Where a dispo service sits under the new marketing rules
Consider a done-for-you dispo and transaction coordination service for wholesalers at a flat $1,500 per closing. The work is taking their signed purchase contract, sending it to a buyer list, screening proof of funds, and running the assignment paperwork into escrow so the wholesaler can stay on the phone with sellers. The part that is hard to get comfortable with is that Nebraska and Kentucky have folded public marketing of a contract into their brokerage definitions. The service provider is the one doing the marketing and is a principal on nothing. The wholesaler holds the equitable interest. The provider holds a service agreement. So two questions. Does acting for the principal shield the provider at all, or is that precisely the person those definitions were drafted to reach? And does the compensation structure matter, because $1,500 per closing looks a lot like a commission on a sale. Would a flat monthly retainer of, say, $2,000 change the analysis or just change the optics?