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

Art is an expression of self so people who make so called “art” for money should be. People who make it for other reasons should not

An artist should be held to the same reporting requirements if the artwork is sold above a certain threshold. All artwork companies, however, should be held responsible regardless of the art price.

The question asks about artists, but the reporting should be on art related corporations. They have enough corporate structure and documents to be audited and regulated. This should not be used to bug smaller independent artists, those are covered by income tax laws.

Depending on how much the artist is making save the hedge funds making $34 billion and the artist is only making $500 there's a big difference on regulatory standards for reporting and summarising an income statement for the ATO or any government agencies that want to know so depending on what the artist is making no

Depending on how they made their art and what inspired it, it could be the right thing to do, but if their is such little to nitpick on then theirs no point.

If selling actual traditional artwork - no but if they are artists selling digital art or nfts then yes definitely

Only if the regulator has the same ability and desire to regulate and enforce these requirements as the financial regulator.

Based on value as in any artists work below say 1000 would be free of this burden.

No, but There should be an accessible way for an artist to register their art in a database that has similar fraud detection as currency.

No unless there art is worth more then $250 million

Depends on the form of art purchase, if it is being purchased at ludicrous to be donated for tax purposes yes. Otherwise no.

Not understanding how this works, more info required

I don't understand how this could ever be implemented.

No but sales over a certain price should be reported

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

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?