Why do collectors get benefits, but artists don’t? Automatic translate

Many of America’s largest museums have benefited from a law that provides collectors with tax benefits if they donate art to museums and charities. Today, American artists are striving to get similar benefits from the state.

While collectors have the right to write off the market value of works donated to museums from the amount of their income, artists can only claim to cover the costs of materials used to create the painting. “I think there’s a discrepancy in that,” said Philippe Vergne, director of the Los Angeles Museum of Modern Art. “Artists give their time, their talent. This is a very generous gift. ”

In an attempt to equalize the rights of collectors and artists, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy is lobbying for a bill that should allow artists to apply the tax deduction to the fair market value of the donated work, and not just the cost of materials. “This law will save the treasured works of art for the public,” said Leahy. If the bill is passed, it will revive the policy that Congress repealed in 1969, amid suspicions that some artists deliberately overstate the cost of their work in reporting documents. This decision led to an immediate decrease in the number of works donated by artists to museums. Statistics showed that within three years before the law was changed, the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) received 321 donations from artists. Within three years after the amendment of this law, he received only 28 works.

“It’s ridiculous that artists cannot apply fair market value to tax deductions for art supplies,” said New York-based dealer Cristin Tierney. “This prevents authors from contributing to the life of the entire creative community.”

Even if the bill is adopted, it will only apply to donations to government agencies, but not to charity auctions, the volume and value of which is growing rapidly. For example, Paddle8’s online auction has shown more than tripled sales since 2012. Charity auctions put a lot of pressure on artists, sometimes asking for donations on behalf of the state, for no reason. This is good for charity, but can be risky for artists. That is why the authors began to demand the provision of guarantees.

Speculating on charity and selling paintings through auctions brings profit to intermediaries, but not to artists. Perhaps in this area it is necessary to introduce measures of regulation and distribution of income. Perhaps organizations could agree on this without involving the state, for example, through sales contracts, but so far this process has not been launched, but has been actively condemned mainly among artists.

Note that Patrick Leahy has been promoting his bill for the past 15 years, and it is still not clear when the point will be put in this matter.

Anna Sidorova © Gallerix.ru