Connect with us

Personal Finance

D.C. appeals court greenlights Justice Department investigation into NAR

Published

on

A federal court cleared the way Friday for the Justice Department to reopen an antitrust probe into the National Association of Realtors and its rules regarding home sale commissions.

In a 21-page opinion, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed a lower-court decision that the Justice Department was barred from reopening its investigation because of complications arising out of a 2020 settlement the government eventually withdrew from. The appeals court sent the matter back to the lower court, where Realtors could appeal to the full D.C. Circuit or attempt to find a new angle to challenge the investigation.

The decision represents the latest blow for the powerful real estate group, which agreed in March to pay $418 million to resolve several class-action lawsuits alleging it conspired to inflate commissions. The NAR, which denies any wrongdoing, also said it would revise a compensation structure that typically carves out 5 to 6 percent of a home’s sale price for agents.

While lawyers for the plaintiffs expect the lawsuit settlement — if approved in federal court — to lower commissions, it would not preclude the Justice Department from further investigating the Realtors association, which counts 1.5 million members.

The Justice Department, which often does not publicly confirm ongoing investigations, did not specifically say it would restart the probe of the Realtors group. But Justice officials went out of their way to note the implications of Friday’s ruling.

“Real-estate commissions in the United States greatly exceed those in any other developed economy, and this decision restores the Antitrust Division’s ability to investigate potentially unlawful conduct by NAR that may be contributing to this problem,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.

The Realtors association said Friday that it was “reviewing today’s decision and evaluating next steps.” Pointing to a dissenting opinion by U.S. District Judge Justin R. Walker, the association added that it “believes that the government should be held to the terms of its contracts.”

Walker wrote that the Justice Department should be precluded from reopening its investigation because the federal government previously said in a letter that it had closed the matter.

Scrutiny on the commissions system comes as housing affordability weighs on consumers. In the last quarter of 2023, the median U.S. sales price was $417,700, according to the Federal Reserve of St. Louis. Under a standard 6 percent commission, more than $25,000 would be earmarked for agents. In 2023, Americans paid close to $80 billion in commissions at a time when financing and other costs were elevated. As of the third week in March, a 30-year fixed mortgage rate hovered near 7 percent, close to the 20-year high reached in October.

At issue in the D.C. Circuit was whether the Justice Department’s antitrust division could reopen an inquiry it settled with the NAR in November 2020 concerning rules that, the government alleged, “illegally restrained competition in residential real estate services.” Months after the probe officially closed, the Justice Department withdrew from the settlement, which it said prevented the government from further investigating the trade group’s commissions rules. When the Justice Department sought to continue its investigation, the association petitioned to block it.

In January 2023, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled in favor of the NAR. The Justice Department appealed, leading to Friday’s ruling.

NAR rules have called for sellers’ agents to include compensation offers in listings on real estate databases known as multiple listing services (MLS). Buyers’ and sellers’ agents have traditionally split the compensation, typically 5 to 6 percent of the home-sale price and funded entirely by the seller.

Critics contend the arrangement pays buyers’ agents far more than the value of their services. Such agents have played a smaller role in transactions in recent years with the rise of platforms such as Zillow that let users search for homes on their own.

The issue burst into the spotlight in October, when a Kansas City, Mo., jury found that the NAR and several major brokerages conspired to keep commissions artificially high, awarding a class of home sellers $1.8 billion in damages. A similar case in Illinois had been moving toward trial when the NAR announced in March that it agreed to settle both cases. The trade group said it would modify its rules to limit cooperation between buyers’ and sellers’ agents regarding compensation.

Although the Justice Department declined to comment on that settlement, it still may have a reason to launch an investigation if the proposed settlement does not foster price competition, according to Ryan Tomasello, an analyst at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods who covers real estate technology.

The settlement proposes changes to prevent agents on either side of the transaction from coordinating on commissions, which experts say leads to price fixing. One proposal would prohibit listing agents from making compensation offers through the MLS, which allows buyers’ agents to easily see what commission rate is being offered and steer their clients toward properties with high compensation.

But Tomasello said it includes exceptions that would keep compensation offers visible to buyers’ agents in some cases.

“In our view, so long as listing agents can continue to make and advertise compensation offers to buyer agents, steering incentives will still exist,” Tomasello said in a research note.

The Justice Department took a similar position in February when it intervened in a Massachusetts commissions case that involves an independent MLS with similar compensation rules as the NAR.

In a filing disagreeing with the terms of the proposed settlement in Massachusetts, the federal government noted that as “long as sellers can make buyer-broker commission offers, they will continue to offer ‘customary’ commissions out of fear that buyer brokers will direct buyers away from listings with lower commissions — a well-documented phenomenon known as steering.”

Rachel Weiner contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Trump funding freeze is existential threat: Morehouse College president

Published

on

Morehouse College President David Thomas speaks during Morehouse College’s graduation ceremony, before US President Joe Biden delivers his commencement address, in Atlanta, Georgia on May 19, 2024. 

Andrew Caballero-Reynolds | Afp | Getty Images

David Thomas, the president of Morehouse College, said his office fielded a surge of calls this week from worried students and their families concerned the Trump Administration’s “federal funding freeze” would directly impact college access

The sudden scramble was “perhaps only rivaled by what happened in March of 2020 when we realized that the Covid pandemic was truly a threat,” Thomas told CNBC. He became president of Morehouse, one of the country’s top historically Black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, in 2018.

This freeze on federal aid “would create another existential threat as great as the pandemic,” he said.

More from Personal Finance:
White House freeze on federal aid will not affect student loans
Consumer protection agencies at risk in Trump’s second term
How this DC-area high school is trying to close the wealth gap

Thomas’ comments come amid ongoing confusion about how a freeze on federal grants and loans could potentially impact students and schools.

A Jan. 27 memo issued by the Office of Management and Budget, which would affect billions of dollars in aid, said the pause on federal grants and loans “does not include assistance provided directly to individuals.”

Although the memo was later rescinded, the White House said a “federal funding freeze” remains in “full force and effect.” It is currently on hold amid legal challenges.

Thomas, who is also on the Board of Trustees at Yale University, said college leaders across the country have spent the better part of the week focused on “the consequences of this action.” Morehouse immediately initiated a hiring freeze in preparation for a potentially significant financial disruption.

“All of the institutions are still in limbo,” he said.

What college aid may be affected

At Morehouse College, about 40% of the student body relies on Federal Pell Grants, a type of federal aid available to low-income families.

Following the memo’s release, the Education Department announced that the freeze would not affect student loans or Pell Grants.

“The temporary pause does not impact Title I, IDEA, or other formula grants, nor does it apply to Federal Pell Grants and Direct Loans under Title IV [of the Higher Education Act],” Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said in a statement.

In addition to the federal financial aid programs that fall under Title IV, Title I provides financial assistance to school districts with children from low-income families. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, provides funding for students with disabilities.

The funding pause “only applies to discretionary grants at the Department of Education,” Biedermann said. “These will be reviewed by Department leadership for alignment with Trump Administration priorities.”

President Trump moves to halt federal grants

But questions remain about other aid for college.

The freeze could affect federal work-study programs and the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant, which are provided in bulk to colleges to provide to students, according to Kalman Chany, a financial aid consultant and author of The Princeton Review’s “Paying for College.”

The disruption to federally backed research funding also poses a threat to college programs and staff.

‘Lots of reasons to still be concerned’

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

What federal employees need to consider when evaluating offer to resign

Published

on

A “Do not cross” sign is illuminated at a crosswalk outside of U.S. Capitol building in Washington, US, November 10, 2024. 

Hannah Mckay | Reuters

The Trump administration emailed more than 2 million federal workers this week, giving them the option to resign now and get pay and benefits through Sept. 30.

Workers have until Feb. 6 to accept the “deferred resignation” offer.

The payouts come on the heels of President Donald Trump‘s executive order to end DEI programs. On Wednesday, he said federal workers need to return to the office five days a week “or be terminated.”

“We think a very substantial number of people will not show up to work, and therefore our government will get smaller and more efficient,” Trump said at the signing of an immigration detention law.

More from Your Money:

Here’s a look at more stories on how to manage, grow and protect your money for the years ahead.

Experts advise federal employees to take their time before accepting the offer. By accepting the resignation, tenured federal employees could lose certain rights they may have.

“If you resign, it’s deemed voluntary,” said Michael L. Vogelsang, Jr., a principal of The Employment Law Group, P.C. “If you are a permanent, tenured employee in the government and the administration wants you out, laws still exist that federal employees cannot just be fired on a whim.”

Meanwhile, some lawmakers question whether the president can make this offer without Congressional approval.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, said federal employees should not be “fooled” by Trump’s proposal.

“If you accept that offer and resign, he’ll stiff you,” Kaine said. “He doesn’t have any authority to do this.” 

The Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment Authority gives federal agencies the authority to offer buyout incentives for some employees to resign or retire, but it is capped at $25,000.

Asked for more detail on the payouts, including what authority the president has to offer to pay through September 30, the White House referred back to its statement given on Tuesday.

“If they don’t want to work in the office and contribute to making America great again, then they are free to choose a different line of work and the Trump Administration will provide a very generous payout of eight months,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

There is already uncertainty around current funding for the federal government. It’s operating under a short-term continuing resolution passed in December. Unless Congress acts, the federal government could shut down on March 14. 

Unlike with corporate buyouts, federal employees who received this offer can’t appeal for a better deal, experts say.

“Usually with buyouts, I think of more severance, and usually it’s sort of some kind of negotiation. This isn’t really negotiation. It’s sort of a unilateral offer,” Vogelsang said.

Still, some of the factors to consider for weighing the government’s deferred resignation offer are similar to what one would weigh in a corporate buyout, experts say:

Consider how much your position is at risk

For federal employees who aren’t permanent, Vogelsang says they should consider how much their position is at risk and if their skills make it likely they’ll be able to find another job. 

“I think there’s enough executive orders out there that people in DEI, probationary employees, IRS employees, environmental employees, can probably read between the lines that their positions may be at risk moving forward,” he said.

Research job alternatives 

Career experts advise not waiting to begin the job search.

“Start thinking about your search now, because it’s going to be longer than you think, especially with people flooding the market,” said Caroline Ceniza-Levine, a career coach and founder of Dream Career Club. 

Prepare for a job search by updating your LinkedIn profile, identifying your accomplishments and reflecting on professional achievements so you can explain them clearly and concisely. “You don’t get every job that you apply for, and that can be a very frustrating and emotionally draining process,” said Ron Seifert, senior client partner at the staffing firm Korn Ferry. 

Consider the work culture if you stay

Think about the culture and career implications of rejecting the offer. A question to ask yourself is, “If I’m still here after this is done, what will this place feel like?” Seifert said. “Is this a place where I have opportunity?”

“I would caution people against making decisions when they’re in the panic zone,” said Connie Whittaker Dunlop, principal of Monarch Consulting Group. “There are a fair number of unknowns, but if you can kind of ground yourself in what you know, what you value, and then make that, make a decision from that space, I think,  people will be better served.” 

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

These child tax credit mistakes can halt your refund, experts say

Published

on

Millions of families claim the child tax credit every year — and filing mistakes can delay the processing of your return and receipt of your refund, according to tax experts. 

For 2024 returns, the child tax credit is worth up to $2,000 per kid under age 17, and decreases once adjusted gross income exceeds $200,000 for single taxpayers or $400,000 for married couples filing jointly.  

The refundable portion, known as the additional child tax credit, or ACTC, is up to $1,700. Filers can claim the ACTC even without taxes owed, which often benefits lower earners.

However, a lower-income family who doesn’t know how to claim the credit “misses out on thousands of dollars,” National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins wrote in her annual report to Congress released in January. 

More from Personal Finance:
Your tax return could be ‘flagged for audit’ without these key forms
Education Department: Trump’s federal aid freeze won’t affect student loans
Why you may be getting ‘shortchanged’ on CD interest rates

More than 18 million filers claimed the additional child tax credit in 2022, according to the latest IRS estimates. 

By law, the IRS can’t issue ACTC refunds before mid-February. But the Where’s My Refund portal should have status updates by Feb. 22 for most early filers, according to the IRS.  

Here’s how to avoid common child tax credit mistakes that could further delay your refund.

Know if you have a ‘qualifying child’

One child tax credit mistake is not knowing eligibility.

The rules can be “very confusing,” according to Tom O’Saben, an enrolled agent and director of tax content and government relations at the National Association of Tax Professionals.

To claim the child tax credit or ACTC, you must have a “qualifying child,” according to the IRS. The qualifying child guidelines include:

  • Age: 17 years old at the end of the tax year
  • Relationship: Your son, daughter, stepchild, eligible foster child, brother, sister, stepbrother, stepsister, half-brother, half-sister or a descendant of these
  • Dependent status: Dependent on your tax return
  • Filing status: Child is not filing jointly
  • Residency: Lived with you for more than half the year
  • Support: Didn’t pay for more than half of their living expenses
  • Citizenship: U.S. citizen, U.S. national or a U.S. resident alien  
  • Social Security number: Valid Social Security number by tax due date (including extensions) 

You may avoid some eligibility errors by filing via tax software or using a preparer versus filing a paper return on your own, O’Saben said. Tax software typically includes credit eligibility, which can minimize errors.

Missing Social Security number

Typically, parents apply for a Social Security number in the hospital when completing their baby’s birth certificate. But it can take one to six weeks from application to receive that number, according to the agency, which can create time pressure for families with a new addition around tax season.

Filing a tax return and claiming the child tax credit before receiving the Social Security number is a mistake, O’Saben said.

“I have seen [the child tax credit] denied for people who have filed before they got the Social Security number for a dependent,” he said. “And there’s no going back.”

If you don’t have the number before the tax deadline, you should request an extension, which gives you six months more to file your return, O’Saben explained.

However, you still must pay taxes owed by the original deadline.

Tax Tip: Child Credit

Continue Reading

Trending