I. Introduction

Rising rents and limited home ownership opportunities have made housing perhaps the single most pressing cost-of-living issue in the United States. Alongside reforms at the state and local levels, Congress finally took steps towards addressing the crisis through the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. The bill, which became law despite the lack of presidential signature, stands to boost supply and reduce construction costs, while supporting affordable and rural housing initiatives. Additionally, the bill aims to limit institutional investors’ ability to purchase housing stock. The administration of Donald Trump, which notably refused to sign the bill and stated that he wants home prices to increase, has shown a total unwillingness to engage on housing.

Trump has affirmed in no uncertain terms that his administration’s housing policy is rooted in support for “driv[ing] housing prices up for people who own their homes,” while limiting opportunities for non-homeowners. Since Trump returned to office, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has seen its workforce gutted. These cuts affect, among other things, the department’s functions pertaining to housing construction and assisting renters. This rot has also been reflected in Trump’s antitrust enforcers, who have backed off of initiatives to rein in anti-competitive behavior in the housing market.

As we noted in our June analysis, Zillow has received scrutiny, including from competitors who have engaged in similar practices, over its control and misuse of listing data. By controlling listing data and directing prospective buyers to affiliated agents, firms like Zillow contribute to the distortion of the housing market. In August, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) settled a case against Zillow and Redfin just hours before trial, continuing a broader pattern of settling with harmful corporations over taking them to task in court. The Trump administration also allowed Compass to finalize its $1.6 billion acquisition of Anywhere despite widespread concerns over the deal’s impact on competition. This week, a coalition of nineteen advocacy groups wrote to state attorneys general to urge coordination on housing market integrity. The letter noted that firms like Zillow have effectively erected private toll booths in the housing market that allow them to profit off of consumers at every point in a transaction.

II. Housing Platforms' Anti-Consumer Practices

WEAK TERMS OF ZILLOW-REDFIN SETTLEMENT

The letter takes particular aim at the terms of the August Zillow-Redfin settlement, which has been derided as a “slap on the wrist” by one industry commentator. The FTC and, separately, five states brought cases targeting Zillow and Redfin’s anti-competitive deal, which required the latter to wind down its independent rental-listing business. Under the agreement, Redfin would transfer its existing customers to Zillow and leave the rental-listing market for up to nine years. One expert on behalf of the government estimated that, following Redfin’s exit from the market, Zillow customers paid on average 14.5 percent more per listing.

Under the August settlement, the FTC required Redfin to rebuild its rental advertising business and removed provisions preventing it from independently seeking listings. The order nevertheless forces Redfin to rebuild the competition Zillow paid to eliminate while allowing Zillow to retain the customer relationships and scale it acquired through the deal. The companies can also maintain their syndication agreement through at least 2030.

NEED FOR STATE AG ACTION

As the Trump administration has systematically receded on antitrust enforcement at the behest of powerful corporate actors, states are increasingly filling in the gaps. The victory of the state attorneys general (AGs) coalition in the Live Nation suit after the DOJ’s controversial settlement affirmed the importance of states in antitrust enforcement. The new coalition letter, signed by Demand Progress Education Fund and 18 other organizations, urges state officials to monitor whether Zillow and Redfin adhere to the settlement. The letter also calls for broader investigations into anti-competitive and deceptive conduct by dominant listing platforms. As the coalition notes, state AGs currently have the power to rein in these platforms by enforcing antitrust laws and rules that prohibit unfair and deceptive practices.

Housing platforms’ deceptive practices make the process of buying or renting a home even more stressful for Americans struggling under high costs. For homebuyers and renters already confronting high prices and limited choices, this behavior adds another layer of expense and uncertainty to an already punishing search. As we noted in June, Zillow’s steering practices extend beyond rental listings. Clicking “Contact Agent” does not route a prospective buyer to the actual agent responsible for the property. Instead, Zillow sells the consumer as a lead to a buyer’s broker that may pay the platform up to 40 percent of the commission through a a referral fee. At the moment a buyer seeks assistance, Zillow obscures whose interests the supposed agent actually serves. This is part of a wider problem in the digital economy. As experts have noted concerning AI agents, a digital intermediary presented as the user’s agent may instead serve the company controlling it.

Outside of Zillow, the letter urges state enforcers to investigate Compass’ pocket-listing strategy and review the Compass-Anywhere merger under state law after federal regulators allowed it to close without a challenge. The scale of the combined entity means it is involved in nearly one in five home sales in the U.S. It’s worth noting that the terms of the Compass-Anywhere merger’s approval by the DOJ were subject to controversy. In February, lawmakers expressed corruption concerns over the DOJ’s backing of the deal, fears that have followed several high-profile antitrust decisions in his second term. The coalition also calls for probes into deceptive platform designs, as well as alleged mortgage-kickback practices. Given that these companies operate on a national level, the coalition urged the creation of a multistate working group to combat platforms’ efforts to exploit gaps between state laws.

III. Conclusion

In 2024, the National Association of Realtors settled landmark private antitrust litigation brought by home sellers in an agreement that made buyer-agent fees more negotiable. Two years later, dominant platforms risk reproducing many of the same anti-competitive dynamics at homebuyers’ expense. Research by the Consumer Federation of America has found that referral fees support high, uniform commissions, not better service. A broker required to surrender up to 40 percent of a commission to Zillow has less room to offer the buyer a lower price.

The ROAD to Housing Act, in conjunction with state and local efforts to promote housing opportunity, shows that the tide may finally be turning after decades of inaction. With this in mind, agencies like the FTC need to ensure that corporations don’t take advantage of people looking for a place to live through misleading agent relationships or surprise referral fees. Slap-on-the-wrist settlements will only empower companies like Zillow to continue distorting the market to their own benefit. With the Trump administration wholly disinterested in tackling the housing affordability crisis, state officials should step in wherever possible, including through combatting tolls and traps that plague housing platforms.