The End Is Near for Double Closing Real Estate Deals in 2026 

The End Is Near for Double Closing Real Estate Deals in 2026 

By Jack 

If you’ve been in real estate for any amount of time, you’ve heard the term “double close.” Some people call it wholesaling. Some people call it assigning. Some people call it “creative.” And if we’re being honest, a lot of people call it attractive because it sounds like a way to get paid without needing any capital. 

But in 2026, the writing is on the wall: the end is near for double closing real estate deals as a mainstream strategy. 

Not because it never worked. Not because it’s impossible to do ethically. But because it’s been abused so hard for so long that title companies, states, counties, and municipalities are increasingly shutting the door on it. It’s creating too many messes. It’s leaving too many sellers angry. It’s wasting too much escrow time. And in the age of instant information, it’s easier than ever for the buyer and seller to go around you—especially when they realize what’s happening. 

I’m going to explain what double closing really is, why it’s falling apart, and what to do instead if your real goal is to build a real business with predictable deal flow. 

And along the way, I’ll share a quick side note that land investors love: properties with a cell tower lease, because those are the opposite of messy—they’re pure upside when you understand them. 

What a “double closing” deal actually looks like 

Here’s the simplified version of a double closing / wholesaling transaction. 

You contact a seller—often through a mailer, cold outreach, or some kind of marketing. The seller calls back and says, “Yes, I’ll sell my property for $20,000.” 

Now, there are two very different ways that conversation can go. 

The first way is what we do. We treat the property like a real acquisition candidate. We check it for reason. We look at the market. We look at value. We look at demand. If the deal makes sense, we open escrow, we actually buy it, and then we resell it—usually with a real estate agent or a clear sales process. If we buy for $20,000 and sell for $50,000, we did the work, we took the risk, and we earned the margin. 

The second way is what I’m talking about in this blog. 

In a double closing scenario, the investor gets the contract for $20,000, but doesn’t intend to buy it. They don’t even necessarily know if it’s a good deal. The mindset is often: “I have nothing to lose. I’m going to tie this up, shop it around, and if it works out, great.” 

They tell the seller they need a long closing window—sometimes months. Then they blast that contract out to buyers, hoping someone will pay them $30,000, $35,000, or even just $22,000 so they can make a couple thousand dollars without ever owning the property. 

And that’s where the problems begin. 

Why the end is near in 2026 

There are a lot of reasons this model is collapsing, but they all boil down to one reality: it creates friction and mistrust for everyone involved. 

The seller eventually finds out what’s going on. They might talk to their spouse. They might talk to a friend. They might talk to an agent. And when they realize the person they “trusted” is simply marking it up and reselling it without ever taking ownership, the reaction is predictable: they’re upset. 

You can argue all day that it’s “business” or “just a spread,” but sellers don’t experience it that way. They experience it as, “Wait… you’re not buying it? You’re just flipping the contract?” Even if it’s legal in certain circumstances, it often feels deceptive when it wasn’t clearly explained upfront. 

Then there’s escrow. If the wholesaler opens escrow just to get a file number and then avoids providing documents, avoids answering questions, or can’t show proof of funds, they end up wasting escrow’s time too. Escrow agents are not there to babysit pretend transactions. 

And then there’s the buyer. In 2026, the buyer can skip trace the seller in minutes. If the buyer realizes you’re buying for $20,000 and trying to sell to them for $30,000, it’s not hard for them to think: “Why don’t I just go directly to the seller?” 

There’s nothing preventing that—especially if you don’t have a strong agreement, and especially if the seller realizes they’re being strung along. 

So what happens? The seller and buyer do a deal without you. The seller gets paid. The buyer gets a better price. And you’re left holding a contract that’s worthless, with no meaningful recourse. 

That’s one of the biggest reasons the end is near: the internet removed the middleman advantage. 

The ethical problem: most people aren’t honest about it 

Let’s talk plainly. 

A lot of people do double closings because they don’t have the money and they don’t believe in the deal enough to buy it. That’s the truth. 

If you believe in the deal, the cleanest move is to buy it and resell it. And if you don’t have the money, there is more capital available than most people realize—especially if you can consistently bring good deals. 

When you don’t buy the deal, the psychology is different too. If you have no money in it, you tend to lose urgency. You’re half trying. You’re not fully committed. But if you put $20,000 into a property and your money is tied up, you become extremely motivated to execute. That urgency is part of why real investors win. 

The other ethical issue is that double closing can slide into a gray area where it starts to look like you’re representing the seller—without being a licensed agent. That’s where title companies and states start paying attention. If you’re “selling someone’s property” that you don’t own, even if you have equitable title, it can be construed as brokering. 

And that’s why the clampdown is happening. 

The net effect on the industry has been terrible 

Here’s the part most people don’t talk about: the vast majority of wholesale-style deals never close. The seller gets strung along for months. The property gets “tied up.” Sometimes people even file documents to make it harder for the seller to move on, which is where things get truly ugly. 

Then a legitimate buyer shows up later—maybe even you, as a land investor trying to do things the right way—and the seller has a bad taste in their mouth. They’ve been burned. They don’t trust anyone. They assume every investor is the same. 

That harms everyone in the business. 

The people who cause the damage get a few checks out of the small percentage that close. Everyone else inherits the distrust. 

That’s not sustainable, and it’s one of the reasons 2026 is going to be a turning point. 

“But is there a legal way to do something similar?” 

There is a clean version of this, and it requires one thing most wholesalers don’t want to do: be upfront. 

If you truly want to “control” a deal without buying it immediately, the ethical and legally safer approach is some version of an option agreement where the seller understands exactly what you’re doing. You tell them: “I think your price can work, but I need time to find a buyer. If I do, great. If I don’t, we part ways.” 

That’s honest. That’s not pretending you’re the buyer when you’re not. 

But even then, you have to be careful. You have to follow the rules. You have to avoid any behavior that looks like unlicensed representation. 

And in most cases, it’s still not the best model. 

Because there’s a better option. 

The better option in 2026: buy it — or bring in funding 

If you believe in the deal, buy it. 

If you don’t have the cash, partner with someone who does. 

That is how real investors operate. You put your money where your mouth is. You take ownership. You control the transaction. You set the resale price. You decide how to sell it. And you don’t have to worry about the deal collapsing because your buyer went around you. 

You’re not stringing anyone along. You’re not wasting escrow’s time. You’re not creating resentment. 

You’re simply doing what real estate investing has always been: acquiring undervalued property and selling it for more. 

Quick bonus for land investors: cell tower leases are the opposite of this chaos 

One of the questions that came up recently was about land with a cell tower lease on it. These are the kinds of “attributes” I love because they add value without adding drama. 

Here’s why: a cell tower lease usually means a tower company identified the location as valuable and negotiated a monthly lease payment with the prior owner. Sometimes it’s a few hundred bucks a month. Sometimes it’s far more—there are investors who’ve bought properties where the lease income is $1,500/month. 

The key is to get a copy of the lease and confirm it transfers with ownership. In most cases, the tower company is highly motivated to keep the tower where it is because moving it would cost a fortune and create service issues. That means the income stream can be stable for a long time. 

If you’re not comfortable reviewing the lease, it’s worth hiring a lawyer—ideally someone familiar with tower leases—to review it with you. But in general, this is exactly the kind of asset that makes a property more valuable and more unique. 

And yes, you may adjust your offer price because of it. That’s normal. That’s professional. 

The bottom line 

Double closing has been abused into the ground. In 2026, the trend is clear: more restrictions, more pushback, more exposure, and less tolerance from the people who actually make real estate transactions happen. 

If your plan depends on tying up sellers, shopping contracts, and hoping nobody notices, you are building on sand. 

The better path—the one that scales, protects your reputation, and keeps transactions clean—is simple: 

Find great deals. Buy them. If you need funding, partner. Then sell the property you own. 

That’s how you build a real business. 

And it’s how you stay in this for the long haul.