THE COOPER REPORT AND ITS IMPACT ON THE ARTS
The Minister for the Arts, Peter Garrett during yesterday morning session, made a statement that he would continue to argue very strongly for measures which will ensure sustainability of the visual arts industry.
At a subsequent meeting with Michael Fox, Evan Lowenstein and myself, he gave an undertaking that he would arrange a meeting between us and The Minister for Superannuation, Chris Bowen who effectively was running the Cooper Report, and that he would also be speaking with him to convey the art industry’s concerns, about the debacle of the Cooper Report into Superannuation and its recommendations.
I would like to make it clear that despite these undertakings, there remains a policy gulf between the Opposition – which has stated its intent to strike out Cooper – and the Government – which has continued to sit on the fence despite the ongoing damage to the arts industry.
Over the past month, I have stated on a number of occasions, that during my 40 year involvement in the arts, I have not encountered an issue which has united the artworld and arts community to such an extent as the recommendations of the Cooper Report.
Artists, art gallery directors, auction houses, dealers, collectors and members of the arts community, reacted initially with surprise and disbelief, which turned to anger and outrage. They have all banded together under the umbrella of “Save Super Art” to voice their opposition to these recommendations.
Hundreds of emails have been received expressing their concern and disappointment at the action, or perhaps the lack of it from the Government.
For more, click HERE
21 Comments
1 KathrynBrimblecombe wrote:
Some thoughts:
1. I manage my own super fund and the GFC has made it very clear that there are/were share investments that should have never been given investment status, yet there is no ban on buying shares in a super fund to ‘protect’ people. Like shares, some art will, as time unfolds, either not maintain value or even increase in value. However, with the good advice, education and clear investment and collecting goals, art will maintain value but also increase in value. Art, can also generate an income for a super funds if the investment decision is to lease the art to external entities.
2. Unlike shares, which can devalue overnight, reacting to such things as fluctuations of foreign markets, art is a tangible product rather than an item on a computer screen watchlist. Whilst directors/beneficiaries of a superfund cannot receive personal gain from their art purchases, if need be, they can literally take hold of it to freely control losses and gains. This creates valuable diversity within a fund.
3. The core preparations for stockmarket or property investments are also applicable when buying art as an investment. These core preparations include monitoring the market, self education, utilising professional advisors [art dealers and consultants], maintaining the investment [insurance, valuations, cataloguing], culling underperforming investments [selling]. These shared preparations clearly make art a legitimate investment for super funds.
4. People will and do enjoy art collecting, but a passion for it only adds to its legitimacy as an investment, because people will be motivated to educate themselves, become involved with reputable dealers and consultants, seek membership of such things as institutional gallery foundations and societies where they will meet and talk with professionals in the artworld [curators, artists, other collectors, dealers, critics and writers]. A passionate and educated collector mass is exactly what the artworld needs to help sustain it. By banning art as a super fund investment the development of this collector mass will be severely thwarted.
5. The success of SMSFs clearly indicates that people are monitoring and managing their funds appropriately. We do not live in a Nanny State, yet the Cooper Report’s suggestion to ban art in superfunds, for the reasons given, smacks of Nanny State mentality.
Regards,
Kathryn
[Visual Artist]
2 Ann Nelson 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.
3 Pavle wrote:
liked the juxtaposition here Michael – the oil rig and our super art problem.
the Age report had Tom speaking with some appreciation of the hearing given by Garrett – no movement was the problem no doubt.
4 Tamsin Green 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.
5 Douglas Sheerer wrote:
Quote “The Federal Government’s Cooper Review of Superannuation has called for a ban on art investment in Self Management Super Funds (SMFS). The Cooper Review also wants SMSFs to divest all art investments within 5 years.”
Has the Cooper Review panel ever heard about the world ‘ART MARKET’ complete with graphs, trends, statistics, ups and downs. It is reported, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly?
We as a gallery have since 1976 dealt predominately in the primary market with a great mix of very young, mid career, elder artists and a few that have unfortunately passed on.
Already we and our artists have been financially and credibly affected by this rather loathsome and un-Australian ‘Coopers’ report which will, if implemented ‘decimate’ all in front of it >>>>>>!!
I really wonder how many of the Cooper’s panel have ever been to a Contemporary Art Gallery or met a real artist? Do their homes contain any significant art? I really do wonder about that!
Any Minister that takes this report on board and acts in it’s favour will not have acted responsibly. There is no doubt in my art market experienced mind that this report is absolutely ‘FLAWED’.
Is ‘Culture’ important to Australians? Pause maybe…… but the answer is a resounding YES!!
Maybe Mr Cooper should have looked at the ArtPrice web site before stumbling in the dark.
This is not an ad for ARTPRICE but only an example used in good faith.
Does this sound a bit like the stock market ??
Discover the world of Artprice:
• Keep track of the real market value with our unique databank of 25 million auction prices and indices, detailed auction results and 405,000 artists.
• Find your artists in upcoming auctions covering 3,600 auction houses worldwide.
• Access to our archives of 290,000 fine art auction sales.
• Detect the emerging artists through their biographies and background.
• Make the right decision with our unique artists’ reports art market key figures & trends country by country.
• 36,000 signatures, monograms and symbols.
• The mechanisms and secrets of the art auction market revealed by our press agency.
• Artprice Indicator® gives you access to indicative values for an artwork in different years.
• Artprice Knowledge®: a unique database of hundreds of millions of artist search sessions enabling artists to be grouped according to the tastes of art buyers and collectors.
• Artprice Classified Ads and Artprice Stores: the Marketplace to sell and buy Fine Art and Antiques visible to 1,300,000 Artprice members.
•
• I really do hope that common sense will prevail and that all the hard work done by, the great Australia Artists, Galleries, Aboriginal Arts Communities and Educators is not ‘wrecked’ by a completely ill conceive and prepared report to government.
• The last words will rest with the Government of the day!
• Let’s trust that the word ‘ethical’ is included in the summation.
Douglas Sheerer
6 Michael Floyd wrote:
What I really object to is the forecast in the change of rules governing what I can put in my SMSF. I followed the rules and now I am being penalised for that. I am being told that I don’t have the ability to manage my own funds and that the rules are changing because some people with vested interests in standardising everyone’s investments is telling the government that SMSFs that invest in art and coins or other collectables should be unacceptable?!
I lost about 15% of my money in my previously professionally managed fund back about 7 years ago and following that I thought I had the ability to manage my own fund as I know something about coins and notes, which is the content of my super fund. Since I set up my own fund it has increased every year. Not outrageous percentages but I have made money every year unlike those with money in shares.
By outlawing my method of managing my SMSF you are infringing my rights in some way I am sure. You will be trying to force me to put my money in shares or property and I will not invest in those.
I don’t have enough to invest in a property in my superannuation and in any case I have no inclination to do that.
Another thing that really wrankles me is that you say I can establish an SAF. What a load of rubbish! I am not going to have someone tell me what I can and can’t invest in and then charge me a fee for ‘managing’ it, especially when they don’t even know anything about my specialty.
I demand that you turf out this unfair part of the Cooper report.
Sincerely
Michael Floyd
Ettrema Super Fund.
7 Peter Gates wrote:
We were looking for a way of diversifying our small portfolio in SMSF which would provide an income, support Australians and in time, hopefully provide an increase in capital for us.
8 Sam Shmith 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.
9 Tracy Smith wrote:
Hi everyone,
I know the galleries are putting on a brace face but it is time to get on the public radar about this.
Savesuperart
http://savesuperart.org.au/ has been doing some fantastic work so far. Visit their site to get a comprehensive grounding of the issues involved.
But it is time for all of us to get out hands dirty in order to save our industry. Get Political now.
Would you be prepared to take part in a public rally, burn paintings, frames art magazines, effigies of nasty pollies etc.
I know I am willing to throw thousands of $ worth of my art on the fire because it is being rendered valueless by the Cooper report.
Please let me know if you are interested.
Cheers Tracy and Paul Smith
10 James wrote:
I wouldn’t get Garrett to take my dog for a walk. He should stick to singing, he was good at that.
11 Alexandra Fraser 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.
12 Virginia Lydiard 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.
13 Sally Morrison wrote:
Australian Artists will suffer as a result of the Cooper Review recommendations. We need to keep enthusiasm for our art going through whatever chanels we can. Investment is a major boost to the Australian art industry: it keeps names and work visible that would be otherwise lost.
14 Scott McDougall wrote:
This recommendation has the potential of destroying the Australian art market. The forced sale of acquired art of SMSF will flood an already struggling art market, robbing collectors of their potential profits on investment (…and art does return a good profit but requires time to mature), and will definitely affect the often meager income of every professional artist in this country. The Cooper Review is plainly a BAD, BAD policy!
Another blow to our culture.
15 Caroline Fidel 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.
16 Emma van Leest wrote:
Hello Michael,
I raised this issue today in page 8 of the Age in a vox pop with voters from the electorate of Melbourne. It is a great concern to me and has already impacted my practice.
Kind regards
___________________
Emma van Leest
17 Steve Denenberg wrote:
As a person who reluctantly placed money in the share market, and then lost it due to the greed of the banks, I find it hard to understand why we can’t invest in Australian art as a means of supporting something we love and, hopefully, saving funds for our retirement. We are encouraged to save for the future – so why not allow us to choose and to support Australian art and culture at the same time?
18 Melanie Diss wrote:
HANDS OFF ART IN SUPER!
19 Lucas Grogan 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.
20 John Izard 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.
21 Anita Traverso wrote:
This move will significantly reduce the quality and quantity of art sales which will threaten the survival of many commercial gallery businesses, their artists and industry suppliers, contractors and collaborators – all small businesses. The snowball effect will see unemployment figures rise as incomes of those affected will drastically dip.