CEA's Property-Market Reforms: Four Changes Consumers Should Know

Singapore’s CEA property-market reforms could change four ordinary but consequential moments in a property journey: deciding whether an online listing is genuine, understanding how an agent is paid, checking an agent’s track record and agreeing on what the agent will actually do.

But the reforms are not all at the same stage.

Two changes have firm commitments: the Council for Estate Agencies will launch a full-scale listing-verification platform in 2027, and property agencies must begin submitting commission data to CEA from 1 January 2027. Two others remain under consideration: adding consumer ratings to the CEA Public Register and requiring Estate Agency Agreements—including transaction-specific commission disclosures—before work starts.

That distinction matters. Commission statistics collected by the regulator are not the same as disclosure of what your agent expects to earn from your transaction. Likewise, a proposal being studied is not yet a rule consumers or agents must follow.

Here is what is confirmed, what remains open and what buyers, sellers, landlords, tenants and investors should do in the meantime.

CEA Property-Market Reforms at a Glance

Senior Minister of State for National Development and Transport Sun Xueling outlined the measures at the Singapore Estate Agents Conference on 28 July 2026. They form part of a broader industry review intended to improve professional standards, transparency and consumer choice, according to the Ministry of National Development.

Consumer-facing change	Status as of 31 July 2026	Expected timing	What is committed
Verified online property listings	Confirmed	2027, with no exact month announced	CEA will launch a full-scale platform to verify listing authenticity
Collection of commission statistics	Confirmed	From 1 January 2027	Agencies will submit data that CEA intends to aggregate and anonymise
Publication of commission statistics	Intended, but timing remains open	“Eventually”; no date announced	Industry-level information may be published; individual agents’ figures will not be released
Consumer ratings on the CEA Public Register	Under consideration	No committed date	CEA is studying ratings and easier access to the register
Mandatory Estate Agency Agreement before work begins	Under consideration	No committed date	The agreement could formalise representation, duties and payment terms upfront
Deal-specific buyer commission disclosure	Under consideration	No committed date	Buyers could be told how much their agent expects to receive and who will pay it

The practical timeline is easier to understand when separated into measures already operating, measures beginning in 2027 and proposals without fixed dates.

These reforms have been developing over several years. They are better understood as the next phase of Singapore’s gradual digitalisation and professionalisation of property transactions—not as four rules taking effect simultaneously.

Why These Reforms Matter in Singapore’s Property Market

Property decisions involve large sums even when market-wide price movements look modest. In the second quarter of 2026, overall private-home prices rose 0.5% quarter on quarter, while non-landed prices slipped 0.1%, according to the Urban Redevelopment Authority. The differences within the market were much wider: Core Central Region non-landed prices increased 1.8%, while Rest of Central Region prices declined 1.2%.

Private residential indicator	Q2 2026 result
Overall private-home price change	+0.5% quarter on quarter
First-half price growth	+1.4%
Landed-home price change	+2.5%
Non-landed price change	−0.1%
CCR non-landed price change	+1.8%
RCR non-landed price change	−1.2%
OCR non-landed price change	−0.1%
Developer sales, excluding executive condominiums	2,141
Resales	3,813
Total sales, excluding executive condominiums	6,148
Private residential rent change	+0.7%

This is a selective market. A national or regional average cannot tell a buyer whether one unit is fairly priced, whether its listing is genuine or whether an agent’s recommendation reflects the property’s merits.

Illustrative new-launch prices show the scale of the decisions involved:

• Tengah Garden Residences reportedly sold 853 of 863 units on its launch weekend at an average of about S$2,120 psf, according to EdgeProp.
• Vela Bay recorded 370 April transactions at a median of about S$2,865 psf, according to SRI.
• Hudson Place Residences recorded 209 sales by the May reporting period at a median of about S$2,465 psf, according to The Straits Times.

These are project-specific launch figures, not market-wide valuation benchmarks. A meaningful comparison also needs to account for tenure, usable area, floor level, orientation, age, layout and whether the transaction is a developer sale, resale or sub-sale.

The HDB resale market presents another form of complexity. The Resale Price Index fell 0.3% in Q2 2026 after declining 0.1% in Q1—the first sequence of two quarterly declines since 2019. Yet 491 million-dollar transactions still represented 7.7% of Q2 resale volume, according to HDB.

HDB indicator	Q2 2026 result
Resale Price Index	202.8
Quarterly price change	−0.3%
Resale transactions	6,396
Year-on-year volume change	−9.9%
Million-dollar transactions	491
Million-dollar share	7.7%
Approved rental applications	10,002

Against that backdrop, better information about listings, agents and incentives is not a cosmetic upgrade. It can affect how efficiently consumers search, whom they trust and whether they understand the commercial arrangements behind the advice they receive.

Change 1: Verified Property Listings Are Confirmed for 2027

What CEA has committed to

CEA will launch a full-scale platform in 2027 to verify the authenticity of online property listings. The intended targets include dummy, inaccurate, duplicate and unauthorised advertisements, according to The Business Times.

This commitment follows a long development process:

• The Alliance for Action on Accurate Property Listings was formed in November 2021, supported by CEA and co-led by the then Singapore Estate Agents Association, PropertyGuru and 99.co.
• Participating organisations included major agencies and portals such as PropNex, ERA, Huttons, OrangeTee & Tie, SRI and EdgeProp.
• A prototype was completed in February 2024 and tested by agencies and agents.
• CEA then began developing the operational platform now targeted for 2027.

The prototype described in CEA’s technical factsheet envisaged checks before an agent could publish an advertisement.

Those checks included:

• Whether the property existed and was genuinely available.
• Whether the owner had authorised the agent to advertise it.
• Whether material details such as floor area and tenure were accurate.
• Whether the same agent had created duplicate listings on the same portal.
• Whether the advertised telephone number belonged to a registered agent.
• A unique serial number linked to the property-and-agent combination.
• A public verification page where consumers could check that serial number.

These were prototype specifications. Consumers should not assume every feature will appear unchanged in the final platform until CEA publishes its operational rules.

Why listing verification is needed

Agents are already prohibited from publishing false or misleading advertisements, and they should obtain an owner’s consent before marketing a property. However, rules and post-publication enforcement have not eliminated problematic listings.

Advertisement-related complaints to CEA increased from 267 in 2022 to 375 in 2023 and 505 in 2024, based on CEA reporting cited in its 2023/24 annual report and subsequent reporting by The Business Times.

The number rose by approximately 89% between 2022 and 2024. In 2024, advertisement and service issues together accounted for 1,028 of CEA’s 1,271 complaints.

Not every bad listing is a scam. Some may contain stale availability, inaccurate details, duplicated advertisements or photographs used without permission. But the more serious cases can result in substantial financial losses.

Between July 2023 and January 2024, at least 389 victims lost at least S$2.4 million in rental scams involving people impersonating legitimate property agents, according to the Singapore Police Force. Facebook generated the largest number of victim responses in those cases.

What a verified listing should—and should not—prove

A successful system should help establish that a real, available property sits behind an advertisement and that the named agent has authority to market it. This could reduce:

• Enquiries about homes that were never available.
• Bait-and-switch attempts directing consumers to another property.
• Unauthorised use of owners’ photographs and unit details.
• Impersonation using a genuine agent’s name but a fraudulent phone number.
• Multiple advertisements that create a misleading picture of supply.

The likely verification logic can be thought of as a chain rather than a single badge.

The last step is crucial. A verified advertisement cannot guarantee that every later message, payment instruction or tenancy document is legitimate. A scammer may copy a genuine listing and redirect the victim to a different number or account.

CEA’s rental-scam guidance says consumers should not pay a deposit merely to view or reserve a rental property. Even after the new platform launches, consumers should:

• Match the advertised telephone number against the agent’s entry in the CEA Public Register.
• Contact the agent through the registered number—not merely the number in a forwarded message.
• View the property in person before making payment.
• Confirm the landlord’s ownership or authority to rent out the property.
• Pay rental deposits and rent directly to the landlord, rather than the agent.
• Use traceable payment methods.
• Be suspicious of artificial urgency, unusually low rent and requests for payment before viewing.

Who benefits most?

Tenants may receive the greatest immediate safety benefit because rental scams commonly seek deposits or advance rent before a genuine viewing.

Buyers and investors could spend less time responding to dummy or stale advertisements. Cleaner listing inventories may also make asking-price comparisons more meaningful.

Sellers and landlords should gain stronger protection against stolen photographs and unauthorised listings, although they may face additional authentication steps before an advertisement goes live.

Commercial portals could benefit from more trusted inventories, but the system’s effectiveness will depend on adoption, interoperability and how quickly changes in availability are reflected.

Expected timeline

The platform is confirmed for 2027, but CEA has not announced an exact launch month or final feature set. Until then, “verified” badges on individual portals should be assessed according to that portal’s own process; they should not automatically be treated as confirmation under the future CEA-backed system.

Change 2: CEA Will Collect Commission Data, but Personal Disclosure Is Still a Proposal

The commission reform contains two distinct ideas. Conflating them creates a misleading impression of what consumers will receive in 2027.

Confirmed: agencies will submit commission data

From 1 January 2027, CEA will collect commission data from property agencies. The regulator intends the information to be aggregated and anonymised, with industry-level statistics eventually published.

One stated objective is workforce transparency. Prospective agents should have a more realistic picture of the opportunities and risks in a commission-based career. Individual agents’ commission figures will not be published, according to The Straits Times.

Several important details remain unknown:

• When the first public dataset will appear.
• Which averages, medians or distributions will be shown.
• Whether figures will represent gross agency commission or an agent’s income after agency and team splits.
• Whether residential sale, rental, commercial, industrial and overseas-property transactions will be separated.
• How referral fees, co-broking arrangements, clawbacks and business expenses will be treated.

The committed process is therefore:

1. Agencies begin submitting commission data on 1 January 2027.
2. CEA aggregates and anonymises it.
3. Industry-level information is intended to be published eventually.
4. No date has been announced for step three.

Still under consideration: disclosure for your specific transaction

CEA is separately considering whether a buyer’s agent should disclose—before commencing work—how much commission the agent expects to receive in that transaction and from whom.

This would be much more immediately relevant to an individual buyer. A buyer may not pay an agent directly because the agent expects to receive a co-broking share originating from the seller’s side. Without explicit disclosure, the buyer may not understand:

• Who is funding the agent’s remuneration.
• Whether different shortlisted properties offer different co-broking amounts.
• Whether those differences could influence recommendations.
• What services the agent has agreed to perform in return.

No implementation date has been announced for this transaction-specific requirement. As of 31 July 2026, it remains a proposal under consideration.

Commission issue	Confirmed position	What remains open
Agency data submission	Begins 1 January 2027	Reporting format and detailed definitions
Publication of industry statistics	CEA intends eventual publication	First publication date and level of breakdown
Individual agents’ earnings	Will not be published through the statistical exercise	Not applicable
Disclosure of expected commission for a specific buyer transaction	Being considered	Whether it becomes mandatory and when
Commission rates	Negotiable today	No announced move to government-set rates

Existing commission rules already protect consumers

The proposed reform does not begin from a blank slate. Current CEA guidance already establishes several important principles:

• CEA does not prescribe fixed commission rates. Consumers and agencies negotiate them.
• Only a GST-registered property agency may add GST to its commission.
• An agent cannot represent and collect commission from both parties to the same transaction.
• Consumers should pay commission to the licensed property agency, not directly to the individual agent.
• Commission generally becomes payable after a successful, completed transaction.
• If an Estate Agency Agreement is signed, the rate or amount should be recorded in it.

These principles are set out in CEA’s commission guidance and its guidance on engaging a property agent.

Awareness is relatively high, but not universal. CEA’s 2024 survey found that 79% of consumers knew commissions were negotiable, and 85% of that informed group negotiated, according to CNA.

That means roughly one in five surveyed consumers did not know negotiation was possible.

Six questions to ask before appointing a buyer’s agent

Until any transaction-specific disclosure rule takes effect, buyers can create their own written record by asking:

1. Who will pay you if I buy this property?
2. What amount or percentage do you expect to receive?
3. Does your expected remuneration vary across the properties we are considering?
4. Is GST included in the stated amount?
5. What services will you provide in return?
6. At what point does the commission become payable?

The answers should be reflected in an Estate Agency Agreement where applicable. If the arrangement changes, ask for the revision in writing before proceeding.

What the reform could improve

Deal-specific disclosure could make it easier to compare agents, clarify co-broking incentives and reduce disputes about GST, lease renewals or when commission becomes due. It may also encourage a more service-based conversation: what research, negotiation, documentation and post-offer support will the agent provide for the fee?

It would not necessarily remove every conflict. A disclosed incentive remains an incentive. But visibility gives consumers a better chance to evaluate it.

Most importantly, neither the confirmed statistical collection nor the proposed transaction disclosure represents government price control. Commission rates remain negotiable unless future rules expressly change that position.

Change 3: Consumer Ratings May Be Added to the CEA Public Register

What is being considered

CEA is considering publishing consumer ratings of individual agents on its Public Register and making the register easier to access. There is currently no implementation date, final scoring model or confirmed moderation process.

The proposal responds to a clear change in how consumers choose agents. In CEA’s 2024 survey, 44% regarded positive online ratings and reviews as an important selection factor, up from 16% in 2021 and 12% in 2018, according to The Business Times.

Recommendations from friends and family, once the dominant consideration, stood at 43% in the 2024 survey. Online reputation had effectively caught up.

What the CEA Public Register already shows

Consumers do not need to wait for a rating feature before conducting basic checks. The existing Public Register includes:

• The agent’s registration status and agency.
• Residential transaction records from the preceding 36 months.
• Locations and transaction categories in which the agent has been active.
• Awards.
• Enforcement and disciplinary information.

From 10 June 2026, CEA enhanced the register to provide a consolidated rolling three-year record of Letters of Censure, Disciplinary Committee actions and court prosecutions. Agency profiles also show enforcement actions involving their agents, supporting comparisons across agencies of different sizes, according to CEA.

What the register does not yet offer is a central, government-hosted consumer score.

The ratings proposal has historical groundwork

CEA issued its Guide on Best Practices for Consumer Ratings of Property Agents in October 2020. It sought to standardise ratings around:

• Service.
• Professionalism.
• Skills.
• Review authenticity.
• Timeliness.
• Comparability.

Early adopters included ERA, OrangeTee, Huttons, PropNex and PropertyGuru, collectively covering agencies representing about 90% of the agent population, according to CEA’s Real Estate Industry Transformation Map.

A rating on the official register could consolidate information that is now spread across agency websites, portals, social media and search platforms. It could also connect subjective feedback with objective information such as transaction history and disciplinary records.

Why a five-star score is not enough

Property transactions are infrequent, high-value and highly varied. A rating methodology would need to account for issues that are less pronounced in everyday retail reviews:

• Verification: Was the reviewer genuinely represented by the agent?
• Selection bias: Are only satisfied clients invited to leave reviews?
• Recency: Should a five-year-old review carry the same weight as a recent one?
• Transaction outcome: Is a poor rating about the agent’s conduct or an unfavourable market result outside the agent’s control?
• Retaliation: How will the system handle reviews arising from disputes?
• Appeals: Can agents challenge demonstrably false statements?
• Comparability: Is a rating based on two reviews comparable with one based on 200?
• Service type: Should sales, purchases and rentals be grouped together?

A central rating would be useful only if consumers can understand what it measures.

How to evaluate an agent now

Ratings should supplement, not replace, a broader review. A practical selection process is:

For example, an agent with excellent reviews but no recent experience in your HDB town may still be less suitable than one who regularly handles your flat type. A high-volume new-launch agent may not be the best fit for a landed resale or a complex tenancy.

Ask prospective agents to explain:

• Their recent experience in the relevant project, town or district.
• Which official transaction data supports their price recommendation.
• How they will market, shortlist or negotiate.
• How frequently they will update you.
• Whether another team member will handle viewings or paperwork.
• Their fee and expected co-broking arrangement.
• How complaints and service failures are handled.

Expected timeline

Consumer ratings on the official register remain under consideration, with no committed date. The enhanced transaction and enforcement information is already available and should be used now.

Change 4: Upfront Estate Agency Agreements May Become Mandatory

What CEA is studying

CEA is considering requiring agents and clients to sign an Estate Agency Agreement before the agent begins work. Agents may also have to disclose whom they will collect commission from.

The agreement could establish:

• Who the agent represents.
• What work the agent must perform.
• The commission rate or amount.
• Whether GST applies.
• Whether the appointment is exclusive or non-exclusive.
• Potential conflicts of interest.
• When the appointment begins and ends.
• Whether any responsibilities continue after completion or handover.

No commencement date has been announced. The measure is a proposal, not a current universal requirement.

What happens today

CEA already provides eight prescribed agreements for different residential sale, purchase and leasing arrangements. Their use is generally recommended rather than mandatory in every engagement.

CEA advises consumers to sign at the beginning—before a seller’s property is advertised or a buyer’s viewings are arranged. Yet the 2024 consumer survey showed a gap between awareness and timely execution.

Estate Agency Agreement survey finding	Share of consumers
Knew about the prescribed agreement	82%
Were asked to sign one	88%
Signed before the agent began work	65%

The figures suggest that many consumers encounter an agreement only after work has started—or do not formalise the engagement at all. That can create disagreement over whether commission is due, what the agent promised and whom the agent represented.

Exclusive versus non-exclusive agreements

An exclusive agreement normally appoints one agency for a period of up to three months. The exact terms matter, but the consumer may be liable for commission if the property is transacted during the exclusive period, including in circumstances described by the prescribed agreement.

A non-exclusive agreement allows the consumer to appoint multiple agencies. Commission is generally payable to the agency that successfully completes the transaction.

Appointment type	Main feature	Consumer consideration
Exclusive	One agency appointed, normally for up to three months	May encourage focused marketing, but consumers must understand commission obligations
Non-exclusive	Multiple agencies may be appointed	Wider representation is possible, but coordination and duplicate marketing may become issues

Consumers should not select an agreement merely because one label sounds more flexible. Read the commission clauses, termination provisions and definitions of a successful transaction.

Why “before work starts” matters

Signing early forces both parties to address awkward questions before incentives and expectations become entrenched.

For a seller or landlord, the agreement can clarify:

• Asking-price strategy.
• Photography and marketing expenses.
• Which portals will carry the listing.
• Viewing arrangements.
• Owner authorisation.
• Co-broking.
• Commission and GST.
• What happens if the owner finds a buyer or tenant independently.
• The consequences of ending an exclusive appointment early.

For a buyer or tenant, it can clarify:

• Search criteria and area coverage.
• Whether the agent will arrange and attend viewings.
• Who will analyse comparable transactions.
• Who will prepare or review offer documents.
• Negotiation responsibilities.
• Commission source and amount.
• Whether service ends at completion or handover.

A signed prescribed agreement also matters when a dispute arises. Access to CEA’s contractual mediation and arbitration scheme generally depends on the consumer having signed the prescribed agreement and the dispute concerning its terms.

The rental-market boundary consumers often miss

In a rental transaction, CEA generally treats the estate-agency role as ending once the tenancy agreement is signed and the property is handed over. Ongoing property management, repair coordination and deposit disputes may fall outside CEA’s estate-agency jurisdiction unless they are separately agreed.

A tenant may assume the agent remains the point of contact for a faulty air-conditioner. A landlord may assume the agent will manage late rent or renewal negotiations. Neither assumption should be left unstated.

Before signing a lease, ask:

• Does the agent’s role end at handover?
• Who handles defects reported during the inventory period?
• Who coordinates repairs later?
• Who holds and returns the security deposit?
• Is lease-renewal work included?
• Will renewal commission apply?
• Is ongoing property management provided under a separate agreement?

A mandatory upfront agreement could reduce this ambiguity, but consumers can already obtain clarity by documenting the answers.

Expected timeline

Mandatory Estate Agency Agreements and upfront deal-specific commission disclosure remain under study, with no implementation date. CEA’s prescribed forms are available now, and consumers need not wait for compulsion to use them.

What the Four Changes Mean for Different Consumers

The benefits and limitations differ according to the consumer’s role.

Consumer	Most relevant potential benefit	Important limitation
Buyer	Cleaner listings, stronger agent-selection information and earlier incentive disclosure	A verified listing does not establish fair value
Investor	Better inventory comparability and clearer remuneration arrangements	Aggregate commission data will not reveal a specific agent’s incentives
Tenant	Lower impersonation and fake-listing risk	Payment instructions still require independent verification
Seller	Reduced unauthorised listings and clearer marketing duties	Authentication may add steps before publication
Landlord	Better owner-authorisation controls and clearer scope of service	Post-handover management must still be expressly agreed

Buyers: better searches do not replace valuation work

A genuine listing can still be overpriced. An authorised agent can still use an optimistic comparable. A highly rated agent can still have limited experience in a particular district.

Buyers should independently check:

• URA caveats for private-property transactions.
• HDB registered transactions and town-and-flat-type medians.
• Tenure and remaining lease.
• Unit size and usable layout.
• Floor, orientation and condition.
• Sale type and transaction date.
• Upcoming supply and planning context.
• Total financing and ownership costs.

HDB does not publish a single official islandwide PSF benchmark comparable with a condominium launch’s average PSF. Consumers should use town-and-flat-type medians and individual transactions rather than treating an unofficial islandwide figure as a valuation.

Investors: cleaner data should improve interpretation

Duplicate or dummy listings can distort the apparent level of supply. They may also obscure how long a genuine unit has been available. Verification should improve listing comparability, particularly when investors monitor asking prices and rental availability.

However, listings remain asking-side information. Investors should distinguish them from:

• Registered sale caveats.
• Executed leases or official rental statistics.
• URA planning information.
• Project-specific supply.
• Maintenance, tax and financing costs.
• Marketing material produced by an agency or developer.

The future commission dataset will initially be an industry statistic, not a window into an individual investment agent’s incentives.

Tenants: verification addresses a high-risk point

Tenants often face pressure to move quickly, particularly for well-located or attractively priced units. That urgency makes fake listings and impersonation especially dangerous.

Verification should reduce risk at the discovery stage. It does not justify paying before a viewing, transferring money to an agent’s personal account or relying on a phone number that has not been matched against the official register.

Sellers and landlords: clearer authority, clearer accountability

Owner-authorisation checks should make it harder for third parties to advertise a unit without permission. A well-drafted agreement can also reduce disagreement about photography, portal placement, viewing access and co-broking.

The trade-off is likely to be more documentation. Owners may need to confirm identity, authority and property details before marketing begins. That friction is meaningful, but it is also the mechanism that makes verification credible.

A Related Change: Agents Must Stay Active or Pass a Refresher Examination

The listing, commission, ratings and agreement reforms focus on consumer transparency. A related confirmed measure addresses professional currency.

From 1 January 2027, agents must complete at least three transactions over a three-year registration cycle or pass a refresher examination.

Among 32,967 agents continuously registered from 2023 to 2025, about 12,920—or 40%—did not complete three residential transactions during that period. The median was two residential transactions per agent per year, according to The Straits Times.

New agents receive a first-year exemption but must complete two transactions over the following two years or pass the refresher examination. Waivers may be available in cases such as serious medical problems or lengthy, complex transactions.

An agent who neither meets the activity threshold nor passes the refresher examination must leave the industry. To return, the person would have to pass the full Real Estate Salesperson examination.

Details of the refresher examination are expected by the first half of 2029. The first three-year cycle runs from 1 January 2027 to 31 December 2029. Agency licences and agent registrations will also move from one-year to three-year validity, while the annual requirement of 16 Continuing Professional Development hours remains.

The policy does not assume that low-volume agents are necessarily poor agents. Its concern is whether agents who transact infrequently remain current on changing regulations, processes and market conditions. CEA executive director Chan Khar Liang warned that unfamiliarity could affect the accuracy of advice, according to The Business Times.

For consumers, transaction count should still be interpreted carefully. Volume demonstrates recent activity, not automatically service quality, integrity or specialised expertise.

How Large Is Singapore’s Property Agency Sector?

CEA recorded 36,816 agents and 997 property agencies on 1 January 2026. By 1 July, the totals had reached 38,162 agents and 1,018 agencies, according to CEA industry statistics.

The five largest agencies accounted for most agents at the beginning of 2026.

Scale can support training, technology and marketing reach, but agency size alone does not determine whether an individual agent suits a consumer’s needs. The reforms increasingly shift the emphasis towards verifiable activity, conduct, consumer feedback and clearly documented services.

What Consumers Should Do Before the Reforms Arrive

The future measures are intended to make good decisions easier. They do not require consumers to postpone sensible checks.

Before responding to a listing

• Verify the agent’s registration and phone number on the CEA Public Register.
• Compare key property details across the advertisement and official records.
• Be wary of prices materially below comparable listings without a credible explanation.
• Do not pay merely to view or reserve a rental property.
• Preserve messages, advertisements and payment records.

Before appointing an agent

• Review recent transactions in the relevant town, district and property category.
• Check enforcement and disciplinary information.
• Interview more than one agent where practical.
• Ask how the agent reached the proposed price.
• Request a written description of services.
• Negotiate commission and confirm whether GST applies.
• Ask who else may remunerate the agent.

Before signing an agreement

• Confirm whether the appointment is exclusive or non-exclusive.
• Check its duration and termination terms.
• Record the commission rate or amount.
• Clarify whether marketing costs are separate.
• Identify when commission becomes payable.
• Define when the agent’s responsibilities end.
• Do not sign with blank fields or rely on inconsistent verbal assurances.

Before making an offer or payment

• Use official transaction records to test the asking price.
• Confirm the recipient and purpose of every payment.
• Pay commission to the property agency, not the individual agent.
• Pay rental deposits and rent directly to the landlord.
• Obtain professional legal, financing or tax advice where needed.

Food for Thought

1. If two agents recommend different properties but receive different co-broking amounts, how should that difference be disclosed and explained?

2. Would you trust a central rating more if only verified clients could post—even if that produced fewer reviews?

3. Should an agent’s transaction volume matter more than recent experience in your particular project, HDB town or property type?

4. How much extra verification would you accept before a listing goes live if it materially reduced fake and unauthorised advertisements?

5. If an agent’s role ends at rental handover, who have you expressly appointed to manage repairs, deposits and lease-renewal issues afterward?

The Bottom Line on CEA’s Property-Market Reforms

The simplest way to remember the position as of 31 July 2026 is: two confirmed measures, two developing proposals.

Verified online property listings are due in 2027. Commission-data collection begins on 1 January 2027, although public statistics will come later and individual agents’ income will not be published. Consumer ratings on the official register and mandatory upfront Estate Agency Agreements remain under consideration, with no committed dates.

None of the four measures removes the need to verify an agent’s phone number, examine official transaction data, negotiate commissions or read agreements before signing. Regulation can improve the information environment; consumers still have to use that information carefully.