Where this fits on the exam
| Official syllabus topic | Antitrust: Price Fixing, Market Allocation, Boycotts, and Tie-Ins |
|---|---|
| Official PSI area | Practice of Real Estate |
| Published area weight | 12% of the national portion |
| Exam portion | National salesperson portion |
| Source edition | PSI Georgia Candidate Information Bulletin dated July 1, 2026 |
The Rule
PSI publishes the weight for the complete content area, not a fixed question count for this lesson. Learn the rule well enough to apply it when PSI changes names, numbers, or parties in a new scenario.
The lesson
Agreement is the core
Competitors do not need a signed document. Conversations, signals, association meetings, messaging, or coordinated patterns can evidence an agreement. Independently reaching similar decisions is different.
Price fixing
Agreements on commission percentages, minimum fees, buyer-broker charges, cooperative compensation, discounts, or service-price relationships can suppress competition. Fees must be independently established and negotiated.
Allocation and boycotts
Competitors cannot agree to divide neighborhoods, clients, listings, or property types, or collectively refuse to work with a discount firm to force conformity.
Tie-ins and lawful choice
Requiring an unrelated second product can create tying risk when legal elements are met. Referrals should preserve consumer choice, disclose relationships, and comply with settlement law.
Consequences and penalty limits
Criminal Sherman Act violations can carry up to ten years in prison for an individual. Statutory fine maxima are $1 million for an individual and $100 million for a corporation, with alternative fines potentially reaching twice the gain or victim loss. Civil remedies can include treble damages. These are possible legal consequences, not an automatic sentence for every disputed business decision.
Decision rule
Georgia-specific distinction
Worked example
Scenario. Four competing brokers agree none will list property below a six-percent commission.
Reason it through. The competitors made a horizontal agreement controlling price rather than deciding fees independently.
Answer. This is classic price fixing.
Common exam traps
- Thinking only written agreements count
- Calling commission standard
- Confusing independent parallel choices with agreement
- Using an association meeting to coordinate fees
Original practice questions with detailed explanations
These questions were written for instruction and mapped to the current outline. They are not copied from PSI or any live examination. Choose an answer before opening the explanation.
Question 1A seller asks a Georgia listing agent what the standard commission is. Which response is appropriate?
- A. Explain that each firm sets its own rate and it is negotiable
- B. Quote the rate the local MLS requires for residential listings
- C. Quote the customary rate that most area brokers charge
- D. Quote the maximum rate GREC allows for residential sales
Show answer and explanation →
Answer: A. Explain that each firm sets its own rate and it is negotiable
Each Georgia brokerage sets its own compensation, and the fee is negotiated with the client. Calling a rate customary is wrong because it suggests competitors charge a shared price, and neither the MLS nor the Commission sets commission rates.
- A. Correct. Compensation is set independently by each firm and negotiated in the brokerage engagement.
- B. Incorrect. An MLS does not prescribe a required residential commission rate.
- C. Incorrect. Calling a competitor-shared rate customary can suggest a collective price rather than individual negotiation.
- D. Incorrect. GREC does not impose a maximum residential commission rate.
Question 2Three brokerages agree that Firm A will take listings only north of the river, Firm B only south of it, and Firm C only commercial property. What does this describe?
- A. Price fixing
- B. A group boycott
- C. A tie-in arrangement
- D. Market allocation
Show answer and explanation →
Answer: D. Market allocation
Competitors dividing territories, customers or property types among themselves is market allocation, even if no one discusses price. A group boycott is the likely wrong pick, but nobody here is refusing to deal with a third firm.
- A. Incorrect. No fee level is agreed; the agreement divides the types and locations of business.
- B. Incorrect. No refusal to deal with an outside firm is stated.
- C. Incorrect. No service is conditioned on purchasing another product or service.
- D. Correct. The firms allocate territory and property types among competitors.
Question 3At an association meeting, several brokers agree to stop showing a new discount brokerage's listings until it raises its fees. What is the main antitrust concern?
- A. A tie-in arrangement
- B. Market allocation
- C. A group boycott
- D. A dual agency conflict
Show answer and explanation →
Answer: C. A group boycott
A group boycott is a coordinated refusal by competitors to deal with a firm, often to force it to conform on price. The brokers are not dividing territory, so market allocation does not fit, and nothing is conditioned on buying a second product, so it is not a tie-in.
- A. Incorrect. No purchase is conditioned on buying a second service.
- B. Incorrect. The brokers are refusing to deal with a competitor, rather than dividing territories.
- C. Correct. Competitors coordinate a refusal to show the firm's listings to pressure its prices.
- D. Incorrect. The issue is cooperation among competing firms, not one agent representing both parties.
Question 4Two competing brokerages independently choose the same listing fee. No communication, agreement, or coordinated conduct about fees is shown. Does the matching fee alone prove price fixing?
- A. Yes, competitors must always charge different fees
- B. No, similar independent decisions alone do not establish an agreement
- C. Yes, unless the MLS approved the fee
- D. No, price fixing is lawful when the fee is low
Show answer and explanation →
Answer: B. No, similar independent decisions alone do not establish an agreement
Antitrust analysis looks for an unlawful agreement or coordination. Equal prices alone do not establish that the firms agreed.
- A. Incorrect. Independent firms can arrive at the same price without agreeing.
- B. Correct. The facts omit evidence of coordination; matching outcomes by themselves are insufficient.
- C. Incorrect. An MLS cannot authorize competitors to coordinate prices.
- D. Incorrect. The amount charged does not make an actual price-fixing agreement lawful.
Question 5An individual broker is convicted of a criminal Sherman Act violation. Which statement about potential federal consequences is accurate?
- A. Only the brokerage's license can be affected
- B. The individual can face up to ten years in prison and statutory or alternative fines
- C. The broker must receive the maximum sentence in every case
- D. The fine is always limited to the unpaid commission
Show answer and explanation →
Answer: B. The individual can face up to ten years in prison and statutory or alternative fines
Criminal consequences can include imprisonment and fines. Statutory maxima and alternative gain-or-loss fine provisions establish possible exposure; the actual sentence depends on the case.
- A. Incorrect. Federal criminal consequences are separate from state licensing action.
- B. Correct. Imprisonment up to ten years and applicable fine provisions are possible.
- C. Incorrect. A maximum identifies exposure, not a required sentence in every conviction.
- D. Incorrect. A fine is not automatically measured by an unpaid brokerage commission.
Ready to move on?
You are ready for the next lesson when all of these are true.
- Explain Antitrust: Price Fixing, Market Allocation, Boycotts, and Tie-Ins in one clear answer without notes.
- Separate Agreement is the core from Price fixing using a fresh example.
- Apply the decision rule to a new fact pattern and name the fact that controls the result.
- State the Georgia-specific point or explain why the national rule applies unchanged.
- Answer every practice question and explain the rule each rejected option misapplies.
- Revisit this topic later in mixed practice without category labels.
Recommended next lesson
Continue with Do-Not-Call, Social Media, Internet Advertising, and Communication. After seeing what competitors may never agree on, Do-Not-Call, Social Media, Internet Advertising, and Communication covers how each firm may reach consumers, from do-not-call requests and text consent to brokerage identification in social posts.
Return to the Practice of Real Estate hub to see every official branch and the complete lesson sequence for this content area.