• 👍Maximum Derek👍
    link
    fedilink
    English
    769 months ago

    But wealthy people need to buy those and store them in crates in overseas storage so they can dodge taxes!

    • @Rapidcreek
      link
      -179 months ago

      Most are in museums where all kinds of people stand in line to see them.

      • @glimse
        link
        249 months ago

        That is absolutely not true. Museums themselves only display like 5-10% of their collection - the rest is locked away. Most art is in private storage

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          -8
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Oh, are you a museum curator? Do you know why they do that?

          • @glimse
            link
            129 months ago

            I am not but the museum stash is surely due to space! Can’t have every artifact on display or the museum would be the size of the city.

            As for private collectors, work from famous artists rarely goes down in value…so rich people “invest” on storing thousands of paintings to make their finances look lower. It’s a tax evasion scheme honestly and the fact that it deprived people from seeing said works makes it even worse imo

            • @FlowVoid
              link
              English
              -19 months ago

              to make their finances look lower. It’s a tax evasion scheme honestly

              Buying art has the same effect on taxes as buying shares of Berkshire Hathaway, which is to say no effect at all until you sell.

              • @glimse
                link
                29 months ago

                Right, it’s defering gains. They are “storing value” and unlike stocks, depriving the world of art in the process

                • @FlowVoid
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  You can store value by buying gold instead, or just depositing money in a bank account.

                  Financially, buying art only makes sense if the value increases. And it might, but stocks are generally more likely to increase and therefore make a lot more sense than buying art.

                  In either case, buying them won’t reduce your taxes.

                  • @glimse
                    link
                    19 months ago

                    Art absolutely increases in value. And it’s steady, too, being unaffected by the market. Your stocks might crash but the art market won’t and a new artist isn’t going to change the value of a Van Gogh like the discovery of a gold deposit.

                    Furthermore, the art itself has no true value so the price can be manipulated through hype. I know someone personally (client at my old job) who proudly played this game with the paintings of a deceased friend. You just need one person to spend 100k on a painting (say, a friend…) And then suddenly every painting is worth 100k. Hype and repeat.

                    It’s been years since I dug into it but here is a decent article (that I admittedly skimmed as I’m about to leave work) describing how art is used to evade taxes

            • @Rapidcreek
              link
              89 months ago

              First of all, you have to acknowledge there is a finite area for proper display. Secondly, this happens more in the artifact world than the fine art world. Third, not all parts of a collection are as good or even ready to display. Some are in need of restoration. Some are inferior to others on display. Lastly, museums like to rotate displays to help visitors see something fresh. All this doesn’t mean that museum storage areas are not interesting. The Smithsonian has a very interesting one which I was lucky to lost in when I was a child.