Comments on: Art-loan datapoints of the day, Peter Brant edition

By: FelixSalmon

FelixSalmon — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 12:11:16 +0000

@Chris08, the simple answer is that the only people to become super-rich playing the art market are art dealers. Larry Gagosian, say. And I think the auction houses do send 1099s to their US consignors, but I can’t speak for all small dealers.

By: Chris08

Chris08 — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 15:57:27 +0000

Felix since you know a lot about the art world, here is a question you might write about: has anyone ever become super rich (say 500 million or more) simply by playing the art market? Buying low and selling dear, as it were. And another question: do the auction houses have to report sales to the IRS? Do some investors in art manage to escape capital gains by simply not reporting them?

By: hansrudolf

hansrudolf — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 07:09:20 +0000

We’ve come full circle since Palla Strozzi and the Medici commissioned art to show their credit worthiness.

By: MrRFox

MrRFox — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 03:39:21 +0000

You didn’t tell us the most important item, FS – should be hoping that Brant borrowed against the works “non-recourse” or “with”?

By: dWj

dWj — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 00:53:38 +0000

“Which means it’s entirely possible that Allen has lent Brant more than Merce is actually worth, thanks to a hugely overinflated valuation.”

So *that’s* what housing appraisers have been doing since 2006…