The final Cooper Report into Superannuation was released on Monday. It contained the recommendations that Self-Managed Superannuation Funds were no longer to be allowed to invest in the Australian art market and all SMSF artwork collections were to be sold within a five-year divestment period.
Save Super Art can only concur with one of the respondents to its campaign that this represents “an oppressive and loathsome series of recommendations” which is ill-thought, lacking evidence and if carried out would result in gallery closures, loss of exhibition opportunities for artists, unemployment in the ancillary art industries and the destruction of retirement savings for thousands of Australians.
This is not an emotional argument as Jeremy Cooper would like to see it but one based on fact. Despite the hundreds of emails sent to his Panel since we commenced our campaign against his wrong-headed recommendations of April 29, which came out of the blue to the Australian arts industry, Cooper has chosen not to investigate the impact of his superannuation review on our national culture and instead has decided on a far harsher course of action than first flagged.
To better understand why Save Super Art opposes these recommendations I have attached an analysis of the words the Cooper Panel used to justify their final position.
We will now be calling for a Federal Government parliamentary enquiry into the processes that led to the unjust Cooper recommendations concerning artwork investments in Self-Managed Superannuation Funds. Details of this action will be sent out shortly but in the meantime please visit www.savesuperart.org.au and send us a comment. Your comments will also be sent to the Cooper Panel, the Government and the Opposition.
All the best
Michael Fox
Campaign Organiser, Save Super Art
P.S. a note of thanks to Don Watson and to www.weaselwords.com.au
For more on Michael Fox’s deconstruction of the arguments in the Cooper Review, click HERE
42 Comments
1 Amanda van Gils wrote:
Absolutely outrageous ill-informed policy. If this goes ahead, the ramifications on artists, galleries and anyone who derives their income from the art world will be staggering. …which, by the way, will actually increase unemployment figures.
Any financial career gains made by artists through government funding programs will be minimised through the downturn in the industry more broadly.
2 Paula Mahoney wrote:
I fully support this campaign – the Cooper report if implemented will severely affect the arts industry and the people working within it.
Just a thought -what remains after hundreds of years to reflect a culture – art and architecture – what are we doing?
3 Michael Laloli wrote:
Very very bad idea..
4 Cynthia Ellis wrote:
I am a full time practicing artist in Western Australia. The super arts investments allow patrons to continue with their support towards artists, which allows them to continue with their practice and collectors who are serious to continue through the advantages superannuation allows them. I am opposed to any changes as this would affect my livelihood and other artists whose practice is supported through these investments. Keep artists alive, and support our creative endeavors.
5 Denise Paterson wrote:
I urge you to examine this policy more closely. The inclusion of artworks within a superannuation portfolio makes sound financial sense – probably more so than investing in the current volatile stockmarket. The regulations on the use of purchased works are very clear and this type of investment are usually viewed as a longer term investment. To insist that people rid their funds of their artwork(s) within a short timeframe could be very detremental for many.
Quite frankly, it is this type of ad hoc, spur of the moment change to the superannuation rules that makes people wonder why they have bothered to plan and sacrifice to be financially responsible & independent in retirement when the rug can be pulled out from under carefully planned portfolios.
6 Robert Buratti wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
7 Ben Harrison wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
8 Sharon Billinge wrote:
This will impact significantly on the sales of my work which will in turn impact people I turn to frame, stretch, supply materials and deliver the finished work.
9 Leisel wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
10 David wrote:
Dear Michael,
Many thanks. I have circulated this to the members of the Association of Western Australian Art Galleries.
The coverage by the Australian has been good & we look forward to Saturday’s edition.
I was struck by the fact that from Tuesday and Wednesday’s coverage we have learnt that the Cooper Committee (a) didn’t consider whether or not art was a worthwhile investment—-what they were concerned about was people buying art for their SMSF without knowing whether it was a good investment; and (b) they never considered the effect their recommendations could have on the art market.
The first argument is specious (are all investors really fully clued up about the stock market?); but in any event can be countered by the points you make in your analysis.
The second, beggars belief. But this is something the Government, unlike Copper, has to take very seriously.
All success,
David
11 John McLennan wrote:
I simply have had enough of this labour governments stupidity. I am in a marginal seat and WILL NOT be voting labour again. EVER!!!
12 Phillip Sayers wrote:
Please consider the impact that any change to art investment in Self Managed Super Funds will have on the art industry. It will totally destabilise the whole industry by destabilising market prices, both in the primary gallery marketing and secondary auction market. Australian artists and art investors cannot realistically consider the international market as an alternative, once the destabilising impact of these changes takes place. The flow on effects and uncertainty in the market will be devastating for many more individuals than the investor and purchaser of Australian art. Consider the impact on the artist, the collector, the gallerist, museums and public galleries and industries/suppliers that support the creation and promotion of art.
13 Lauraine Diggins wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
14 James Macdougall wrote:
The concept of SMS Funds purchasing art is a sound one from many perspectives. It provides a well structured and regulated mechanism for the preservation of artworks for future generations. Remove these mechanisms and without question the modest incentives for contemporary Australian artists to create will be in part removed.
15 Francesca Carra wrote:
I also support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
Hands off the Arts Industry, It’s tough enough as it is to make a living, without having to have someone think that OUR lively-hood isn’t worth investing in.
16 Ember Parkin wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
17 John Wregg wrote:
The legislation would drastically reduce the value of our existing superfund. When art is outperforming the share market, why should our well researched and carefully managed investments, in an arena we are knowledgeable about, in the art market be disallowed as a way of providing for our retirement
18 Helen Johnson wrote:
This is an economically myopic and culturally regressive act. It is extremely sad to see the Australian arts industry, as driven, energetic and viable as it is, being throttled by governmental imbeciles.
19 Jane Raffan wrote:
In 2009 the Protection of Moveable Cultural Heritage legislation underwent a formal review process, the results of which have now been published. Key recommendations include:
71. Monitor the impact of the PMCH legislation on the contemporary Indigenous art market to assess whether it is having any negative impact.
72. Continue to monitor concerns that the legitimate trade in cultural property, including visual arts and craft, is supported in line with the Australian Government’s broader policy objectives, and is not excessively restricted…[p24].
In contrast, the Cooper Review’s recommendation to ban art as an asset class in SMSFs has been determined without broad consultation with the arts sector during the review process, and apparently without reference to the ‘broader policy objectives’ mentioned above.
If the Cooper Review’s recommendations for SMFs are accepted by the federal government, it will be deemed another example of ad hoc policy made on the run, and the art market will suffer significant constraint as a consequence.
20 Paul Jarvis wrote:
I am a small business owner servicing the Sydney art market . We deliver and install Art .
These recommendations by the Cooper Review will definately have an impact on my business . I can ill afford a downturn in business .
At a time when the government has been offering various kinds of stimulus packages ,I am in turn being kicked in the guts !
I have no doubts that changes eliminating Art purchases from Super funds will have a significant effect on the Art industry and in turn on my business . These changes are a worry to me .
Honestly it’s hard enough as is to run a small business with all the insurances ,workers comp and payroll tax that one is forced to pay . These proposed changes will make it harder to keep my business worthwhile . . One would like to think you could be given a pat on the back with a nod and a wink for trying to do something for yourself. “good on you mate for having a dip”.
Nope!
It just keeps getting made harder .
With a young family and a mortgage and employees I ask that these recommendations , not be made .
Leave it as is . I’m not asking for anything irrational or unjust . Just give my small business a chance .
21 Annette Larkin wrote:
Working in the arts industry for over 25 years and as an art advisor/dealer/valuer, I am very aware of the many people who have made very astute purchases of art through their super fund. These individuals have carefully looked after the interests of their retirement in an educated manner and taken more care with their investment than many who just push the regulatory amount of cash into a black hole.
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. I do not see the purpose of such a decision neither has the arts community ever been consulted on this issue.
If this occurs there will be a flood of art on the market, which will lead to a decrease in prices, therefore less money in personally managed superfunds and therefore more money the government has to cough up in pensions and public healthcare.
Please take careful consideration to your decision Mr Cooper.
Annette Larkin
22 Andrew Mezei wrote:
The federal Government’s reckless decision will artificially depress prices in the art market for years. I fear new creative talent will be stamped out as a result.
23 Lisa McLaren wrote:
I am a gallery owner (aboriginal art). Yesterday I was visited by an elderly gentleman who for many years has been building a ‘nest egg’ of art in his super fund. He is now quite devastated by this new proposed legislation. Art is an extremely legitimate form of investment, that has outperformed many sectors. We should encourage people to invest in the arts- this ‘reform’ will not do that.
24 Helen Hansen wrote:
I have worked in the retail end of the Aboriginal art market for 30 years. Most art galleries are suffering the effects of reduced consumer spending. Removing investment in art for Superannuation Funds will be a fatal blow for many struggling galleries. Flooding the secondary market with divested art works will cause values to drop and a loss of confidence.
25 Richard Giblett wrote:
As a practicing artist for 20 years I well know the difficulties in trying to stay afloat financially. If implemented the CR recommendations will seriously undermine many artists’ livelihood and art practice. Please reconsider.
Regards,
Richard Giblett
26 Ronzo wrote:
I don’t see the difference, you’re allowed to buy stocks but not art. I think an artist should be the ones given the tax breaks and allowed to invest their self managed super any way they like.
Artists barely get any kind of incentive and why hurt an already crippled art market??? You obviously have no idea of the concept of art or where it comes from.
27 Ken Martin wrote:
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your efforts regarding the save super art campaign.
I have had difficulty accessing the website http://www.savesuperart.org.au listed in your recent email but will persist.
I have clients who have purchased my sculptures through super funds and they found the increased value of their purchases outstripped share investments. This result is both incentive for them to reinvest and adds solidarity to my income stream.
When GST was introduced , the benefits of exemption from a value added tax enjoyed by the arts under the sales tax system was foregone. What little resistance to this change, offered by the arts industry, was futile , resulting in the arts being placed on level ground with other industry. What the Cooper report proposes would place the arts industry at a distinct disadvantage , culturally and financially. I would be interested to know how a constitutional lawyer would interpret such discriminatory legislation that may compulsorily restrict the freedom of choice when choosing the type of investment for retirement funds.
The opportunity for individuals to invest in art as part of their super folio has in my view inadvertently created the best and fairest system for fostering artists that we have seen to date. I would guess that as a result the ATO has received more revenue from the arts sector than any other time in Australia’s history.
All the Best
Regards
Ken Martin –sculptor
28 Scott Marr wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
29 Tiffany Zanatta wrote:
“HANDS OFF OUR SUPER ART”!!!!! We are supposed to be a wonderfully diverse cultural society who embraces the arts with open arms. Instead we have uninformed or uninterested bureaucrats trying to tell us that art is a bad investment for Super. How wrong can he be!!!
30 Eleanor Hart wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
31 Virginia Dahlenburg wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
32 Christine Wrest Smit wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
33 Stephen Davidson wrote:
The ramifications for a stressed art market will only be increased a hundred fold. It is time for a real policy for the arts and to be given all the financial opportunities given to athletes and sport. The Artists of the world work for little return with many willing to take advantage of the artist now we have big government doing the same thru the retrograde policy for art in super funds.
34 Susan McCulloch wrote:
Michael
Re the `legitimacy’ of the art world…as you quote Cooper as below
There is now a code of conduct in place for Aboriginal art currently being implemented.
The fact that the govt is spending so much money on implementing a code of conduct for Aboriginal art dealers and galleries ought counteract some of these concerns
Best
Susan
35 Mike Chavez wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
36 Alfredo Sonny Esquil wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.
37 Maryanne Byrne wrote:
Why punish the artists of this country with a very unfair review. Leave the art super the way it is.
38 Prue wrote:
We too have a large amount of money set aside in our Super we were going to put into art.
39 Jan wrote:
I can also confirm that I have had a client put $150K purchase budget (Aboriginal art) on hold for the same reason.
40 Mark Seares wrote:
I am a property valuer and real estate agent of some 35 years standing. I’ve seen the introduction of compulsory superannuation and tried to manage lifetime decisions whilst Governments continually shift the goal-posts, from tax deductable to taxable, can’t borrow to can borrow etc.
Now Mr Cooper wants to dictate what I can invest in.
Well I’ve studied the markets Mr Cooper; I’ve lost a heap following the advice of stockbrokers who helped me “balance” my SMSF with equities like Babcock & Brown and others which no longer exist. I’ve never lost like that in the art market. In fact I’m well in front at present, despite the lack of your ASIC regulations, but even ASIC must understand the fundamentals of supply & demand.
You propose to kill a major sector of the art market and force that sector to dump all it’s investment in a five year time frame, with a view to “protecting” those investors? Well sorry kids, there goes the inheritance and by the way, have you got somewhere for me to stay???
41 Jillian Holst wrote:
I have been an art advisor and registered art valuer for over thirty years.
During this time I have personally witnessed, with thoughtful and judicial purchases, how my clients have financially benefited in their investment in art.
One salient fact seems to have been totally ignored in the rather questionable arguments against art as an investment in SMSF’s.
The people who own their own funds are also the custodians of the assets within their SMSF. They are responsible to ensure growth..why? Because it guarantees comfort in their retirement/old age.
WHY would anybody jeopardise that?
42 Tamsin Davidson wrote:
Dear Mr Cooper, Government Ministers and Opposition Spokespeople
I support the SAVE SUPER ART campaign against the Cooper Review recommendations banning art investments in Self Managed Super Funds. The recommendations are fundamentally flawed, serve no good purpose, are already creating damaging uncertainty in the Australian art market, and, if implemented, would create disastrous “unintended consequences” for the Australian art industry.