire company moved and if you couldnât sell, after 90 days, theyâd buy was a part of the program) - but I put together a PPT for the appraisers - I had what was closed, pending (all my realtor) - and on the market. I showed good and bad comps and why the bad were bad - one had linoleum floors in a bedroom and a haircut chair mounted into the ground. I had one slide per home.
Got full offer - was amazing.
What you all are talking about cost wise is depressing.
Perhaps some realtor amongst usâŠor a business personâŠbut where I am, those corporate relocations went the way of the dinosaur. There were many corporate families here who bought very expensive homes thinking they would be relocated elsewhere at company expenseâŠbut that all stopped happening.
Some of these families are still living here over 20 years laterâŠand thatâs the way it is.
We had the same realtor when we bought our first houseâŠwho then sold that same house about 7 years later. She was terrific. Recommendation came from a friend who also used her. We were not disappointed as first time home buyers and sellers later. She was great!
Corporate relos continue to happenâŠslowed in the age of covid - but I know 6 or 8 who have been reloâd in the last couple years. My company reloâd 30 or so people in a re org a couple years back - sent them to Atlanta.
Big buyouts are also back - an old employer of mine is again doing three weeks per year up to 2 years - so you have people walking away with $350K+ and up.
My current employer wasnât that generous in itâs buyout.
But I just hope one day - when Iâm bounced, I get bounced with some sort of checkâŠpreferably six figures.
Some get lucky - I did selling my home.
And now I hope at retirement time, I fall into a buyout - get lucky again!!.
Stellantis announced yesterday theyâll be offering buyouts in hopes of getting people to leave.
Automaker Stellantis plans to once again reduce its U.S. employee headcount through a broad voluntary buyout, as the company attempts to reduce costs and boost profits.
The company, which reported disappointing first-half results last week, said that if not enough employees participate in the buyout, involuntary terminations could follow.
In an email to employees Tuesday morning, Stellantis said it would offer a voluntary separation program to nonunion U.S. employees at the vice president level âand below in certain functions.â
My kids had corporate relos (one had it twice). First company required him to stay 18 mos or heâd have to pay back a prorated portion. But in none of these 3 cases did the companies have a house to purchase.
Companies continue to pay moving expenses. Some actually help pay those closing costs. Some put folks up in temporary residences while the employee is waiting for their house to be ready.
@jym626 In Ca from
What Iâve observed it varies. Where my daughter purchased her first house the seller and buyer split. When she bought her second house it was from a FSBO which was a pain. The seller refused to pay any commission which is
Likely why the house had been sitting. They had a great relationship with their realtor who they ended up paying a flat fee to their agent who did a lot of work. The buyer refused to pay any costs. They really wanted the house so they paid.
My husband through his work has sold more houses than I can count in his case they mainly split.
Iâm curious what these changes will mean to buyers as far as how much cash theyâll need to have on hand in addition to their down payment. If they have to pay their own buyerâs agent, presumably up to 3% of the purchase price, that would seem to be difficult if not impossible for some.
Will house prices in the future reflect that sellers arenât paying for half of the typical commission? Will some sellers be able to add a buffer figure to their list price to cover voluntarily paying the other sideâs RE commission, or will the appraisal not support doing so?
Various groups say these changes will save buyers money. I get that financing a lower purchase price saves in the long run, but I wonder if many buyers are more focused on bringing as little cash to the deal as possible rather than on what theyâll pay in total over 30 years.
Depending on the market area of course, the buyers agent commission will end up being part of the price negotiation. In our area on the MLS site, sellers agents are already reducing the buyer agent commission and advertising. For instance one sellers agent is offering 2.4% commission instead of 3%. I have a friend who wanted a house offering a lower broker agent commission, her agent agreed to a commission cut in order to get the deal done.
I also think that the real estate market will get even more competitive. And, perhaps those doing it as a side hustle might get out of the business.
The agent representing the buyers of our home was way over his head. He made so many mistakes that ended up costing his buyers money and the ability to negotiate. I was quite frankly shocked at how inept he was given his marketing profile. In a competitive market a seasoned agent is a must for people.
I personally donât think this will be as much of a benefit to buyers as the news make it out to be. Points to consider:
Currently, the commission for the buyerâs agent is paid for by the seller. With this change, the commission for the buyerâs agent will be paid by the buyer. Yes, the buyer can negotiate the price with their agent. But buyer only comes out ahead if the sellers lower their asking price to reflect that they are no longer paying the buyerâs agentâs commission which I am not convinced will happen.
With buyers needing to pay the commission, this increases the loan amount they will need to take from the bank (a bigger issue for the less well-off who are already struggling to come up with the down payment)
Buyers will need to sign a contract with an agent documenting the agreed upon commission. Seems like this locks the buyer into using that agent if and when they decide to purchase, which makes them worse off. Currently, buyers could work with one agent to look at houses. If that agent isnât working out, buyers could just find someone else who better met their needs. Doesnât seem like that would be an option anymore.
Couldnât a buyer simply find a home on their own - online, open houses, etc. and then hire someone by the hour or on a fixed price to consummate the paper work?
Yes, a buyer could always do that, but I think people often donât consider some of the benefits of having a good local agent who is familiar with the area and the local market.
A good agent familiar with the local market (stress on GOOD agent who is FAMILIAR with the local market) might know to steer a client away from a house in a certain neigborhood because of the risk of landslides or other issues (true story for someone I know). Or provide guidance on evaluating the disclosures and advising on what items could be serious issues vs. what items not to worry about. Or in the negotiating process - with their experience, they might have a better sense of what the specifics are about the house they could provide better leverage at the negotiating table. etcâŠ
Yes, everyone has access online to the inventory of house on the market, but you canât tell whether it really fits your needs without visiting the house. A good agent (at least the ones in my area) would be familiar with all the houses coming on the market - they are visiting all those houses during the brokers tours before the house comes on the market - and they know what their clients are looking for, so could narrow down the list that their clients actually have to visit.
In my area so much sells in pre-market that without an agent, a buyer wouldnât even know the house is coming on the market. And by the time itâs officially listed, itâs sold.
For many people the answer is yes. Real estate is a relatively simple business.
An honest real estate broker will tell you they arenât qualified to perform home inspections or draft legal documents, which are the two areas most buyers might need help.
Iâm not anti-broker but Iâve always felt itâs been a monopolistic racket, and I say this as someone whoâs had a brokerâs license for over 40 years.