Monthly Archives :

September 2025

Eminent domain laws in Arizona for 2024 continues to be a critical issue for property owners, understanding the legal expectations pertinent to these proceedings is increasingly vital.

Arizona’s Eminent Domain Laws: What Every Landowner, Investor, and Developer Should Know

Arizona’s Eminent Domain Laws: What Every Landowner, Investor, and Developer Should Know 1920 1280 Gottlieb Law

Gottlieb Law, PLC provides this article for informational purposes only. Nothing herein creates an attorney–client relationship. You should not act on any of the information contained without consulting qualified legal counsel. Laws change over time, and you should seek legal advice about your specific situation.

Understanding Eminent Domain in Arizona

If you own property in Arizona or are planning to develop land, it’s important to understand how eminent domain works. In a fast-growing state, governments and certain private entities regularly acquire property for infrastructure, utilities, and other public purposes.

At its core, eminent domain is the power to take private property for a “public use,” so long as the owner is paid “just compensation.” This requirement comes from both the U.S. Constitution (Fifth Amendment) and the Arizona Constitution (Article 2, § 17).

Who Can Exercise Eminent Domain?

While eminent domain is most often associated with city, county, or state governments, Arizona law also authorizes certain private entities to use it when the legislature has granted the power. These include utility companies, railroads, and pipeline operators. The authority comes primarily from Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 12-1111 through 12-1129.

What Protections Do Landowners Have?

Property owners are not powerless. Arizona law sets out strict requirements to ensure fairness:

  • Public Use Requirement – The taking must be for a valid public purpose, such as roads, utilities, schools, or other community infrastructure.
  • Just Compensation – Owners must be paid fair market value for the property taken, which may include damages for partial takings.
  • Procedural Safeguards – Courts oversee the process to ensure compliance with statutory deadlines and constitutional protections.
  • Proposition 207 Protections (A.R.S. § 12-1134) – Arizona provides additional protection against “regulatory takings,” where land use restrictions reduce property value without a direct taking.

Why This Matters

Eminent domain is not rare in Arizona — it often arises in highway expansions, light rail projects, and utility easements. Understanding the process, the defenses available, and how compensation is calculated can make the difference between a fair resolution and a costly loss.

The Legal Landscape: What Authorizes Eminent Domain in Arizona?

Eminent domain in Arizona is governed by both the Arizona Constitution and a detailed statutory framework (A.R.S. §§ 12-1111 through 12-1129). These laws specify who may take property, under what circumstances, and what procedures must be followed.

Under the Arizona Constitution (Article II, § 17), property may be taken only for a public use and only if the owner is paid just compensation. Importantly, the Constitution makes clear that it is the courts—not lawmakers or agencies—that decide whether a use truly qualifies as “public.” This means property owners have the right to challenge not only the amount of compensation, but also the very legitimacy of the taking itself.

Arizona law also provides additional protection through the Private Property Rights Protection Act (Proposition 207, codified at A.R.S. § 12-1134). This statute requires compensation if new land-use regulations reduce a property’s fair market value, unless narrow exceptions apply. It also prevents condemnations that primarily benefit private parties.

The Process for Eminent Domain in Arizona

Arizona statutes require condemning authorities to follow a strict, step-by-step process. Any misstep can delay or even invalidate the taking:

  1. Resolution of Necessity – The government agency (or, in limited cases, a utility or special district) must adopt a formal resolution declaring the need for the property.
  2. Notice and Offer – The owner receives formal notice, along with a written offer based on an appraisal of fair market value.
  3. Negotiation – The parties may attempt to settle voluntarily.
  4. Court Filing – If no agreement is reached, the condemning authority files a complaint in superior court and deposits its estimate of just compensation.
  5. Early Possession – Once the deposit is made, the authority may take possession of the property before final judgment.
  6. Trial and Valuation – If unresolved, a jury (unless waived) determines just compensation, including damages for partial takings.
  7. Two-Year Bar on Refiling – If the case is dismissed before payment, the condemning authority cannot bring a new action for two years.

These safeguards ensure that property owners have multiple opportunities to contest both procedure and valuation.

What Counts as “Public Use” in Arizona?

Arizona’s definition of public use rests on three pillars:

  1. Arizona Constitution (Art. II, § 17): Prohibits takings for private use and requires judicial review of whether a claimed public purpose is valid.
  2. Proposition 207 (A.R.S. § 12-1134): Bars condemnations that primarily benefit private entities and provides compensation for certain regulatory takings.
  3. Arizona Eminent Domain Statutes (A.R.S. §§ 12-1111 et seq.): Establish procedures and reinforce that property may be taken only for authorized public uses.

An important case on this issue is Bailey v. Myers, 206 Ariz. 224, 76 P.3d 898 (App. 2003). There, the Arizona Court of Appeals struck down a proposed condemnation for a private retail redevelopment, holding that public benefits and characteristics must substantially predominate over private interests for a taking to qualify as public use under the Arizona Constitution.

Constitutional Foundation: Article II § 17

    • “No Private Use” Rule
      • Arizona’s Constitution provides some of the strongest property protections in the country. Article II, § 17 flatly prohibits taking private property for private use, except in narrow cases such as private ways of necessity or mining ditches. It also requires just compensation in money before a taking is effective. For corporate condemnors (other than municipal corporations), compensation must be paid in full, without offsets for “benefits” from the project.
  • Judicial Review Requirement
  • The final sentence of Article II, § 17 makes Arizona unique:  “Whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public.”
  • This means courts, not legislatures or agencies, decide whether a use is truly public. Judicial review is independent and cannot be bypassed by legislative declarations. This principle was central in Bailey v. Myers, where the Arizona Court of Appeals invalidated a retail redevelopment taking because public benefits did not “substantially predominate” over private interests.
  • Historical Context
  • Arizona adopted this provision at statehood in 1912, reflecting deep mistrust of unchecked eminent domain power. Early cases such as Inspiration Consol. Copper Co. v. New Keystone Copper Co., 16 Ariz. 257, 144 P. 277 (1914), confirmed that Article II, § 17 must be read strictly to protect landowners, limiting private takings to the narrow exceptions expressly listed in the Constitution.

Statutory Safeguards

These constitutional limits are reinforced in Arizona’s eminent domain statutes (A.R.S. §§ 12-1111 to 12-1129). The statutes:

  • Define the permissible categories of public use;
  • Require a resolution of necessity before filing;
  • Allow early possession upon deposit of estimated compensation; and
  • Impose a two-year bar on refiling if a case is dismissed before compensation is paid.

Together, the Constitution and statutes create one of the most property-owner-protective eminent domain frameworks in the country.

Proposition 207: The Private Property Rights Protection Act (2006)

In 2006, Arizona voters approved Proposition 207 in response to Kelo v. City of New London (2005). Codified at A.R.S. § 12-1134, it provides that:

  • Takings for economic development are not public use. The statute expressly excludes general economic benefits such as higher tax revenue or jobs from qualifying as “public use.”
  • Regulatory takings are compensable. Landowners are entitled to just compensation if a new land use law reduces their property’s fair market value, unless the government issues a waiver or the regulation falls within limited exceptions (e.g., public health, safety, nuisance abatement).

This reform made Arizona’s eminent domain protections among the strongest in the nation.

Federal Precedents and Arizona’s Response

In Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a city may use eminent domain for a comprehensive economic-development plan, treating “public use” as a broad public-purpose inquiry with strong deference to legislative judgments. Arizona voters reacted swiftly: Proposition 207 (2006)—codified at A.R.S. §§ 12-1131–1138—explicitly excludes ‘public benefits of economic development’ from qualifying (see A.R.S. § 12-1136(5)).

For regulatory takings, Arizona courts primarily apply Ariz. Const. art. II, § 17 and A.R.S. § 12-1134, while federal precedents remain informative.

Practical Takeaways for Property Owners and Developers

  • For Property Owners: If a proposed taking primarily benefits a private developer, you may challenge it under Article II, § 17 and A.R.S. § 12-1134(A)(4). Early legal review of the condemnor’s “resolution of necessity” and appraisals can expose weaknesses in the public-use rationale.
  • For Developers and Municipalities: Ensure any project tied to condemnation has a clear public-use component (road, park, safety improvement). Where possible, rely on voluntary acquisitions (contracts, options) to avoid litigation risk.
  • For Land-Use Planning: Developers should evaluate potential Prop 207 regulatory-takings risks before launch. Municipalities can mitigate liability by offering waivers or variances rather than imposing regulations that reduce property values.

Valuation: What Counts as “Just Compensation”?

In Arizona, just compensation means the fair market value of your property on the date of the taking:

  • Fair Market Value: What a willing buyer would pay a willing seller in an open market.
  • Highest and Best Use: Compensation must reflect the most profitable legal use of the property, even if you’re not currently using it that way.
  • Project Influence Rule: The value cannot be inflated (or reduced) by the very project causing the taking.
  • Partial Takings: If only part of your land is taken, you may also recover severance damages—the loss in value to the remainder of your property.

Government appraisals often come in low. Property owners have the right to present their own expert valuations, and juries—not agencies—decide the final number if the case goes to trial.

Defenses Against Eminent Domain in Arizona

Landowners are not powerless. Arizona law gives you multiple avenues to fight back:

  • Challenge Public Use: Under Article II, § 17 and A.R.S. § 12-1134, courts—not agencies—decide whether a taking is truly for public use.
  • Question Necessity: You can argue the project could be built elsewhere or that the scope of land being taken is excessive.
  • Contest Valuation: You may reject the government’s deposit and demand a jury trial on just compensation.
  • Enforce Procedure: If the condemnor skips a statutory step—like notice, deposit, or a resolution of necessity—you may move to dismiss the action.

Strong procedural safeguards mean missteps by condemning authorities can delay or derail the taking entirely.

Examples of Eminent Domain in Arizona

Eminent domain shows up in many contexts:

  • Transportation: ADOT’s I-17 and Loop 202 expansions have required taking residential and commercial parcels.
  • Utilities: Water, electric, and gas corridors often affect rural and suburban landowners.
  • Flood Control: Maricopa County has condemned land for retention basins, levees, and emergency access.

These takings affect not only land, but also business operations, farming, and access rights, which can significantly increase compensation claims.

Why This Matters

By understanding valuation rules and defenses, landowners can avoid leaving money on the table and ensure condemnors meet every legal obligation.

What Developers and Investors Should Know

Eminent domain can sometimes play a role in making large-scale development possible—for example, when a city needs to build new roads, utilities, or drainage improvements tied to a project. But the law requires that the primary benefit remain with the public, not private investors. Developers should:

  • Structure carefully: Ensure the government—not the private project—is the direct beneficiary of any condemnation.
  • Avoid private-benefit takings: Lobbying for condemnations that primarily benefit a private project risks invalidation under the Arizona Constitution and the Private Property Rights Protection Act.
  • Plan for costs and delays: Appraisal disputes, court deposits, and potential challenges can affect project timelines.
  • Evaluate land-use risk: New overlays, rezonings, or infrastructure funding measures may trigger regulatory-takings claims under Proposition 207.

Early legal guidance can help developers reduce these risks and keep projects compliant.

Regulatory Takings: The Private Property Rights Protection Act

Eminent domain is not the only way property rights are impacted. Arizona’s Private Property Rights Protection Act (Proposition 207, 2006; A.R.S. § 12-1134) also protects owners from certain land-use regulations:

  • Compensation Right: If a newly enacted regulation reduces the property’s fair market value, the owner may demand compensation.
  • Waiver Alternative: Instead of paying, the government can grant a waiver, allowing the property to be used under prior rules.
  • 90-Day Response: After a property owner submits a written demand for compensation, the government has 90 days to either pay, repeal/amend the law, or issue a waiver. If the regulation still applies after 90 days, the owner may file suit

Limits: Some regulations are exempt, such as those addressing public health, safety, or nuisances, and owners must file within 90 days of the law’s enactment or application.

How Gottlieb Law Supports Clients

Whether defending against condemnation or structuring a complex development, Gottlieb Law’s attorneys can provide targeted counsel across Arizona real estate law.

  • For Property Owners: Guidance from early strategy through trial and appeal, ensuring just compensation and strict enforcement of procedural protections.
  • For Developers and Investors: Advice on public-private partnerships, land-use compliance, condemnation risks, and Proposition 207 assessments to keep projects on track.

The firm also handles zoning and leasing legal issues and offers comprehensive support for Arizona real estate clients.

Protect Your Arizona Property: Why You Need Skilled Eminent Domain Attorneys

Eminent domain and regulatory takings aren’t abstract legal issues—they affect homes, investments, and development projects across Arizona. The state’s Constitution and statutes give landowners unusually strong protections, but those protections only matter if you know how to assert them. From contesting whether a taking is truly for public use to challenging undervalued appraisals, every detail counts.

At Gottlieb Law, our attorneys focus on Arizona real estate and property law. We guide clients through Arizona real estate issues, which can include condemnation threats, valuation disputes, and regulatory takings claims, combining deep knowledge of Arizona’s real estate landscape with hands-on courtroom experience. Whether you’re facing a government demand or planning a project that could trigger land-use disputes, we help you protect your rights and move forward confidently.

Call Gottlieb Law today at 602-899-8188 or use our Contact Us page here to schedule your initial consultation.

This article is provided by Gottlieb Law, PLC for informational purposes only and does not create an attorney–client relationship. You should not rely on the information contained herein without first consulting qualified legal counsel regarding your specific situation. Laws change over time, and the application of law varies based on individual facts. For advice tailored to your circumstances, please seek guidance from a licensed attorney.

Arizona Rental Tax Ban 2025 - What Landlords and Tenants Need to Know - Gottlieb Law - Arizona Real Estate Lawyers

Arizona Rental Tax Ban: What Landlords and Tenants Need to Know for 2025

Arizona Rental Tax Ban: What Landlords and Tenants Need to Know for 2025 1045 697 Gottlieb Law

Gottlieb Law, PLC provides this article for informational purposes only. Nothing herein creates an attorney–client relationship. Reading this article is not a substitute for seeking advice tailored to your situation. Laws change over time, and you should consult qualified legal counsel regarding any specific questions.



Understanding Arizona’s Rental Tax Ban and What It Means for 2025

Starting January 1, 2025, Arizona will eliminate the residential rental transaction privilege tax (TPT). For years, many cities and towns required landlords to collect this local tax—often 2–4%—on rent payments.

The new statewide ban applies only to residential rentals of 30 days or more (not commercial leases). It overrides local city and town authority, meaning landlords across Arizona can no longer collect or remit residential rental tax, even if their municipality previously required it.

For tenants, this means monthly rent bills should drop by the amount of the former rental tax. For landlords, it simplifies compliance and reduces reporting obligations, but it also requires careful adjustments. Lease agreements that currently say “plus applicable rental tax” must be updated, and landlords should stop charging the tax immediately as of January 1. Landlords will also need to file their final December 2024 TPT return and close out their rental TPT license if it applied only to residential properties.

Legislative Background: The Foundation of the Rental Tax Ban

Amendment to A.R.S. § 42-6004(H)

Recently, the Arizona Legislature amended A.R.S. § 42-6004 to add subsection (H). The statute provides that “from and after December 31, 2024, a city, town, or other taxing jurisdiction may not levy a transaction privilege, sales, gross receipts, use, franchise or other similar tax or fee on the business of renting or leasing real property for residential purposes.”

In practical terms, this means that starting with January 2025 rent, municipalities can no longer collect residential rental TPT. The prohibition applies statewide.

What the Amendment Means for Cities and Towns

This statutory change eliminates more than $230 million in annual municipal revenue once generated by taxing residential rentals. Cities and towns will need to adjust their budgets accordingly. For tenants, the benefit is direct — rental bills should drop by the amount of the repealed tax.

For landlords, the law simplifies compliance but requires attention to lease language, billing systems, and tax filings during the transition.

Key Changes for Landlords to Implement

Automatic Cancellation of TPT Licenses

Effective December 31, 2024, the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR) automatically canceled TPT licenses that were limited to business code 045 (Residential Rental, Leasing & Licensing for Use).

  • Landlords who only rented residential property no longer need a license.

  • Landlords who also lease commercial property must maintain their license for those activities.

Ceasing Collection of TPT Charges

From January 2025 forward, landlords must stop charging residential rental TPT. Continuing to bill tenants for the repealed tax violates state law and may lead to penalties or tenant disputes. Gottlieb Law recommends that landlords audit their billing systems immediately to ensure no residual tax charges appear on rent statements.

Updating Lease Agreements and Billing Systems

Residential leases signed before 2025 may include language such as “plus applicable rental tax.” Landlords should:

  • Amend leases to remove TPT references.

  • Update property management and accounting software to reflect the elimination.

  • Notify tenants so expectations are clear.

These updates are essential to maintain compliance and avoid over-collection.

Exemptions to Keep in Mind

The ban applies only to residential rentals of 30 days or more. The following remain taxable under Arizona’s TPT system:

  • Commercial leases
  • Short-term rentals under 30 days
  • Health care and long-term care facilities
  • Hotels, motels, and other transient lodging

What Tenants Should Know About the Rental Tax Ban

Expected Rent Savings Starting in 2025

With the elimination of the residential rental TPT, tenants statewide are projected to save more than $230 million annually. Rent payments that previously included a city tax should decrease beginning with January 2025 rent.

Tenants should carefully review rent statements to confirm that no TPT charges appear after December 31, 2024.

Reviewing Rent Statements and Lease Terms

Even though the tax ban is automatic, oversights can occur. If a tenant sees TPT still listed on a rent bill in 2025, the first step is to notify the landlord in writing and request correction.

If the charge continues, tenants may seek help from a qualified attorney or file a complaint with the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR). The law places the burden of proof on landlords to show that any additional charges are not improperly tied to repealed TPT.

Tenant Rights and How to Act

Arizona tenants have the right to pay rent without being charged a tax that no longer applies. Tenants who believe they are being billed unlawfully should:

  1. Document rent statements and lease provisions.

  2. Contact the landlord promptly for clarification.

  3. Seek legal counsel or assistance if the problem persists.

Gottlieb Law assists renters with understanding their options, enforcing compliance, and protecting tenant rights under Arizona’s new framework.

Compliance and Enforcement in 2025

Legal Risks of Non-Compliance

Landlords who continue to collect residential rental TPT after January 1, 2025 risk:

  • Enforcement actions from ADOR.

  • Audits and penalties for improper billing.

  • Potential tenant disputes or litigation if overcharges are not corrected.

Government Oversight and Resources

The Arizona Department of Revenue is responsible for implementing the new rules and provides official guidance online. Both landlords and tenants can access compliance updates, FAQs, and support resources through AZTaxes.gov and the ADOR Residential Rental team.

Registering with County Assessors

Although the TPT requirement is eliminated, landlords must still register residential rental properties with their county assessor. This separate requirement remains in force, and penalties can apply for failing to register. Tenants may also check public assessor records to confirm that their rental property is properly registered.

Preparing for Arizona Rental Tax Changes: What You Need to Do Next

The elimination of residential rental TPT in Arizona reshapes how landlords, tenants, and property managers handle rental transactions. Here’s what to keep in mind moving forward:

  • Landlords should update lease agreements, remove TPT billing, and confirm that all property management and accounting systems reflect the new tax rules beginning January 2025.

  • Tenants should carefully review rent statements in 2025 and understand their rights if unlawful TPT charges appear.

  • Property managers should train staff and revise internal procedures to maintain compliance with Arizona’s updated requirements.

  • All parties must understand the statutory exemptions and remember that rental properties must still be registered with county assessors.

Stay Compliant with Legal Guidance

From and after December 31, 2024, cities and towns can no longer impose TPT on residential rentals under A.R.S. § 42-6004(H). While the change reduces costs for tenants and simplifies compliance for landlords, proper preparation is key to avoiding errors, penalties, or disputes.

Gottlieb Law’s real estate attorneys are available to guide landlords, tenants, and property management companies through these changes. Proper legal advice ensures you stay compliant, avoid penalties, and fully benefit from Arizona’s new rental tax ban.

If you want personalized support navigating these updates or need help updating lease agreements and billing systems, call our firm today at 602-899-8188 or schedule a consultation with Gottlieb Law to meet with our experienced real estate attorneys.



This article is provided by Gottlieb Law, PLC for general informational purposes only. It does not create an attorney–client relationship, and it should not be relied on as legal advice. Laws change, and every situation is different. You should consult qualified legal counsel about your specific circumstances.

Understanding Arizona delayed MLS listings and the NAR delayed marketing policy helps sellers protect their interests. Gottlieb Law guides you through real estate law for smooth transactions.

Delayed MLS Listings: What Arizona Home Sellers Need to Know

Delayed MLS Listings: What Arizona Home Sellers Need to Know 931 671 Gottlieb Law

Gottlieb Law, PLC provides this article for information purposes only and nothing herein creates an attorney-client relationship. You should not take any actions in reliance on any of the information contained herein without consulting with qualified legal counsel first and reading this article is not a proper substitute for seeking legal advice of your specific situation.  Laws change over time and you should seek counsel to discuss any specific legal questions.


Arizona’s real estate market is always evolving, and staying ahead means knowing how new policies impact your home sale. The National Association of Realtors (NAR) recently introduced a delayed marketing policy aimed at giving sellers more control over how and when their properties appear on public platforms.  For Arizona home sellers, understanding this policy alongside state-specific rules is critical. That’s where Gottlieb Law comes in. With deep roots in Arizona real estate law, they guide sellers, buyers, agents, and brokers through these shifting waters, helping you make informed decisions every step of the way.

What Is the NAR Delayed Marketing Policy?

NAR’s “Multiple Listing Options for Sellers” offers sellers choices on how their listings appear publicly. Two key concepts stand out:

  • Delayed Marketing Exempt Listings: These are exempt listings where the seller directs the listing broker to delay public marketing through IDX and syndication for a period allowed by the local MLS.  Each MLS has discretion to determine the length of this delayed marketing period.  This approach allows sellers to keep their homes under wraps initially while still preparing for broader exposure and reflects the seller’s choice to postpone public advertising.
  • Office Exclusive Listings: In this scenario, listings remain private within a brokerage and never reach the broader MLS network.

Sellers must sign a certification acknowledging the benefits they are waiving or delaying, such as broad exposure through the MLS, and confirming their informed decision to opt for delayed marketing or office exclusivity.  Understanding these nuances can significantly affect your home’s exposure and sale timeline, which is why legal guidance is so valuable.

The Multiple Listing Options for Sellers policy is expected to roll out in phases, with each local MLS setting its own rules for implementation. Sellers should confirm with their real estate counsel and listing agent how these policies apply in their market.

Arizona’s Take on Delayed Marketing Policies

Arizona’s largest MLS, ARMLS, has adopted and enforces the Clear Cooperation Policy, which requires listings to be submitted to the MLS within one business day after any public marketing.  However, Arizona provides some flexibility through the “Coming Soon” status, which allows listings to remain in a pre-market phase for up to 30 days.

Not every Arizona MLS interprets NAR’s delayed marketing policy in the same way.  Some are still refining their rules, creating a patchwork landscape that can confuse both sellers and agents.  This complexity underscores the value of working with a seasoned real estate attorney who understands the intricacies of Arizona real estate law in 2025.

Legal Considerations for Arizona Home Sellers

Navigating Arizona real estate law in 2025 requires aligning with both state regulations and NAR’s evolving policies. The Arizona Department of Real Estate oversees how licensed professionals handle property marketing under active listing agreements.  Missteps could lead to disputes over how days on market are calculated or raise concerns about MLS data integrity.

Failing to comply with these regulations exposes sellers to legal risks that can delay,  or even derail, transactions.  Gottlieb Law’s extensive experience can help sellers focus on compliance and avoid costly missteps.

The Upsides and Downsides of Delayed MLS Listings

Choosing to delay MLS listings comes with both benefits and drawbacks.

On the upside, sellers who value privacy, such as public figures or those with tenant-occupied properties, often appreciate the additional control it provides.  Delaying can also give agents flexibility to gauge market interest, refine pricing, and build interest before going fully public.

On the downside, holding back a listing from full public exposure can shrink your buyer pool, potentially extending the time your home remains on the market and impacting sale price.  It may also distort MLS data, complicating property comparisons and influencing buyer perceptions.

Sellers should weigh these factors carefully, with guidance from experienced legal counsel to balance privacy with market reach.

How Gottlieb Law Supports Arizona Buyers, Sellers, Agents, and Brokers

Whether you are a home seller navigating delayed MLS listings or a buyer entering Arizona’s competitive market, Gottlieb Law provides tailored legal insight for real estate transactions.

The firm’s team can advise on everything from drafting airtight contracts to focusing on compliance with MLS rules and the Clear Cooperation Policy.  Real estate agents and brokers need to remain compliant in a fast-changing legal landscape.  From reviewing listing agreements to managing disclosures around office exclusive listings in Arizona, Gottlieb Law can serve as a trusted partner.

Tips for Arizona Sellers Considering Delayed MLS Listings

  • Engage a qualified real estate attorney early. Understanding how delayed marketing options apply to your situation helps prevent surprises.
  • Negotiate listing agreements carefully.  Ensure they clearly outline marketing timelines and privacy protections.
  • Confirm compliance.  Align with both NAR policies and Arizona real estate law 2025 to keep your sale on track.
  • Leverage the “Coming Soon” status.  Arizona’s MLS coming soon status may offer a strategic marketing advantage without violating rules.

Final Thoughts on Arizona Delayed MLS Listings

Arizona home sellers face a complex real estate environment with shifting policies around MLS listings and marketing.  Balancing privacy concerns with the need for broad buyer exposure isn’t always straightforward.  That’s why working with an accomplished real estate law firm like Gottlieb Law is valuable. Having attorneys with the knowledge and experience to guide sellers, buyers, agents, and brokers through these challenges helps position clients for successful transactions.

Ready to Navigate Arizona Real Estate with Confidence?

Selling or buying a home in Arizona comes with unique legal challenges, so don’t go it alone. Connect with Gottlieb Law to get advice and trusted representation that puts your interests first.

Whether you’re managing delayed MLS listings or handling more complex transactions, the team at Gottlieb Law is ready to help you move forward with clarity and confidence.

Call our firm today at 602-899-8188 or schedule a consultation online with Gottlieb Law to meet with our experienced real estate attorneys.


Gottlieb Law, PLC provides this article for information purposes only and nothing herein creates an attorney-client relationship. You should not take any actions in reliance on any of the information contained herein without consulting with qualified legal counsel first and reading this article is not a proper substitute for seeking legal advice of your specific situation.  Laws change over time and you should seek counsel to discuss any specific legal questions.