In 1994, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) amended its national policy for multiple listing services (MLSs), allowing local Realtor boards and associations to decide whether they wanted to allow non-Realtors to subscribe and participate in their owned MLSs. The optional rule still exists today, and it is up to local associations and boards to decide if they would like to adopt it.
As the Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to scrutinize the real estate industry — and as private citizens file suits against NAR and the state and local Realtor associations over MLS access — many are suspecting that MLSs and local associations will be under greater pressure to adopt the rule and offer access to non-Realtor licensees.
This is the exact move that the Phoenix Association of Realtors (PAR) and the Austin Board of Realtors (ABoR) made recently. In late 2024, PAR announced it would be allowing non-Realtors to access the MLS it co-owns with Arizona Regional MLS (ARMLS) starting Jan. 1, 2025. ABoR is allowing non-Realtors access to its Unlock MLS starting June 1, 2025.
More choices for agents
PAR refers to its non-Realtor option as MLS Choice. ABoR does not have a specific name for its program, but it calls the fee that licensees pay to access Unlock MLS an “MLS subscription fee.”
Licensees pay the same MLS access fee regardless of their Realtor membership status. If a licensee chooses to become a Realtor, they will pay an additional Realtor membership fee that provides them with membership to their local, state and national associations.
At both PAR and ABoR, real estate licensees who choose to participate in their respective MLSs without becoming Realtor members are not allowed to call themselves a Realtor. Non-Realtor licensees who access either MLS will also have access to local association-provided forms, as well as education and training.
Unlock MLS in Austin is providing non-Realtor MLS subscribers with lockbox access, while PAR is allowing MLS Choice agents to purchase Supra lockboxes for an additional fee.
NAR says not so fast
Despite the nearly identical offerings and their adoptions of the 1994 optional rule, NAR has begun the charter revocation process with PAR but not with ABoR.
The battle between PAR and NAR began in December when NAR sent a cease-and-desist letter to PAR, asking it to end the MLS Choice program. NAR told HousingWire this was necessary to “support and defend the Realtor trademark.” When PAR did not comply, NAR informed its leadership and members that it had made the decision to initiate the charter revocation process against PAR.
“Phoenix Realtors is violating NAR’s bylaws and Constitution by offering a non-Realtor membership option. Without action, we put the benefits NAR members rely on — such as market research, business resources, a unified advocacy platform, and a single Code of Ethics — and the organization itself at risk,” a NAR spokesperson told HousingWire at the time.
In contrast, however, when asked about ABoR’s decision to open Unlock MLS to non-members, NAR wrote that “NAR’s policy is that each MLS has the discretion to determine individual participation requirements based on their market.”
When asked about the differing responses to PARR’s and ABoR’s nearly identical actions, a NAR spokesperson told HousingWire that “the process is ongoing, and we do not have any updates or information to share with you at this time.”
While PAR is currently the only association known to be coming under fire from NAR for allowing non-Realtors to access its MLS, the Phoenix and Austin organizations are far from the only local associations and MLSs that allow access to non-Realtors.
Historic legal precedent
In California, Florida, Alabama and Georgia, all MLSs are open to all real estate licensees, regardless of their Realtor association membership status or whether their local association has adopted the optional NAR rule on MLS access.
Access to the MLSs in these states was opened to non-Realtors through lawsuits filed in the 1970s and 1980s, years before the optional NAR rule was adopted.
In Florida, Alabama and Georgia, access to the MLS was opened to non-Realtors by a 1991 ruling in a case known as Thompson v. Metropolitan Multi-List. The suit was originally filed in Georgia in December 1988 by Fletcher L. Thompson against Metro MLS and the DeKalb Board of Realtors.
Thompson did not wish to join the Atlanta Board of Realtors and therefore his application to use Metro MLS was denied since he wasn’t a Realtor. The suit alleged three different antitrust violations — an illegal tying arrangement, a conspiracy to monopolize a market and an illegal group boycott.
While a lower court initially ruled in favor of the defendants by granting them summary judgment, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision on the plaintiffs’ tying and group boycott claims, remanding the case to the lower court. It was through this decision of the Eleventh Circuit that “Thompson brokers” came to exist.
Although it has been more than 30 years since MLS access in Florida was opened, Jorge Guerra, the 2025 vice president of Florida Realtors, said that at least in his state, Thompson brokers are not that common.
“I was actually a few years into my real estate career before I had even heard of Thompson brokers,” Guerra said. “It isn’t that common to see a Thompson broker, and it is becoming even less common.”
According to Guerra, with so much data available on listing portals like Zillow and Homes.com, he suspects that many real estate licensees who do not want to be Realtors are simply forgoing any type of MLS access.
In California, MLS access was opened even earlier, based on a 1976 ruling by the Supreme Court of California in Marin County Board Realtors v. Palsson. In a unanimous decision, the court found that the board’s bylaws violated the state’s antitrust statute because they restricted membership to individuals primarily engaged in real estate and denied access to the MLS for non-Realtor members, constituting an unreasonable restraint of trade.
“Since that decision, you haven’t had to be a Realtor in California in order to access the MLS,” said Saul Klein, the CEO of San Diego MLS. “So, that is going on 50 years now where this has been allowed in California, and everyone is talking about it like it is a new thing.”
Klein, a longtime real estate professional, said that at San Diego MLS, the share of non-Realtor MLS subscribers ranges from 5% to 10% of all subscribers at any given time.
What’s next?
In addition to these states, many non-Realtor-owned MLSs — such as Northwest MLS in Washington state and MLS Property Information Network (MLS PIN) in Massachusetts — allow access to non-Realtors. They pay the same MLS access or MLS-only membership fees as Realtors, as the local Realtor association and MLS are separate entities.
Due to pressure placed on the industry by the DOJ and the fresh batch of lawsuits, industry experts believe that more MLSs, especially those owned by Realtor associations, will consider opening themselves to non-Realtors. But this decision may be risky given NAR’s reaction to PAR’s debut of MLS Choice.
As a result, RealTrends Consulting co-founder Steve Murray believes that more Realtor associations may decide to sell their MLSs to private entities.
“I was an adviser on the recent sale of the MLS in Denver and I fully expect we are going to see more sales,” Murray said. “Honestly, they should have done this a while ago.
“I told a bunch of them over a decade ago and they said no, they are ‘the voice for real estate.’ But they aren’t — they are the voice for Realtors and Realtor listings, but they don’t have new homes or FSBOs or multifamily. I could see that they were going to get ambushed.”
For now, the industry must wait and see if PAR and ABoR are anomalies, or if they’ll usher in the start of a new wave of open-access MLSs.
