Who does the onsite salesperson at a builder's model home work for?

The builder. And in Texas that person may not be required to hold a real estate license at all. The Occupations Code exempts "a person employed by an owner in the sale of structures" where the structures "are erected by the owner in the course of the owner's business." A builder selling its own houses fits that description closely.

That one sentence explains most of what buyers find confusing about new construction. The person at the model home is professional, knowledgeable, and almost always pleasant. They know the floor plans, the lot premiums, the incentive sheet and the construction schedule better than any outside agent does. What they are not is yours. And depending on how they are employed, the body of Texas law that creates duties between agents and buyers may not apply to them in the first place.

This page walks through what the statute and the rules actually print, in order, and then sets out what each of the three possible people behind that desk owes you. It explains process. It is not legal advice, and where a question turns on a particular person's employment arrangement, that is a question for that person and, if the answer matters to you, for your own attorney.

Why isn't the onsite salesperson simply a real estate agent?

Some are. Many hold a Texas real estate license and work for a brokerage affiliated with the builder. But the licensing chapter of the Occupations Code — the Texas Real Estate License Act, usually called TRELA — opens its applicability section with the words "This chapter does not apply to:" and then lists twelve categories of person and transaction.

The sixth of those is the one that matters here. Quoted exactly:

"a person employed by an owner in the sale of structures and land on which structures are located if the structures are erected by the owner in the course of the owner's business"

Read it against what a production homebuilder does. The builder owns the land. The builder erects the structures. Selling those houses is the course of the builder's business. A person the builder employs to sell them is, on the face of the provision, outside the licensing chapter.

Two things are worth saying plainly about that. First, the provision does not mention builders, homebuilders, model homes or new construction anywhere. It is drafted in general terms and the application to a builder is a reading of general words, not a sentence anyone can point to. Second, the provision turns on words the section does not define — "employed by an owner," "erected by the owner," "in the course of the owner's business." Whether a given onsite salesperson falls inside it depends on facts about their employment that are not visible from the sales office.

What you can take from it is the shape of the thing: Texas has an exemption that a builder's own sales employee may well sit inside, and nobody at the model home is obliged to volunteer which side of it they are on.

What does TREC's own rule say about an owner's employee?

The Texas Real Estate Commission has a rule that runs parallel to the statutory exemption. It is 22 Texas Administrative Code §535.5, titled "License Not Required," and subsection (c) reads in full:

"A real estate license is not required for an individual employed by a business entity for the purpose of buying, selling, or leasing real property for the entity. An entity is considered to be an owner if it holds record title to the property or has an equitable title or right acquired by contract with the record title holder. An individual employed by a business entity means a person employed and directly compensated by the business entity. An independent contractor is not an employee."

Three details in that paragraph do real work.

The entity has to own the property. The rule defines ownership two ways — record title, or an equitable title or right acquired by contract with the record title holder. A builder that has closed on the dirt satisfies the first. A builder working under a contract with a land developer may satisfy the second.

The person has to be an employee, and paid as one. The rule says "employed and directly compensated by the business entity." That is narrower than it sounds in conversation.

An independent contractor is not an employee. The rule says so in a sentence of its own. So a salesperson engaged as a contractor rather than an employee does not reach the exemption by this route, whatever the sign on the desk says.

The Commission's own public FAQ gives the same answer in plainer words. Asked whether an employee of a corporation that owns property needs a license to sell or lease it, TREC answers: "No. A real estate license is not required for an individual employed by a property owner for the purpose of buying or selling real property on behalf of the owner."

Notice that TREC's paraphrase drops the three qualifiers. It says "employed by a property owner" and stops. The rule says "employed and directly compensated," and excludes independent contractors. If you are trying to work out where a particular person stands, the rule text is the version to read.

Is a license needed just to show you the house?

Yes, as a general matter — and the definition of "showing" is broader than most buyers assume. The companion rule, 22 TAC §535.4, is titled "License Required," and subsection (c) reads:

"Unless otherwise exempted by the Act, a person must be licensed as a broker or sales agent to show a property. For purposes of this section, to 'show' a property includes causing or permitting the property to be viewed by a prospective buyer or tenant, unlocking or providing access onto or into a property for a prospective buyer or tenant, and hosting an open house at the property."

Unlocking a door for a prospective buyer is showing. Hosting an open house is showing. Walking you through a model home is, on that definition, showing you a property.

But look at how the subsection opens: "Unless otherwise exempted by the Act." The exemption route described above is exactly such an exemption. So §535.4(c) does not close the loop — it states the general requirement and then points back at the exceptions.

There is one more provision in §535.5 worth knowing, because it tells you how little an unlicensed person has to be able to do:

"An answering service or clerical or administrative employees identified to callers as such to confirm information concerning the size, price, and terms of property advertised are not required to be licensed under the Act."

"Size, price, and terms." Hold on to that phrase. It reappears in the 2026 statute, in a different place, doing a very similar job.

What changed on 1 January 2026, and who does it bind?

Two new sections of TRELA took effect at the start of 2026, and between them they rewrote how showings work in Texas. They are the reason buyers are now asked to sign something before they are shown a house.

The first is §1101.563, "Written Agreement Required." Its operative subsection reads:

"A license holder who performs any act of real estate brokerage for a prospective buyer of residential real property must enter into a written agreement with the prospective buyer before: (1) showing any residential real property to the prospective buyer; or (2) if no residential real property will be shown, presenting an offer to purchase residential real property on behalf of the prospective buyer."

The section defines "residential real property" as a single-family house, a duplex, triplex or quadraplex, or a condominium or co-operative unit. A new build in a DFW subdivision is squarely inside that.

The agreement has to say six things. Quoting the list:

"(A) the services to be provided by the license holder; (B) the termination date of the agreement; (C) whether the agreement is exclusive or non-exclusive; (D) as applicable, that the license holder: (i) represents the prospective buyer as the buyer's agent; or (ii) does not represent the prospective buyer as the buyer's agent if the only act of real estate brokerage being performed is showing real property under Section 1101.562; and (E) the amount or rate of compensation the broker will receive and how this amount will be determined"

— plus a requirement to "disclose in conspicuous language that broker compensation is not set by law and is fully negotiable."

Two limits apply to the showing-only version of that agreement. It "may not be an exclusive agreement with the license holder," and it may not "state a termination date more than fourteen days from the date the agreement is entered into." And if the relationship goes further than a showing, a separate agreement is required: a license holder who signed a showing-only agreement "shall enter into a separate agreement with the prospective buyer if additional real estate brokerage acts are to be provided after showing the real property."

Now read the first five words of the operative subsection again. "A license holder who performs any act of real estate brokerage." The duty is imposed on license holders. That is the hinge of this entire page. If the person showing you the model home is an unlicensed employee of the builder, operating inside the exemption, §1101.563 does not reach them. There is no written agreement to sign, because the section that would require one is addressed to someone else.

What must a license holder tell you, and when?

The second relevant section is §1101.558, "Representation Disclosure," and it predates the 2026 changes. Its core duty reads:

"A license holder who represents a party in a proposed real estate transaction shall disclose, orally or in writing, that representation at the time of the license holder's first contact with: (1) another party to the transaction; or (2) another license holder who represents another party to the transaction."

So a licensed onsite salesperson who represents the builder has to tell you so, orally or in writing, at first contact. Not at contract. Not when you ask. At first contact.

There is a second, separate duty — a written notice:

"At the time of a license holder's first substantive communication with a party relating to a proposed transaction regarding specific real property, the license holder shall provide to the party written notice in at least a 10-point font that: (1) describes the ways in which a broker can represent a party to a real estate transaction, including as an intermediary; (2) describes the basic duties and obligations a broker has to a party to a real estate transaction that the broker represents; (3) describes the basic obligations a broker has to a party to a real estate transaction that the broker does not represent; and (4) provides the name, license number, and contact information for the license holder and the license holder's supervisor and broker, if applicable."

This is the provision behind the form Texas buyers are handed at first meeting. The statute itself does not name that form; it says the Commission "by rule shall prescribe the text of the notice" and establish how it must be delivered.

And then there are three situations in which that written notice is not required. Quoted in full, because the third one is directly relevant to a model home:

"(1) the proposed transaction is for a residential lease for less than one year and a sale is not being considered; (2) the license holder meets with a party who the license holder knows is represented by another license holder; or (3) the communication occurs at a property that is held open for any prospective buyer or tenant and the communication concerns that property."

A builder's model home is open to any prospective buyer who walks in, and the conversation there concerns that property and others in the community. Whether a model home is a "property that is held open" within the meaning of this exception is not something any source read for this page decides, and the statute does not mention model homes. But the exception exists, it is drafted in general terms, and it removes the written-notice duty where it applies. The first-contact disclosure duty in the subsection above is a separate duty with no such exception attached to it.

Can someone show you a house without representing you?

Since 2026, yes — explicitly, and on conditions. That is §1101.562, "Real Property Showings Without Representation," and it is short enough to quote whole:

"(a) A broker may show real property available for sale or lease to a party without representing the party if the broker: (1) has not agreed with the party, either orally or in writing, to represent the party; (2) is not otherwise acting as the party's agent at the time of showing the real property; (3) does not provide to the party opinions or advice regarding the real property or real estate transactions in general; and (4) does not perform any other act of real estate brokerage for the party.

(b) Before a broker may show real property under Subsection (a), the broker must, as applicable: (1) disclose to the party as required by Section 1101.558(b) if the broker represents the owner of the real property; or (2) provide to the party the written notice described by Section 1101.558(b-1) if the broker does not represent the owner of the real property.

(c) Notwithstanding Subsections (a)(3) and (4), a broker showing real property under this section may confirm information to a party regarding the size, price, and terms of the real property available for sale or lease."

Subsection (c) is the sentence to remember. A broker showing you a property without representing you may confirm size, price, and terms. That is the same three-item list that appears in §535.5(f) for answering services and clerical staff. The legislature drew the line at the same place twice: facts about the listing, yes; opinions and advice, no.

Which means that when a licensed but non-representing person at a model home declines to tell you whether the lot premium is worth it, or whether to waive something, that is not evasion. Subsection (a)(3) makes the showing conditional on a broker who "does not provide to the party opinions or advice regarding the real property or real estate transactions in general." Giving you that opinion would take them outside the conditions that let them show you the house without representing you.

So what does each of the three people actually owe you?

There are three possibilities behind that desk, and they are not interchangeable. This table sets out what the provisions quoted above require of each. It describes the duties the sources print; it is not a prediction about how any individual behaves.

	Unlicensed builder employee (inside the exemption)	Licensed agent representing the builder	Licensed agent representing you
Whose interests they act for	The builder's	The builder's	Yours
Must disclose whom they represent at first contact	No — §1101.558 addresses license holders	Yes, orally or in writing, per §1101.558(b)	Yes, to the other party, per §1101.558(b)
Must give you the written representation notice	No	Yes at first substantive communication, subject to the three exceptions in §1101.558(c)	Yes, same provision
Must sign a written agreement with you before showing you a home	No — §1101.563 addresses license holders	Only if performing an act of brokerage for you; otherwise they may show under §1101.562	Yes, per §1101.563
May give you opinions or advice on the property	Not regulated by these provisions	No, if showing under §1101.562 — only size, price and terms	Yes; that is the service
Regulated by TREC	Not as a license holder	Yes	Yes
Who pays them	The builder	The builder	By written agreement with you, at a rate the statute requires be disclosed as negotiable

The middle column is where most of the confusion lives. A licensed agent who works for the builder has real duties to you — a first-contact disclosure, and in most settings a written notice — but those duties are duties of candour, not duties of loyalty. The loyalty runs the other way.

What does this mean on your first visit?

Three practical points follow from the material above, and one from the builders themselves.

Ask, early, in plain words. "Do you hold a Texas real estate license, and who do you represent in this transaction?" A license holder representing the builder is required to answer the second half at first contact anyway. Someone operating inside the exemption is not covered by that duty, which is itself the answer you are looking for.

Understand what the signature is and is not. If you are asked to sign something before being shown a home, the written-agreement section is likely in play, and the version used for a showing alone cannot be exclusive and cannot run more than fourteen days. The section also requires it to state, in conspicuous language, that broker compensation is not set by law and is fully negotiable. Read the box that says whether the person represents you.

If you want your own agent, bring them to the first visit. This is not a legal requirement; it is a condition builders impose themselves, and it is the single most common way buyers lose their own representation in new construction. KB Home publishes its conditions openly. In the builder's words: "Please remember to register your clients on their first visit. You will also need to confirm that a Written Buyer-broker Agreement (WBA) has been signed and share commission details at this visit." Its broker co-operation footnote sets out four requirements, including "accompany client at first visit" and "submit a signed WBA that predates the buyer's purchase agreement at time of sales contract," and adds two provisos: the customer must contract within 60 days, and "No other broker or agent is present as the representative of Customer at the time of execution of the Purchase Agreement by Customer."

Note what that document does and does not say. It states conditions for payment. It does not state a consequence for failing them, and nothing on the page says what happens if a buyer visits alone. Three other national builders' agent pages could not be read at all for this article. So treat registration timing as builder-by-builder, ask before the first visit rather than after, and get the particular builder's own written terms rather than assuming KB Home's apply.

One related point on paperwork. The contract you sign for a new home is usually the builder's own, not the Commission's promulgated form. The Commission's form rule permits that, because one of its listed exceptions covers a contract form prepared by the property owner — and a builder selling its own houses is the property owner. That exception carries no disclosure requirement of any kind, which is why nobody is obliged to point out to you that you are not looking at the standard Texas contract. That rule text was researched for a companion page on 12 October 2026 and read there from secondary restatements only; it is noted here for orientation rather than quoted.

What this page does not establish

Being straight about the gaps is part of the answer.

• None of the statutory or rule text quoted here was read from an official government copy of the law. The Occupations Code sections come from two commercial publishers. The Administrative Code rules come from two more. Where those publishers agreed word for word, that is said below; where they differed, that is said too. The Legislature's own statutory website served no text at all when it was tried for a page on 16 October 2026.
• No source read for this page addresses homebuilders or model homes. The words "builder" and "model" do not appear in §535.4 or §535.5. The exemption in §1101.005(6) does not mention builders. Every statement here about how those provisions apply to a builder's sales office is a reading of general words.
• TREC appears to publish an FAQ titled "Do I need a license to sell a builder's new houses?" — that is the page title served at its URL. The body served at that address was TREC's general FAQ collection, read in full, and that question is not in it. So TREC's own answer to the exact question could not be quoted. TREC does say elsewhere, flatly: "TREC does not have jurisdiction over builders."
• Whether any particular onsite salesperson is licensed, and how they are employed and paid, is not something this or any page can tell you. Ask them.
• Nothing here is legal advice, and no part of it should be read as drafting, interpreting or altering contract language. A question about your own transaction belongs with your own agent, and a question about the legal effect of a document belongs with an attorney.

Sources

Each entry notes whether it is a primary or a secondary source, because on this topic the distinction matters.

1. Texas Occupations Code §1101.005 (Applicability of Chapter) — read 17 October 2026 from two secondary restatements: codes.findlaw.com/tx/occupations-code/occ-sect-1101-005/, labelled "Current as of January 01, 2026," and texas.public.law/statutes/tex._occ._code_section_1101.005, labelled "Verified: May 26, 2025." Exemptions (1) through (7) match word for word on both hosts, including exemption (6) quoted above. The hosts disagree on later items: FindLaw prints subdivisions (10) through (12), which do not appear on the public.law page at all, and the two word subdivision (9)(A) differently. public.law also inserts a cross-reference title parenthetically inside the text of subdivision (4) — an editorial addition, not statutory language. Neither host is the official text.
2. Texas Occupations Code §1101.558 (Representation Disclosure) — read 17 October 2026 from the same two secondary hosts. Subsections (b), (b-2) and (c) match word for word. The hosts disagree on (b-1): FindLaw prints four numbered items, public.law prints three, omitting the item on a broker's obligations to a party the broker does not represent. The four-item version is quoted above because it is the fuller text, and the discrepancy is flagged rather than resolved. public.law prints an Acts history whose last entry is 2015, S.B. 699, effective 1 January 2016.
3. Texas Occupations Code §1101.562 (Real Property Showings Without Representation) and §1101.563 (Written Agreement Required) — read 17 October 2026 from one secondary host only, codes.findlaw.com, labelled "Current as of January 01, 2026." The corresponding public.law addresses returned that site's statutes index rather than either section, so there is no second host corroboration for these two sections, and no enacting Act or effective date was printed on either page. The 1 January 2026 commencement stated above comes from the Commission's own January 2026 explanatory article, researched for a companion page on 5 October 2026.
4. 22 Texas Administrative Code §535.5 (License Not Required) and §535.4 (License Required) — read 17 October 2026 from two secondary restatements, Cornell Legal Information Institute and Justia, which match in wording and in subsection lettering throughout. Justia prints "Current through Reg. 50, No. 26; June 27, 2025." Cornell prints no currency date; the latest amendment in its history note for each section is effective 1 January 2024. The official Secretary of State copy was not read.
5. Texas Real Estate Commission, Frequently Asked Questions — primary for TREC's own guidance, though TREC's guidance is not rule text. Read in full on 17 October 2026 at trec.texas.gov/node/312. Source of the employee-of-an-owner answer and of "TREC does not have jurisdiction over builders." Caution: TREC's FAQ cites rule subsection letters that do not match the Administrative Code text on either Cornell or Justia — it cites both 535.5(c) and 535.5(d) for the same employee point, where only (c) carries it, and cites 535.4(i) and 535.4(k) for points those subsections do not carry. The subsection letters in TREC's FAQ should not be relied on.
6. KB Home, "For Real Estate Agents" (kbhome.com/for-agents) — primary for that builder's own published terms, read 17 October 2026. A national page with a Texas state selector, not a Texas-specific document; its broker-cooperation footnote is dated "©2025 KB Home (KBH)." It states conditions for broker payment and does not state a consequence for failing them. The page does not say whom its sales staff represent.
7. Lennar, Perry Homes and David Weekley Homes agent pages — attempted 17 October 2026 at lennar.com/realtor, perryhomes.com/realtors and davidweekleyhomes.com/realtors. All three returned client errors and no builder terms other than KB Home's were read for this page.