Artists Want a Cut From Auction Mega-Sales

Christie's auction staff place bids received over the phone for a Frank Stella painting in 2007. The painting sold for $2.2 million.

Frank Stella has been called the father of minimalism. In the 1960s when he first started coming to people’s attention, his work could sell for a few thousands dollars.

Now, some of those same works can sell for millions of dollars at auction at places like Christie’s or Sotheby’s.

But Stella receives nothing.

If he were a musician or a novelist, he would receive residuals every time someone bought his album or novel. But in the U.S., for visual artists like Stella, a work of art is considered private property, sold from one person to the next like a car or a house

That could change if a bill sponsored by New York Congressman Jerry Nadler (D) is approved.

ART, or “American Royalties Too”Act, originally proposed a 5 percent fee on every public auction sale above $5,000 that would go to the artist. After amendments, the bill now has a maximum sales cap of $700,000, so no artist would receive more than $35,000 from an auction sale.

“I firmly believe that the time has come for us to establish a resale royalty right here in the United States,” Nadler said in a statement introducing the bill. “By adopting a resale royalty, the United States would join the rest of the world in recognizing this important right.”

Christie's and Sotheby's oppose the bill, but declined to talk to WNYC.

Guy Rub, a law professor at Ohio State University who has studied the bill argues it could actually discourage buyers from investing in art and would largely benefit famous artists who are already financially successful. It could also drive sales to galleries and private sales, which would be exempt from the law.

“I don’t know what’s good about that,” he said. “Auctions, at least, are public – the information is public – so one of the problems with the art market is there’s a lot of secrecy there. That’s not good for any market, it’s not horrible but it’s not good.”

 

Correction: An earlier version of this story described the proposed legislation as a tax. It is more accurate to describe it as a royalty to be paid to the artist if a work of art is resold at auction.