Earlier this year, I was in a room full of real estate regulators viewing a demonstration of an AI-powered consumer outreach call. In the simulation, presented at the 2026 Legal Exchange hosted by the Association of Real Estate License Law Officials (ARELLO), an AI representative attempted to convince a consumer to work with a real estate agent.
The AI voice was polished, conversational and very effective. It asked questions about the consumer’s housing goals, financial position and timeline. It responded naturally to hesitation and kept the consumer engaged long enough to move the conversation toward a potential property search and agent introduction.
Then came the moment that changed the atmosphere in the room.
As the consumer resisted the AI caller’s attempt to “hot transfer” her to a licensed specialist, she mentioned that she was already working with another real estate agent. The AI caller quickly reassured her that this was not a problem and continued the conversation without asking whether the consumer was under an exclusive representation agreement.
Several regulators immediately raised concerns.
- Should there have been an agency disclosure?
- Was there a potential ethical issue in encouraging the consumer to continue the conversation without clarifying her existing relationship with another agent?
- What are the supervisory obligations?
Those are legitimate concerns — assuming the AI system was operating on behalf of a licensed brokerage.
But what if it wasn’t?
What if the AI caller belonged to a technology platform, marketing company or search portal whose business model was not brokerage at all, but advertising and lead generation? What if the company deploying the AI had no intention of representing the consumer in the traditional sense and planned only to sell or transfer the lead to a real estate agent at some later point in the transaction?
That distinction matters because AI can easily blur the line between “technology platform” and “real estate brokerage” in ways the industry is only beginning to confront. My work as an attorney and broker of record for online real estate platforms regularly brings me into discussions with real estate regulators, including how new business models fit within existing licensing laws.
Many regulators tolerate unlicensed online lead generation businesses so long as they remain in a relatively narrow lane — collecting consumer inquiries and referring leads to licensed agents. But AI systems are rapidly expanding beyond that limited role.
The broad potential of AI agents in sales
An AI platform can now do much more than capture contact information. It can recommend properties, answer transactional questions, analyze pricing trends, suggest offer strategies, draft communications and contract language, and guide consumers through increasingly large portions of the buying or selling process without a human agent ever entering the conversation.
If consumers spend days or weeks relying on an AI platform for guidance on homes, pricing and market conditions, many will naturally conclude that the platform is acting in their interest — even when the platform’s actual business model may be advertising, lead monetization or something else. Licensed agents may ultimately appear only at isolated points in the process — to unlock doors, review documents or satisfy compliance requirements — if they appear at all.
That prospect should matter to every real estate professional because it raises a larger question about the future structure of the industry: Who owns the client relationship?
As AI systems gain increasing influence over the consumer relationship — gathering personal information, shaping transaction decisions, and determining when and how agents are introduced into the process — agents risk becoming dependent on platforms that effectively function as digital gatekeepers.
For decades, agents and brokerages have occupied the center of the transaction — but AI threatens to shift much of that influence toward large technology platforms that increasingly control consumer attention, search behavior and transaction flow. In that environment, there is a legitimate question as to whether these platforms need to be subject to the same rules and obligations that govern licensed professionals.
New legislative and industry guidelines
Regulators have not been silent on the rise of artificial intelligence in real estate. In fact, many state agencies, legislatures and industry bodies have issued guidance and imposed affirmative legal obligations governing how AI may be used in the marketing and sale of real property.
For example, California recently enacted legislation addressing AI-generated content and disclosures, and the Department of Real Estate issued an advisory outlining agents’ responsibility for the accuracy and fairness of any AI-generated content.
However, nearly all regulatory activity has been directed at individuals and firms that already hold real estate licenses. As consumer-facing AI systems continue to evolve, regulators will have to confront the question of when the AI platform itself is crossing the line into performing brokerage functions.
Licensed real estate professionals already operate within a framework designed to protect consumers. As a broker licensed in all 50 states, I have seen firsthand how that regulatory framework applies to online real estate platforms and how businesses structure their operations to comply with licensing requirements.
As AI platforms assume a greater role in influencing consumer behavior and transaction decisions, regulators will inevitably have to determine when those platforms cross the line from unlicensed assistance into brokerage activity. When comparable conduct occurs, comparable regulatory responsibilities should follow.
There is a strong case for bringing AI-driven real estate platforms within the licensing framework. At its core, licensure drives accountability. When a company steps inside the licensing system, regulators can gain visibility into how it operates and authority over how it conducts business.
Consumers gain confidence that there is an identifiable actor responsible for the system’s conduct and answerable when problems arise. These principles apply with equal force in an AI-driven environment where consumers may have limited visibility into how information and recommendations are generated or prioritized.
Unfair advantage for unfettered AI platforms
There is also a competitive issue that cannot be ignored. Licensed agents and brokerages operate under extensive obligations involving disclosure rules, advertising standards and disciplinary exposure. If AI platforms are permitted to perform many of the same practical functions while avoiding those obligations, real estate licensees will eventually find themselves competing against entities benefiting from a fundamentally different regulatory framework.
That does not create a level playing field.
AI will certainly become an indispensable tool for agents, brokers, consumers and technology providers alike as innovations lead to a more dynamic and efficient marketplace. The industry’s regulatory framework cannot ignore the reality that technology platforms will expand into functions historically performed by licensed professionals.
As these platforms take on a greater role in real estate transactions, the question will increasingly become where unlicensed assistance ends and brokerage begins. When an AI platform crosses that line, it should be subject to the same standards, oversight and accountability as any other real estate brokerage.
Lee Leslie is CEO of RE50. Get connected on LinkedIn.
