Let’s be honest—most people outside the profession have no real understanding of what it costs to operate an auction business in 2025. There is a common assumption that all expenses should simply be absorbed into the auctioneer’s commission. That idea sounds great in theory, but it ignores economic reality. Commission alone rarely sustains an auction operation once licensing, compliance, staffing, marketing, insurance, technology, and risk are factored in.

Auctioneering is a profession, not a hobby. It is no different than any skilled trade or licensed service. Expecting an auctioneer to work without proper compensation is no more reasonable than asking someone to work a full-time job without pay. It doesn’t happen, and it shouldn’t.

Recently, I reviewed materials sent to me by someone seeking guidance on a specific auction scenario. The company involved heavily promoted “high ethical standards,” yet was neither licensed in the states it claimed to operate in nor affiliated with any recognized professional associations. That distinction matters. There are legitimate auctioneers who are independent, but licensure is not optional. Consumers should always verify licensing through the appropriate state authority before entering into any agreement.

One frequent criticism is that most auctioneers and auction companies do not publicly post their full rate structures, fees, or charges. On the surface, transparency sounds appealing. Publishing rates would allow potential consignors to compare services and decide whether to proceed.

However, the issue is more complicated. Broad publication of standardized pricing across an industry can raise serious antitrust concerns. When competitors align pricing—intentionally or otherwise—it risks violating federal law.

The most common antitrust violation under the Sherman Antitrust Act is price fixing. Price fixing occurs when competitors agree—explicitly or implicitly—to raise, lower, stabilize, or otherwise control prices instead of allowing market forces to operate freely.

That said, simply publishing one’s own rates is not illegal.

A careful reading of the Sherman Antitrust Act makes it clear that a violation requires an agreement between competitors. An auctioneer or auction company independently posting its own commission schedule is not, by itself, price fixing. There must be coordination, collusion, or an understanding among multiple parties to charge the same or similar rates.

Despite this, a simple online search will reveal hundreds—if not thousands—of auctioneers who openly list their pricing models. Common structures include:

• Flat-rate commissions, sometimes as high as 50%, plus labor, marketing, and related expenses
• Sliding-scale commissions, where the percentage decreases as sale prices increase

Some published examples look like this:

• 10% on items selling for $10,000 or more
• 15% on items selling between $5,000 and $10,000
• 20% on items selling under $5,000 (often with a minimum fee)
• Plus labor, marketing, and operational costs

Publishing such rates does not mean the auctioneer has agreed to match competitors. It simply discloses what that particular company charges for its services.

The legal line is crossed only when multiple auctioneers in the same market agree—formally or informally—to charge the same rates in an effort to eliminate competition. Proving such a violation typically requires evidence of coordination, communication, or intent beyond mere public disclosure.

A well-known example is the case against Sotheby’s, filed in October 2000. The U.S. government alleged that between 1993 and 1999, Sotheby’s and others conspired to fix seller commission rates domestically and internationally, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The case involved evidence of coordinated pricing decisions, shared customer information, non-negotiable commission schedules, and agreements designed to suppress competition.

That case illustrates the difference between transparency and collusion.

For individuals, trustees, executors, executrixes, or companies deciding how best to sell real estate or personal property, the focus should not be on chasing the lowest fee. The real question is value. Results matter. Compliance matters. Experience matters.

The right auctioneer or auction company is the one that delivers the best outcome—not the one that promises the cheapest path.