The Best of the Legal Hotline

2025 Wisconsin Act 69 goes into effect on January 1, 2027. The practice changes associated with this new law increase transparency and provide sellers and buyers with clear, consistent information regarding marketing, compensation and the use of technology in advertising. There are three key components of the practice changes: marketing listed property, compensation to firms working with buyers, and advertising enhanced by technology. The following questions and answers cover agents’ frequently asked questions as they prepare for the 2027 practice changes.

Marketing listing property

What do the 2027 practice changes require when advertising a property?

The first component of the practice changes involves the marketing of listed residential property containing one to four dwelling units. A listing firm must share information about the property with agents working with buyers, respond to inquiries from any agent working with buyers, and make the property available for showings.

The listing firm must list the property within one business day of the listing period on one or more internet platforms or websites. If the seller does not want the property listed within one business day, the seller will sign the new WB-55 Public Marketing Opt-Out Agreement, a disclosure and opt-out form prescribed by the Wisconsin Real Estate Examining Board (REEB) that allows the seller to opt out of public marketing on the internet.

Sellers must also understand and acknowledge the potential risks associated with reduced market exposure, including the possibility of reaching fewer prospective buyers and potentially affecting the property’s market opportunities.

What does “market the property to the public” mean?

The property must be advertised on one or more publicly accessible internet platforms within one business day of the start of the listing contract. The advertising platform must be available to the general public and accessible to agents working with prospective buyers, ensuring broad exposure of the property to the marketplace.

What does this mean for MLS rules?

All licensees must comply with Wisconsin law. MLS participants must also comply with applicable MLS rules. Contact the local MLS regarding its policies.

Can a seller still choose to restrict marketing or access to their property?

Sellers may choose how their property is marketed when it is listed by a real estate firm. A seller may choose to have their property publicly marketed or may choose to restrict the marketing of their property. If a seller chooses to restrict the marketing of their property, they will be asked to affirmatively opt out of public marketing with the WB-55 Public Marketing Opt-Out Agreement.

The purpose of the WB-55 is to ensure that the seller is making an informed decision to restrict the marketing of their property and that the seller has discussed marketing options with the listing firm. Additionally, the form confirms that the seller understands the potential impact of restricting marketing and that the seller — not the listing firm — is making the decision to restrict marketing.

Furthermore, a seller may still choose to restrict access to their property from certain individuals, provided the restriction is not based on a person’s membership in a protected class. This means the property owner may identify specific agents and prospective buyers with whom the property owner does not wish to work or allow to view the property.

Are the forms changing?

The WB forms have been revised to reflect all the 2027 practice changes. The revised WB forms have an optional use date of October 1, 2026, and a mandatory use date of January 1, 2027. Visit the WRA’s forms update webpage to review the updates.

Is there a resource for sellers regarding the marketing practice changes?

The law requires the REEB to create a consumer brochure. The brochure will be available on the Wisconsin Department of Professional Services (DSPS) website and will be referenced in the listing contracts and the WB-55 Public Marketing Opt-Out Agreement.

Cooperating firm compensation

How is compensation changed by the practice changes?

The practice changes modify how compensation is documented and paid in residential transactions involving one to four dwelling units.

Beginning January 1, 2027, one firm may not pay compensation of any kind to another firm for brokerage services performed in connection with the sale of a residential property containing one to four dwelling units. This prohibition applies regardless of the brokerage relationship between the firms.

How can a firm working with a buyer get compensated?

The firm may be compensated by the buyer directly or the buyer may request the seller pay the firm in the offer to purchase. The law allows a seller to compensate a firm working with a buyer provided such compensation is documented in the offer to purchase.

The new law provides that:

1. A firm may be paid directly by its own client, who is the seller or the buyer, via an agency agreement.

2. Firms may not enter into side agreements with other firms to share or split compensation.

3. Sellers may decide whether they want to offer compensation to an agent working with a buyer.

4. If a buyer wants the seller to pay the cooperating agent, that arrangement must be explicitly included in the offer to purchase.

5. Compensation terms must be transparent and documented so both the buyer and seller understand who is being paid, by whom, and how much.

This structure ensures compensation is handled as part of the negotiated transaction between the buyer and seller, not as a separate agreement between real estate firms.

Does this apply to commercial or multifamily property?

No, the compensation provisions apply only to residential properties containing one to four dwelling units. Transactions involving other property types are not subject to these specific restrictions.

Are referral fees still allowed?

Yes, referral fees and finder’s fees permitted under Wisconsin law are not affected.

Can a seller still pay some or all of the buyer’s firm’s fee?

The law does not prohibit seller-paid compensation; rather, it changes how that compensation is documented. A seller may agree to pay all or part of the buyer’s firm’s compensation, provided the agreement is negotiated and expressly documented in the fully executed offer to purchase signed by both the buyer and seller. The payment is made directly by the seller to the buyer’s firm, not by the listing firm.

Can a buyer request the seller pay the buyer’s firm’s compensation? Is this amount negotiable?

A buyer may include a request in the offer to purchase asking the seller to pay compensation to the buyer’s firm. The amount of compensation is negotiable. The seller is under no obligation to agree and may accept, reject or counter the request as part of the overall negotiation of the offer, just like they can with any other offer term. If the parties reach an agreement, it must be included in the fully executed offer to purchase.

Can the seller agree to pay the buyer’s firm’s compensation after the offer is already accepted?

Provided the buyer and seller mutually agree, the parties may amend the offer to purchase to include a seller-paid compensation provision. Because the law requires the agreement to be documented in the executed offer to purchase, any subsequent agreement should be incorporated into the contract through a written amendment signed by both parties.

Can a subagent ask the seller to pay the subagent’s compensation?

The law permits a seller to agree to pay compensation to a firm working with the buyer-customer provided the agreement is negotiated and documented in the executed offer to purchase. The revised WB offers to purchase provide an option for the buyer to request the seller pay the firm working with a buyer-customer.

What happens if firms enter into an agreement that violates the new law?

Any agreement or arrangement that violates the statutory prohibition on firm-to-firm compensation is void and unenforceable.

Can a listing firm charge different commission rates depending on whether the listing firm brings the buyer or another firm brings the buyer?

The practices changes and revised WB forms do not affect what a listing firm may negotiate as the firm’s commission with the seller. The new law prohibits firm-to-firm compensation. Variable rate commission structures are still allowed.

The firm and the seller can negotiate a variable rate commission. For example, a listing contract may state that commission is X% of the purchase price if the listing firm brings the buyer or Y% of the purchase price if another firm brings the buyer.

Prior to January 2026, the REALTOR® Code of Ethics required REALTORS® to disclose variable rate commission in Standard of Practice 3-4. That section was deleted from the Code of Ethics, effective January 2026.

Advertising enhanced by technology

What do the practice changes require regarding advertising enhanced by technology?

A licensee must disclose whenever advertising has been altered or modified using technology, including artificial intelligence (AI), to add, remove or change elements of a property in a way that creates a false or misleading impression of the property.

What is the purpose of the disclosure?

The practice changes are intended to promote transparency and help consumers understand when technology has materially altered the appearance of a property. The goal is not to prohibit the use of technology, but to ensure that buyers receive accurate information and are not misled by digitally modified advertising.

Is there specific language required for the disclosure?

The statute requires disclosure that the advertising has been altered or modified using technology when the alteration creates a false or misleading impression. The law does not prescribe specific language. A simple statement such as “Image has been digitally altered,” “Virtually staged” or “Rendering depicts possible renovations” may be appropriate, depending on the circumstances. A firm may develop its own standardized language for use in its advertising. Any firm-developed disclosure should be clear, accurate and consistent with the practice changes.

Does removing clutter or personal property require disclosure? Does altering the grass, landscaping or sky require a disclosure?

Whether alteration or modification requires disclosure depends on what exactly is done. If any modification using technology would create a false or misleading impression of the property’s condition or appearance, disclosure is required.

Does virtual staging require a disclosure?

Yes, virtual staging requires disclosure if virtual staging adds furnishings or other features that were not present when the photograph was taken. Because the image has been altered using technology, the advertisement should disclose that the image has been virtually staged.

Does the disclosure have to appear on every altered image?

The statute requires disclosure in the advertising. As a best practice, licensees should make the disclosure clear and conspicuous so consumers understand which images have been altered.

Can an agent solely make the disclosure in the private remarks on the listing platform, or does it need to be made public?

The disclosure should be visible to the public so anyone who sees the altered advertising is aware the advertising has been modified by technology.

Does every digitally altered or modified image create a false or misleading impression?

Whether an image creates a false or misleading impression depends on the nature and extent of the modification. Routine editing that improves image quality, such as adjusting brightness or color correction, generally does not create a false or misleading impression. However, adding, removing or changing significant features of the property may require disclosure under the practice changes.

What happens if a licensee fails to disclose a digitally altered image, such as showcasing a finished basement when the property does not actually have a finished basement?

The licensee would likely be in violation of Wis. Stat. § 452.136(1m). A complaint may be filed with the DSPS. If a licensee violated licensee law, the REEB can assess fines up to $5,000 for each violation; require education; assess costs; and limit, suspend or revoke the licensee’s license.

Additionally, the licensee may have violated Article 12 of the REALTOR® Code of Ethics. Article 12 provides:

“REALTORS® shall be honest and truthful in their real estate communications and shall present a true picture in their advertising, marketing, and other representations. REALTORS® shall ensure that their status as real estate professionals is readily apparent in their advertising, marketing, and other representations, and that the recipients of all real estate communications are, or have been, notified that those communications are from a real estate professional. (Amended 1/08).”

An ethics complaint may be filed with the WRA’s Professional Standards Program.