Should artists be held to the same reporting and disclosure requirements as hedge funds, mutual funds, and public companies when selling their artwork?

Yes

Not the same requirements, but some to hold them to a level of accountability

Depends. They’re individuals, they shouldn’t be treated as business entities.

yes to ensure the buyers aren't scammed but they shouldn't have to face the same amount of legal docs as a business

Absolutely not. This is simply ridiculous. An artist is there to be able to feed themselves. I know artists and they are always sad to let some of their work go, as it is much more a part of them than most people's typical 'work'. For hedge funds, they are only involved in art they have put a lot of research into, and only items that have already gathered largescale interest. As such, the hedge fund is working through greed, and should be taxed quite a bit accordingly. An artist should not have to give anyone else anything from his earnings, as it was something he developed com…  Read morepletely independently, for himself and by himself, and was valued by both himself and the customer at a level that was completely subjective. As such a bank or government has no right to it. Especially when if an artist did have to do that, they would end up having to insist on higher prices just because the government will take most of it and they need to be able to live

Tricky! On the surface I'd say no, however there's a propensity for laundering activities to be considered ... hard one.

Yes but only when I come made from the selling of artwork has reached a certain threshold. This protects small or upcoming artists whilst also protesting the consumer from fraud when purchasing more expensive artwork

Individual artists shouldn’t be compared to large business entities but there should be something in place to prevent scamming

Only when their income reaches a high threshold. It's hard enough supporting yourself as an artist as is.

Yes however this should only be applicable to artists that are expecting a payout of over an agreed upon price range. For example, this should not be applicable to artists selling work for under €1000. This would allow room for creativity to still thrive and deter them away from plagiarism and theft of other artists work.

Depends on the value of the art. Cannot expect a small scale painter or singer to have to provide the same information as a hedge fund who have teams of people to work on this as their sole job

A financial entity is vastly different to an artist. different rules entirely apply

No as long as they arnt being fraudulent to people

They should be held to higher standard, lest they be culled

Individual artists shouldn't be held to the same standards as large businesses but should be held to some degree of clarity

Yes, but only after the value of the art exceeds a reasonable threshold - or the seller/dealer's combined income exceeds a reasonable threshold. Individual artists, should not be subjected to burdensome regulations if they're making less than a good, middle-class, living from their art.

I want to artists to able to make a living from art and remain protected

Yes for artists earning over a certain amount (eg €150k)

Depends on the artists background we know most art colleges are attended by affluent families with working class individuals being the minority

Yes for High income artists, but there should be means testing for reasonable thresholds. The arts is a crucial part of Irish culture

Yes, Depending on the income from the selling of artwork, if it over a certain threshold it should be taxed.

How do you feel about the balance between ensuring ethical practices in the art market and preserving the unique culture of art creation and collection?

Do you agree with the perspective that implementing such regulations could protect the art community from fraud, or do you see it as an unnecessary complication?

In what ways do you think requiring artists to follow these financial regulations could influence the types of art being produced?

If buying art became as regulated as buying stocks, would that change your interest or ability to participate in the art market?

How important do you believe transparency is in art transactions compared to maintaining an artist's right to privacy?

Imagine creating a piece of art and being told it's now considered a security; what would be your initial reaction?

Would the requirement for artists to disclose financial information change your perception of the art world's exclusivity and mystique?

Can the introduction of financial regulations into the art world be a form of protection for buyers, or does it pose a threat to artistic freedom?

Do you think treating artwork like stocks or bonds could impact how people appreciate art?

How would you feel if your favorite artist's work became significantly harder to buy due to new financial regulations?