What a Broker Earns on Your Load: Your Rights and Rule Status

Can a carrier see what a broker was paid for moving its load? Many drivers and small fleets ask that when a rate feels thin, and the answer today is more nuanced than most headlines suggest. A federal rule already gives you a right to review the broker’s transaction record. A proposal to strengthen that right has been stalled for almost two years. This article explains what the rule says now, where the proposal actually stands as of October 26, 2026, and what you can do in the meantime.

What the rule says today

The existing rule is 49 CFR 371.3, and it is not new. It requires a property broker to keep a record of each brokered transaction. The record includes the shipper’s name and address, the carrier’s name, address and registration number, the bill of lading or freight bill number, the brokerage compensation the broker received and who paid it, and the date the broker paid the carrier. Brokers must keep these records for three years, and each party to the transaction may review the record (49 CFR 371.3).

In plain terms, the rule already points to the number many carriers want: what the broker received for arranging the load. The weakness, according to carrier groups, is practical. Some broker contracts ask carriers to waive the review right, and some brokers say records cannot be produced electronically. Because the rule says nothing about format or timing, a request can be slow or ignored.

What FMCSA proposed in 2024

In response to petitions from the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and the Small Business in Transportation Coalition, FMCSA published a proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” on November 20, 2024 (Docket FMCSA-2023-0257). A proposal is not a rule you can rely on, so it is worth separating what it would do from what is actually in force. As proposed, it would:

• Require brokers to keep the covered records in electronic form so they can be reviewed remotely.
• Require records to list every charge and fee with a dollar figure and a short explanation, include any penalties and shipment-related claims, and show when the shipper paid the broker and when the broker paid the carrier.
• Turn the current right to review into a duty: brokers would have to provide the records to the transacting parties within 48 hours of a request. The proposal did not include automatic disclosure.
• Leave waivers in a gray area. FMCSA did not adopt the outright waiver ban the petitioners wanted, and brokers could still use confidentiality clauses that restrict sharing with people outside the transaction.

The comment period was set to close on January 21, 2025, and FMCSA reopened it for 30 days through March 20, 2025, after a request from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (Federal Register, 2024; Federal Register, 2025). Reaction was split. According to Land Line, OOIDA supported the proposal, while the American Trucking Associations and the Transportation Intermediaries Association opposed it, with ATA citing strain on brokers and questions about FMCSA’s authority.

Where it stands now

This is the part that is easy to get wrong. No final rule exists. The latest document in the Federal Register on this docket is still the February 18, 2025 comment notice; I checked the Federal Register index for this title on October 26, 2026 and found nothing newer. FMCSA has since chosen to start over with a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, which is the tool agencies use when a proposal changes significantly. According to Commercial Carrier Journal and Land Line, FMCSA sent that supplemental proposal to the White House Office of Management and Budget on August 27, 2026. Its content is not public, and it cannot be published until OMB finishes its review.

Two practical consequences follow. First, a new comment period will open only after publication, and then FMCSA must review the comments before any final rule. Second, nobody outside the agency can say today whether the 48-hour clock or the itemized-records requirement will survive in the new version. Treat any claim that brokers must already hand over records in 48 hours as incorrect: that is what was proposed, not what is required.

What you can do before any new rule

The current right to review is usable, and a calm written request is more effective than an argument on the phone. A reasonable approach looks like this:

• Read the broker-carrier agreement before signing. Look for language that waives your review rights or limits records to an in-person visit, and ask about it before you accept the load.
• Keep your own paperwork: the rate confirmation, bill of lading, proof of delivery and invoice date. They make a record request specific and easy to answer.
• If you want to see the transaction record, ask in writing (email works), cite the load number, and refer to your right to review the record under 49 CFR 371.3. Keep it factual and short.
• Note the response time. A broker that provides records quickly is giving you useful information about how it deals with carriers.
• If a broker declines without a clear reason, keep a copy of your request and its reply, in case you need them later.

For related background on broker payment risk, see our guide to freight factoring and the broker bond rule, and for context on rates, our explainer on reading the freight market.

A worked example: what a record would show

The following numbers are hypothetical and exist only to show the arithmetic. Suppose a shipper pays a broker $2,400 for a 500-mile load and the broker pays the carrier $2,000. The carrier’s rate is $4.00 a mile, the broker keeps $400, and that spread equals about 16.7% of what the shipper paid ($400 divided by $2,400). A transaction record would let you confirm those two figures instead of guessing.

What the spread means is a separate question. A broker carries costs a carrier does not see, such as credit risk, claims handling, technology and sales, so a large spread is not proof of anything improper, and a small one is not automatically fair. The value of seeing the figure is that you can compare brokers over time and decide which relationships are worth keeping. Gross figures are also not profit: for either side, the spread or the rate has to cover fuel, insurance, labor and overhead before anything is left.

The Bottom Line

Today, the rule that matters is the existing 49 CFR 371.3, which gives parties to a brokered load the right to review the transaction record and requires brokers to keep records for three years. The 2024 proposal to add electronic records and a 48-hour deadline is still only a proposal, and a revised version was at the White House for review as of the latest reports I could open, with no new publication in the Federal Register. Until that changes, use the right you have, put requests in writing, and read contract waivers carefully.

Neal’s Take

What stands out to me is how much depends on a rule that is still unsettled: carriers and brokers both have reasonable arguments, and the supplemental version may differ from the 2024 text. I would watch for the Federal Register publication, because that starts the comment period and shows the real wording. Until then, the practical step is to keep clean records on every load and to treat a broker’s willingness to share transaction information as one factor among several when choosing partners. Rules can change, so it is wise to read the final text before changing how you operate.

— Neal Cvetkovski, Founder of LOAD TIDE. Personal opinion, not legal or financial advice.

Stay with LOAD TIDE for daily updates on the freight and trucking market.

Sources: 49 CFR 371.3 (current rule, Legal Information Institute); Federal Register, Transparency in Property Broker Transactions, proposed rule, November 20, 2024; Federal Register, comment period reopened, February 18, 2025; Commercial Carrier Journal, August 31, 2026 (updated September 3, 2026); Land Line Media, August 28, 2026; Land Line Media, August 26, 2026; Land Line Media, comment period closed January 21, 2025.