|The PCC has been making a splash, |
particularly when it comes to copyright litigation
As always, thoughts, comments and suggestions for future blog posts are very welcome.
|The PCC has been making a splash, |
particularly when it comes to copyright litigation
[Rosales was arrested] for filing false tax returns and for failing to disclose a foreign bank account to the IRS. Rosales allegedly failed to report the receipt of at least $12.5 million in income from the sale of works purported to be by celebrated abstract expressionist artists. Most of the income was received in a bank account in Spain that Rosales hid from, and failed to disclose to, the IRS.So not only did she manage to pull the wool over the IRS' eyes, but she managed to fool the art world with her forged artworks - and for a significant period of time. Indeed, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said:
“As alleged, Glafira Rosales gave new meaning to the phrase ‘artful dodger’ by avoiding taxes on millions of dollars in income from dealing in fake artworks for fake clients...”
|A painting sold by Rosales as an original Pollack|
Rosales began selling several never before exhibited and previously unknown paintings in the 1990s, which she claimed to be by some of the most famous artists of the twentieth century, such as Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, and Willem de Kooning. From 2006 through 2008, the proceeds of her sales of such paintings to two prominent Manhattan galleries were over $14 million. In selling most of the paintings to the two galleries, Rosales purported to represent a client who had inherited the paintings and wanted to sell them, but who also wished to remain anonymous. For the remainder of the paintings, she purported to represent a Spanish collector. Rosales further claimed that a portion of the price paid by the Manhattan galleries was a commission to her for selling the paintings, and that the remainder would be passed along to her clients.
However, the investigation revealed that:Unfortunately for Rosales, it seems the scheme was not fool proof after all. As IRS Special Agent-in-Charge Toni Weirauch explained: “The sale of a piece of art for profit is a taxable event and the seller is responsible for paying his or her fair share of tax, even if the art is counterfeit."
- experts in the fields of art, art history, and materials science concluded that at least several of the paintings sold by her are counterfeit;
- the client on whose behalf she purported to sell most of the paintings to the Manhattan galleries never existed;
- the Spanish collector on whose behalf she purported to sell the remainder of the paintings to the Manhattan galleries never owned the paintings;
- instead of passing along a substantial portion of the proceeds of the sale of the various paintings, she kept all or substantially all of the proceeds, and transferred substantial portions of the proceeds to an account maintained by her then-boyfriend; and
- Rosales then filed tax returns claiming that she had not kept all, or substantially all of the proceeds from the sale of the paintings. She also kept most of the proceeds in a foreign bank account that she hid from, and failed to report to, the IRS.
|This is an original button|
"It is an existential drama of a kind that no city has ever faced, a combination of a high-stakes poker game and morality play in front of a worldwide audience. On the one hand, it has the potential to turn into a messy legal thicket with the courts ultimately deciding whether emergency manager Kevyn Orr can compel the museum to sell off some of its treasures to help pay the city's debts. On the other hand, many who oppose the suggestion to sell art see this as an emotional battle for the soul of the city.
Should Orr decide to move ahead on a sale of DIA artwork, these two fronts — the cultural and emotional on one hand and the legal side on the other — are likely to produce a clash that could take months or years to resolve. The toll could be monumental, permanently diminishing a museum widely recognized as one of the country's best.
With the city of Detroit facing possible bankruptcy, Orr and his representatives have put the DIA on notice that its multibillion-dollar art collection is a city asset and could be sold as part of a broad-based resolution of the city's massive debt, estimated at $15 billion to $17 billion. The DIA has hired a bankruptcy lawyer to advise it.
Nothing about the case is typical. The DIA is unusual among major civic museums in that the city retains ownership of the building and collection while daily operations and fund-raising are overseen by a nonprofit institution. The forced sale of art from a major American museum would be without precedent — and likely extraordinarily complicated and controversial.
Orr has not yet decided whether to sell art, though a final decision is expected within weeks. The possibility that the DIA might be forced to liquidate treasures by van Gogh, Matisse, Bruegel or other masterpieces under its care has sent shock waves of disbelief among the museum's supporters and the wider art world."It is a difficult time for the city, its residents and institutions. It is unlikely that Orr's decision, whatever it ultimately is, will satisfy anyone.
|A photograph which hasn't been litigated in the PCC|
|Sometimes, navigating the law can get a little prickly|
" Zenani and Makaziwe Mandela intend fighting an April 2004 Johannesburg High Court order which gave Mandela the right to instruct Ismail Ayob, his then lawyer, to stop managing his financial, personal and legal affairs. The court order barred Ayob from selling any of Mandela's artworks.The precise legal basis upon which the rights in the former President's artwork are contested is not spelled out, but a post on Public News Hub adds that
The Star reported that Mandela's current lawyer, Bally Chuene, filed an affidavit last week in response to a lawsuit brought by the sisters, who are represented by Ayob.
Last month the sisters filed papers asking for Chuene, George Bizos SC and Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale to remove themselves as directors and trustees of the Mandela Trust and as directors of Harmonieux and Magnifique (Pty) Ltd with immediate effect.
In his replying affidavit, Chuene reportedly said he, Bizos and Sexwale had, in 2011, refused to release the trust's money to the daughters without a legal justification.
The Star reported that Chuene was adamant Ayob was behind the women's court action".
"The affidavit also exposes the fact that Ismail Ayob is yet to respond to the ailing leader’s request for complete information about his art collection. Madiba requested this information for the first time in 2004 but it has yet to land at his desk".Art & Artifice hopes to report on this matter in greater detail when more information about the legal issues is available.
Collecting, preserving and promoting cultural goods, whether fine art, archaeological objects or decorative arts, is now global. Oddly, rules and practices have remained very local, save for ICOM’s efforts at the institutional level and UNESCO’s endeavours to help preserve national cultural heritage and combat illicit trafficking.Apart from this, there's some further information as to what the book covers:
This book is designed to help the collector and their advisers navigate the maze on an international level. Each chapter of The Art Collecting Manual addresses a number of issues from the perspective of a different jurisdiction to help collectors making errors that could be potenitally illegal. The format of the chapters follow a question and answer style thus enabling readers to make quick and accurate comparisons in multiple jurisdictions covering property law, insurance, customs, tax, inheritance, intellectual property and more.
A collectable in itself, this title crosses the line between highly functional and aesthetically pleasing, the perfect addition for anyone who works in international art dealings".
• Cultural Heritage and Art Market: regulations; legislation features and treaties; data about art and cultural property market: trade volume; dealers
• Purchase and Export: due diligence, local law features; remedies in case of fake, forgery or counterfeit; VAT/sales tax; artist’s resale right; export restrictions; “free ports”
• Peaceful Enjoyment: import customs; protection against claims; restitution assistance; repatriation of illegally exported cultural property; anti-seizure guarantee
• Sale: due diligence; temporary import for sale; remedies against a defaulting buyer
• Art Philanthropy: rules and practices; private foundations and museums
• Tax: wealth tax; capital gain tax; inheritance tax; tax breaks; taxation of private foundations and private museums
• Practical information/referencesBibliographic details: hardback, ISBN 9780414026933. Price: £80. Book's web page here.
Fletcher claims he helped Doig apply for parole, and was assigned as his parole officer.
Fletcher helped Doig in his search for employment, and helped him to obtain employment through the Seafarers Union in Thunder Bay...
Fletcher also encouraged Doig to pursue his artistic talent, and accepted Doig's offer to sell the work to Fletcher for $100.
Since that day in or about 1976 and to the present, Fletcher has owned the work.
He claims that "many years later, a friend staying with Fletcher commented on the work hanging in Fletcher's home, mentioned that it might be by Peter Doig, and began doing research on the artist and the painting, which was later continued by Bartlow [the Second Plaintiff] on Fletcher's behalf."
But VeneKlasen, on behalf of Doig, denied that the painting was by Doig, and denied that Doig had ever been to Thunder Bay.Back in November 2012, a HuffPost article on the dispute noted that Fletcher just wanted to establish the truth. Seeing as he is now seeking punitive damages for interference with prospective economic advantage, it seems that he now has his eyes on a greater truth.
|Richard Prince "Graduation" (2008)|