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

Yes

Yes, but only if the sales price is high enough to justify it as an investment

Artists should be held to the same standards as anyone who is sort employed. The selling of their art is a business.

Yes, but only if the art surpasses a particular value threshold.

Yes, but only for artists who are making a certain a substantial income off their work

There should be categories for smaller groups and larger groups depending on how much the income is.

depending on the value of the artwork in question. High value transactions should be treated as such, but most artists don't get high value commissions

Yes, artists should be held to the same standards as everything else, while also making sure the process is very simple and non-tedious.

It should always be considered income and treated as such. Like retail institutions selling a product, an artist is selling their product. However, rules should still apply for authenticity of large works

I think that extent of reporting is somewhat extreme, but art should be reported as it can easily be manipulated to provide unfair benefits to certain people or be involved in "funny business".

Yes, but only over a certain threshold. (e.g $10k)

Depends. Most aren’t making enough to get by, and we need the arts to have a vibrant community.

So long as the amount of paintings sold, and the price doesn't exceed a certain margin

Depends on where they are at in their job and how much money it produces

I think there's a middle ground somewhere in here that we could do. We are not American so we need to start coming up with our own solutions

Taxes should be based on overall income period. No one should have to pay less whether it's is art, stocks or employment income.

Yes , however artist should be recognized as equals to other jobs and be elegible for equal amounts of government help and options

If making a living yes. if selling art to get by No

No, but we should implement more standards around art, just not that strict.

No. They should pay taxes on income like for any other entrepreneur that sells goods and/or services.

Yes, but only if their income expands a certain amount

yes but only after making a certain income off their work

Yes, but only if the price of said artwork is over a certain threshold.

For large companies yes but small businesses should be able to dictate their own standards as it is not the same for small companies as for large companies.

It all depends on the consumer and producer. If the consumer seems like they will misuse this information then the artist shouldn't, but it all depends on if the artist is comfortable.

suppose this should depend on the volume/value of art being sold

Artists should be to some extent held to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the condition that they aren't disincentivized to sell their artwork

This question is really about cryptocurrency

The SEC filed lawsuits against NFT artists & NFT marketplaces for acting as an unregulated security, not just art in general. The problem is that the SEC hasn't actually even made rulings on cryptocurrency let alone NFT's. The outcome of these lawsuits should create clear boundaries & regulations on both.

They should have their own unique thing, done by economists and expert consultants on the economy.

Depends on what the artwork is about and the whole abstract .

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

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

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?

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?

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?