Nevada Real Estate Broker Exam — All Questions

Assembly Bill 258 of Nevada's 2025 session changed the definition of "brokerage agreement" in NRS 645.005 and, as a consequence, amended NRS 645.320. What did the act do?

• a.It added "an oral or" to the definition, so a brokerage agreement may now be oral, and it added a "be in writing" requirement to NRS 645.320 for exclusive agency agreements only
• b.It struck "an oral or" from the definition, so a brokerage agreement must now be written, and it deleted the "be in writing" requirement from NRS 645.320 as redundant✓
• c.It limited the definition to residential transactions, and it moved the "be in writing" requirement of NRS 645.320 into the definition of an exclusive right to sell
• d.It extended the definition to property management agreements, and it replaced the "be in writing" requirement of NRS 645.320 with a Division-prescribed form

Before 2025, NRS 645.005 defined a brokerage agreement as "an oral or written contract" between a client and a broker. Section 2 of A.B. 258 struck the bracketed words "[an oral or]," leaving "a written contract between a client and a broker in which the broker agrees to accept valuable consideration from the client or another person for assisting, soliciting or negotiating the sale, purchase, option, rental or lease of real property, or the sale, exchange, option or purchase of a business." The bill's digest states the effect: the change removes the provisions under which an oral contract could be a brokerage agreement, "thereby requiring a brokerage agreement to be in writing." Section 4 then struck the old subsection 1 of NRS 645.320, "Be in writing," and renumbered the rest, because - again in the digest's words - that requirement is "made redundant by section 2." So the writing requirement did not disappear; it moved into the definition and now reaches every brokerage agreement rather than only exclusive ones. Section 6 fixes the reach: the amendatory provisions apply to any brokerage agreement entered into on or after 1 October 2025. Sections 1, 3 and 5 made matching deletions of the now-superfluous word "written" in NRS 624.031, NRS 645.300 and NRS 645.633. The definition still excludes a property management agreement, which is governed by NRS 645.6056.

NRS 645.320 governs a Nevada brokerage agreement that includes a provision for exclusive agency representation. Which clause would put such an agreement in breach of that section?

• a.A clause fixing, in the agreement's own terms, a definite, specified and complete date on which the exclusive agency representation terminates
• b.A clause requiring the signatures of both the client and the broker before the agreement becomes enforceable
• c.A clause permitting the client to buy the property through another broker after the agreement has terminated
• d.A clause requiring the client to notify the broker of an intention to cancel the exclusive features after the agreement has terminated✓

NRS 645.320(2) forbids an exclusive agency brokerage agreement from containing "[a]ny provision which requires the client who signs the brokerage agreement to notify the real estate broker of the client's intention to cancel the exclusive features of the brokerage agreement after the termination of the brokerage agreement." That is the trap the section exists to close: an agreement that quietly continues its exclusivity unless the client writes in to end it. The other three clauses are either required or unobjectionable. Subsection 1 requires the terms to set out "a definite, specified and complete termination," and subsection 3 requires the signatures of both the client or an authorized representative and the broker or an authorized representative "in order to be enforceable" - so an agreement containing those two clauses is complying rather than breaching. Nothing in the section restricts what the client may do once the agreement has ended. Note that the section was renumbered by A.B. 258 in 2025: a study guide printed before then shows four subsections rather than three, so the numbering in an older source will not line up. NRS 645.633(1)(f) separately makes it a ground for discipline to omit a fixed date of expiration from any brokerage agreement or to fail to leave a copy with the client.

Under NRS 645.633(1)(f), the Real Estate Commission may discipline a Nevada licensee for failing to:

• a.include a fixed date of expiration in a brokerage agreement, or leave a copy of one with the client✓
• b.file a copy of each brokerage agreement with the Division within 10 days of its signing
• c.have each brokerage agreement reviewed by the client's own attorney before it is signed
• d.record each exclusive brokerage agreement with the county recorder before marketing begins

NRS 645.633(1)(f) lists as a ground for action "[f]ailure to include a fixed date of expiration in any brokerage agreement or failure to leave a copy of such a brokerage agreement or any property management agreement with the client." Two distinct failures, both disciplinary. Nevada requires no filing of brokerage agreements with the Division, no attorney review and no recording with the county recorder; those answers describe procedures the chapter does not contain. What the chapter does require is retention for inspection: NRS 645.324(2) provides that a licensee shall maintain, for review and audit by the Division, each brokerage agreement entered into by the licensee, and NRS 645.630(1)(e) makes failure to do so a separate ground for discipline. NRS 645.300 governs the timing of the client's copy, and NRS 645.320(1) requires the definite termination date in an exclusive agreement.

A Nevada licensee obtains the client's signature on a listing agreement. Under NRS 645.300, the licensee must deliver a copy of the brokerage agreement to that client:

• a.within 24 hours after the signature is obtained, in every case without exception
• b.within 5 calendar days after the signature is obtained, in every case without exception
• c.at the close of escrow, together with the client's closing statement for the transaction
• d.at the time the signature is obtained if possible, and otherwise within a reasonable time after✓

NRS 645.300 provides that when a licensee prepares or has prepared a brokerage agreement authorizing or employing the licensee to purchase or sell real estate for compensation or commission, "the licensee shall deliver a copy of the brokerage agreement to the client signing it at the time the signature is obtained, if possible, or otherwise within a reasonable time thereafter," and allows the receipt for that copy to be made on the face of the agreement itself. The standard is immediate delivery where practicable, with a reasonableness backstop - not a fixed 24-hour or five-day window, and certainly not a delivery deferred to closing. A.B. 258 amended this section in 2025 only to delete a word that the amended definition in NRS 645.005 had made superfluous; the delivery duty itself is unchanged. Failing to leave the copy with the client is independently disciplinable under NRS 645.633(1)(f).

A Nevada licensee represents the seller, and the seller does not accept an offer within a reasonable time after it is presented. Under NAC 645.632(1), the licensee must give the buyer or the buyer's representative:

• a.written notice, signed by the licensee, informing the buyer that the offer has not been accepted
• b.oral notice that the offer has not been accepted, confirmed by a note in the transaction file
• c.a written counteroffer, because under Nevada practice silence operates as a rejection
• d.written notice, signed by the seller, informing the buyer that the offer has not been accepted✓

NAC 645.632(1) requires that where a licensee represents a seller and the seller does not accept an offer within a reasonable time after it is presented, the licensee "shall provide to the buyer or the representative of the buyer written notice signed by the seller which informs the buyer that the offer has not been accepted by the seller." The seller's signature is what the regulation asks for, so a notice signed only by the licensee does not satisfy it, oral notice does not satisfy it, and no counteroffer is required - silence is not a rejection under Nevada law, which is why the notice rule exists at all. Subsection 2 mirrors the duty on the other side: where the licensee represents a buyer who does not accept a counteroffer within a reasonable time, the licensee must give the seller or the seller's representative written notice signed by the buyer. NAC 645.630 sets the companion duty to deliver every bona fide offer to the seller promptly and to deliver copies of each acceptance of an offer or counteroffer to both purchaser and seller.

Under NRS 645.635(4), a Nevada broker must deliver the seller a complete, detailed closing statement showing all receipts and disbursements the broker handled for the seller:

• a.within 10 business days after the transaction is closed✓
• b.within 10 calendar days after the transaction is closed
• c.within 30 calendar days after the transaction is closed
• d.before the buyer's funds are released from escrow

NRS 645.635(4) makes it a ground for discipline to fail "to deliver to the seller in each real estate transaction, within 10 business days after the transaction is closed, a complete, detailed closing statement showing all of the receipts and disbursements handled by him or her for the seller," to fail to deliver the buyer a statement showing all money received from the buyer and how and for what it was disbursed, or to fail to retain true copies of those statements in the licensee's files. Business days, not calendar days, and 10 of them - the 30-day and pre-release answers do not appear in the section. The same subsection supplies the practical escape valve most Nevada transactions rely on: "[t]he furnishing of those statements by an escrow holder relieves the broker's, broker-salesperson's or salesperson's responsibility and must be deemed to be in compliance with this provision." The copy-retention half of the duty stands whoever produces the statement.

A Nevada broker charges a client an advance fee. Under NRS 645.322, the broker must furnish that client an accounting of how the money was used:

• a.within 30 days after the fee is charged or collected
• b.within 12 months after the fee is charged or collected
• c.within 3 months after the fee is charged or collected✓
• d.only when the client asks for one in writing, and not otherwise

NRS 645.322 provides that "[a]ny person or entity who charges or collects an advance fee shall, within 3 months after the charge or collection, furnish to his or her client an accounting of the use of that money," and adds that the Real Estate Division may also demand an accounting. The duty is automatic and runs from the charge or collection, so it is neither triggered by a client request nor stretched to a year, nor compressed to 30 days. Two neighboring sections complete the topic. NRS 645.323 provides that a person shall not accept an advance fee listing unless licensed as a broker, broker-salesperson or salesperson. NRS 645.324 lets the Commission prescribe the forms of brokerage agreements containing advance-fee provisions and the reports and accounting forms to be kept, requires the licensee to maintain each brokerage agreement for the Division's review and audit, and makes any violation of the Commission's rules, orders or requirements a ground for disciplinary action.

A Nevada broker receives the buyer's earnest-money check when the purchase agreement is accepted. Unless the purchase agreement provides otherwise, NRS 645.630(1)(k) requires the broker to deposit it:

• a.before the end of the next banking day after acceptance of the agreement✓
• b.before the end of the third banking day after acceptance of the agreement
• c.before the end of the fifth calendar day after acceptance of the agreement
• d.at any point before the close of escrow on the transaction

NRS 645.630(1)(k) makes it a ground for discipline for a broker, "[u]pon acceptance of an agreement," to fail "to deposit any check or cash received as earnest money before the end of the next banking day unless otherwise provided in the purchase agreement." One banking day is the rule, acceptance is the trigger, and the parties may vary it only in the purchase agreement itself. The three- and five-day answers overstate the window, and deferring to closing abandons it. NRS 645.310(4) governs where the money goes once it is banked, and makes the broker personally responsible and liable for the deposit at all times; NRS 645.630(1)(j) governs the separate question of accepting something other than cash as earnest money in the first place.

A buyer offers a promissory note rather than cash as earnest money on a Nevada purchase. Under NRS 645.630(1)(j), the licensee may accept it only if:

• a.the owner is told before accepting the offer and the fact is shown in the earnest-money receipt✓
• b.the note is payable within 30 days and is held meanwhile in the broker's trust account
• c.the note is guaranteed by the buyer's lender in a separate written commitment to the seller
• d.the Division approves the substitution before the offer is presented to the property's owner

NRS 645.630(1)(j) makes it a ground for discipline to accept "other than cash as earnest money unless that fact is communicated to the owner before his or her acceptance of the offer to purchase and that fact is shown in the receipt for the earnest money." Two things are required and both are about the owner's knowledge: disclosure before acceptance, and the fact recorded on the receipt. The statute imposes no maturity limit on the instrument, requires no lender guarantee, and involves no Division pre-approval - those answers invent conditions the section does not contain. The rule protects a seller who would otherwise believe cash is in hand when deciding whether to take the offer off the market. Where the deposit is cash or a check, NRS 645.630(1)(k) then governs how quickly the broker must bank it, and NRS 645.310 governs the account it goes into.

A Nevada broker holds rents and earnest money belonging to clients. Under NRS 645.310, that money must be:

• a.deposited promptly in the brokerage's operating account at a bank in this State and tracked by a separate ledger for each client
• b.deposited promptly in a separate account at a bank or credit union in this State, designated a trust account✓
• c.held in the broker's own personal account until the transaction closes or is terminated
• d.remitted to the Real Estate Division, which disburses it when the transaction closes

NRS 645.310(4) requires a broker who receives money belonging to others as a broker to "promptly deposit the money in a separate checking account located in a bank or credit union in this State which must be designated a trust account," and directs that all down payments, earnest money deposits, rents or other money received on behalf of a client or any other person be deposited there unless everyone with an interest in the money has agreed otherwise in writing. Subsection 3 forbids commingling client money or property with the broker's own, and subsection 4 separately forbids letting advance payments belonging to others sit in the broker's business or personal account. The operating-account and personal-account answers are therefore both commingling, which NRS 645.630(1)(h) makes a ground for discipline in its own right. The Division audits trust accounts; it does not hold client money. Trust accounts must designate the broker as trustee and allow withdrawal without previous notice, and under subsection 6 the broker must tell the Division which banks and credit unions hold them and the names of the accounts.

A Nevada seller has signed an acceptance of one offer, but the listing broker does not yet know of it when two further written offers arrive. Under NRS 645.635(8), the broker must:

• a.hold those offers unopened, because the seller's written acceptance ended the duty at once
• b.submit those offers to the seller, because the duty runs until the broker knows of the acceptance✓
• c.return those offers to the offerors with written notice, signed by the seller, that the property is already sold
• d.submit those offers only if the first transaction later fails to close as scheduled

NRS 645.635(8) makes it a ground for discipline to fail "to submit all written bona fide offers to a seller when the offers are received before the seller accepts an offer in writing and until the broker has knowledge of that acceptance," except where the client has waived the duty under NRS 645.254(4). The duty therefore has two endpoints, and the later one controls: the seller's written acceptance alone does not stop it while the broker is still unaware of it. That is the whole point of the phrase "and until the broker has knowledge of that acceptance" - a broker cannot be excused by a fact he does not yet know, and a seller cannot be deprived of an offer that arrived in the gap. Holding the offers, returning them, or waiting to see whether the first transaction closes all leave the seller uninformed during exactly the window the subsection covers. Related timing duties sit alongside it: NRS 645.635(3) requires delivery of a completed copy of any purchase agreement or offer to the purchaser and seller within a reasonable time, and NRS 645.635(7) requires a bona fide offer to be reduced to writing when the proposed purchaser asks for that.