UK art export policy under review

No great surprise, given the problems noted here and elsewhere with the existing system:

UK export procedures may have to be modified because of an abuse of the system which has recently been practised by Sheikh Saud al-Thani of Qatar. The Sheikh’s agents applied for export licences and then withdrew them when UK museums attempted to match the price. . .

The committee comments: “We cannot overstate our concern about the practice of some applicants for export licences indicating they will accept a matching offer at the time of the hearing and subsequently changing their mind. This puts those raising the money to very great trouble and effort, which are entirely wasted. We do not consider this practice runs with the grain of the Waverley system [of export controls], and we are considering whether to recommend changes in the procedures”. . .

The Export Reviewing Committee report also highlights the problems faced by museums and galleries in raising the money for acquisitions which have been export-stopped. In 2004-5, nine items were purchased, with a total value of £5.6 million, representing only 12% of the total value of objects deferred. However, export licences were ultimately issued for a further 10 deferred items, worth a total of £30.2 million, or 65% of the total value of objects under deferral. No UK buyer was able to raise the necessary funds for these, so they went abroad. Items for which licence applications were withdrawn accounted for the remaining cases.

This means that although a reasonable number of the less expensive items are saved, few of the more expensive objects go to UK museums. The two major items saved were Reynolds’ The archers (£3.2 million) and the Macclesfield Psalter (£1,685,000).

In the case of the Macclesfield Psalter, it was only thanks to a very low auction price that it stayed in the UK. As we noted here, the current system does nothing to prevent well-heeled buyers using agents to bid up the final price to a level where there is little to no chance of the required funds being raised to preempt. From the Art Newspaper.

Posted by David on January 10, 2006 11:13 AM