BCFSA is committed to greater transparency; agents identify challenges in proposed ideas

BCFSA, the provincial Crown agency that regulates the real estate industry, recently published Strengthening confidence in real estate servicesa discussion paper describing potential new regulations aimed at building transparency and trust among consumers.

A ‘180’ on performance-oriented committees

Tony Joe, a broker, trainer and coach from Victoria, BC, told Real Estate Magazine that the proposals that surprise him most are those involving commissions, especially one that allows agents to base their payment on the difference between the list and the sold price.

“That’s a practice that people look at with disapproval. It’s always been a thing in B.C. that you can’t earn a commission based on performance,” he said. “This is a complete 180 from what we have been told all along.”

BCFSA says the rules were once designed to protect consumers with limited access to information, but given the availability of property prices and appraisal information today, “allowing commission structures that reward agents for successfully negotiating a lower or higher price could encourage new commission models,” the regulator said in the discussion paper.

Given the varying consumer risks on the part of buyers and sellers, BCFSA may consider several proposed approaches for agents representing buyers and sellers, the report said.

Vancouver real estate agent Keith Roy said it’s an odd proposition, but he generally supports different compensation models.

“Brokers with 20 years of experience may be better than new brokers and should be compensated accordingly,” he said in an email to REM.

“As long as there is transparency, it is up to the (consumer) to make the decision”

The article also raises the idea of ​​banning agents from claiming commissions when they are a principal in the transaction (buyer or seller).

“This is one of the benefits of being a licensee. I think this will be problematic,” Joe said.

Joe said he believes commission claiming should still be allowed, provided all disclosures are made.

“BCFSA is talking about transparency, and as long as there is transparency, consumers will probably be happy to be made aware of it, and it will be up to them to make the decision.”

‘This will be a hotspot’

The article opens the discussion on the idea of ​​banning ‘double ending’, a practice in which the seller’s brokerage retains the entire commission paid by the seller when the buyer is not represented.

“Double termination can make unrepresented party listings more lucrative for agents and can result in misaligned incentives because the benefits accrue to a listing agent, not the seller,” it said.

Although data shows that only two percent of buyers were unrepresented in 2025, BCFSA said, “a double-whammy could erode trust in the industry as consumers expect any collaborative committee to be for buyer representation.”

Joe noted that BCFSA already banned dual representation, which he said “seems to be going well.”

“I don’t really have a problem with banning double endings, Joe said. “But I do know this will be a hot spot for licensees because it is an opportunity for them to earn both sides of the commission.”

BCFSA tackles bidding wars

The discussion paper looks at providing additional information to buyers when bidding enters a second round. This change would require the seller’s agent to disclose to any buyer invited to make a new offer or consider a counter-offer the price of the highest active bid from the last bidding round.

Another approach the article highlights is post-transaction multiple bid reporting, which requires a seller’s agent to provide an anonymized report with information such as the number of offers, the date of each bid, and the names of competing agents to all bidders, including the successful buyer.

“Sellers naturally want the best outcome. To uncover the highest bid price in a second round, there are limits to where the seller could end up,” says Joe. “This is an issue that consumers should take into account.”

Changed building since the end of self-regulation

In 2016, former Prime Minister Christy Clark self-regulation ended for the real estate sector. BCFSA became the sole regulator for BC’s financial services sector, including real estate, in 2021.

Joe says the changes proposed in the new article don’t shock him because they build on changes in recent years since the industry came under stricter government regulation.

“They’ve taken on a very clear mandate of consumer protection, and I understand that. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing,” he said.

Some of the proposed approaches would bring BC in line with regulations in other jurisdictions in Canada. For example, the document proposes mandatory service agreements for buyers, which were introduced to Nova Scotia in 2017.

What happens next?

BCFSA says the document is not a formal consultation on changes, but rather an “opportunity to highlight important issues and invite dialogue on a proposed path forward.”

BCFSA has put out a call for feedback and promises to publish a summary of what people have said.

“If we decide to move forward with any of the proposed approaches, we will engage further with industry and the public, including formal involvement in potential rule changes to help guide our decisions,” the report said.