Will money laundering laws end art world’s culture of secrecy?

Sotheby’s Geneva, Switzerland, June 21, 2020. When a Botticelli painting went under the hammer in January 2021, at Sotheby’s New York for $92 million, it was assumed the buyer was a Russian oligarch. (Reuters/Denis Balibouse/File)

PARIS: When a Botticelli painting went under the hammer last month at Sotheby’s in New York for $92 million, it was assumed the buyer was a Russian oligarch since the bidding was done by an adviser to wealthy Russians.

As art journalist Scott Reyburn told “The Week in Art” podcast, it’s not always that simple.

“Sometimes very wealthy collectors use telephone bidders that imply a certain nationality just to guarantee their own anonymity,” he said, “to throw us off the scent.”

The ultra-wealthy prize that sort of confidentiality, and it also helps build the mystique and theatre in which auction houses like to drape themselves. Lately, however, regulators in Europe and the US are out to spoil the fun, arguing that this culture of secrecy is ripe for exploitation by criminals.

New anti-money-laundering rules mean art and antiquities dealers in the UK and EU must now record the actual beneficiaries of their sales for the first time. US Congress approved similar legislation last month that should be in place by 2022.

Some high-profile cases over the past decade seem to justify the clampdown. Disgraced Brazilian financier Edemar Cid Ferreira buying an $8 million Jean-Michel Basquiat painting and shipping it to a New York storage facility with a $100 label. Fugitive Malaysian Jho Low is accused of spending some $137 million on art with money he “borrowed” from his country’s 1MDB sovereign wealth fund.

Some in the art market fear the new approach means they are being essentially hung out as bait for criminals.

“They say we don’t report enough people, but that’s because we don’t do sales if we get a sense that the buyer is doubtful or shady,” said Marion Papillon, who runs a Paris gallery and heads a group representing the trade.

“Tracfin [France’s anti-money-laundering authority] actually wants us to complete the sale,” she told AFP, “so we can report them.”

Dealers also worry about the financial impact, not least because secrecy about their clients’ identity is often their most prized asset.

“Remember, it’s a completely cut-throat business,” said Tom Christopherson, an art law consultant for Bonhams auction house in London. “As soon as something expensive is sold at auction, within seconds the whole art market is trying to work out who that bidder was. Everyone wants to cut out the middle-man.”

There are more immediate costs, too, as even small independent galleries will need to start running background checks as if they were a bank.

“Many dealers working with small volumes probably do know their clients,” said Christopherson, “but they probably don’t have the resources to fully document that they know their clients. The art market is not famously good at bureaucracy.”

Gallerists across Britain and France have tried to push back, arguing that regulators are looking in the wrong place – that criminals are much more likely to favour anonymous online transactions to dealing with professional art experts.

“We’ve had a hell of a time trying to explain to the authorities that galleries have zero interest in seeing artworks disappear into the wrong hands,” said Papillon.

For all this, most in the Western art market accept that the days of clubby confidentiality are numbered. The public is unlikely to shed tears over the thought of wealthy collectors losing their anonymity.

Even if art dealers are not knowingly complicit in crime, their discretion and easily portable products can make them a target.

“Structurally there are a lot of ways in which money laundering certainly could easily happen in the arts, and therefore it probably does,” said Amy Whitaker, an art industry expert at New York University.

With the regulations here to stay, the only question is how a famously old-school industry adapts.

One possibility, said Whitaker, is that high-end dealers embrace technology, perhaps using blockchain-style encryption to continue guaranteeing privacy while also keeping a traceable log of purchases.

That would require quite a cultural shift for an industry, she added, laughing, “where a significant number of people still print their emails.”

The opposite could also happen, she said, with wealthy people opting for backroom sales that avoid the paperwork.

“So you might get this split where you have an incentive towards a science fiction level of technology,” said Whitaker, “and also this analogue version of two people doing a deal over an Aperol Spritz.”





Your feedback is important to us!

We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.

Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.

Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (

comments powered by Disqus



Interested in knowing more about this story?

Click here