The right to a royalty

It is difficult to argue against the introduction of droit de suite, the artists' right to royalties when their works are re-…

It is difficult to argue against the introduction of droit de suite, the artists' right to royalties when their works are re-sold publicly. However romantic the image of the artist starving in the garret, it is clearly unfair that artists and their families should often live in financial hardship while others profit, sometimes substantially, from their work.

Auctioneers maintain that the resale right is akin to giving architects a share in the re-sale value of buildings they designed or engineers a royalty on every toll bridge they built. Such spurious arguments were effectively demolished by artist Robert Ballagh, whose court action forced the Government to introduce a temporary version of the EU-inspired measure. Claims that it will damage prospects for newcomers by undermining the art market do not stand up either: beginners' work rarely appears in auction rooms but in galleries whose sales on behalf of artists are not subject to the royalty.

While the case for droit de suite is unanswerable in terms of equity, the main auction houses are divided over who should pay the royalty as the autumn sales season begins. The Government's temporary regulations - pending legislation due later this year - explicitly say that the seller is liable to pay the resale royalty due. Some auctioneers, however, have taken their lead from the main London auction houses which are charging the buyer, although the UK legislation is equally explicit that the seller pays. Christie's explains the twist of logic on its UK website with this statement: "For Christie's purposes, the seller and his agent [the auction house] are jointly and individually liable. Christie's will collect from the buyer an amount equal to the resale royalty and pass this to the relevant collecting agency."

The people who profit from an artist's work should surely be the ones to contribute to the person who created it. Most sellers of art have done very well out of the strong market for Irish works in recent years: surely they would not begrudge the artist a share in their profits.

READ MORE

The people who benefit most are, of course, the auctioneers who may sell the same work several times over a career. Between their "premiums" on sellers (usually 10 per cent) and buyers (usually 15 per cent), they take up to 25 per cent of the hammer price of all lots sold. Art sales by the three main Irish houses last year amounted to some €23 million, up almost €8 million on 2004, thus increasing their take by €2 million in one year. Surely they should contribute some if not all of the droit de suite payments to the people who make their business possible.