Art Adviser Lisa Schiff Pleads Guilty to Wire Fraud

Image of Lisa Schiff

Once a prominent art adviser, Lisa Schiff, has now pleaded guilty to wire fraud in a New York court on Thursday, admitting to defrauding clients out of millions! She faces two lawsuits from collectors, including one for $1.8 million related to a painting sale and another claiming she misused $6.6 million intended for art purchases.

In January, Schiff filed for bankruptcy, reportedly owing nearly $7 million to various entities. U.S. Attorney Damian Williams stated she misappropriated client funds to support a lavish lifestyle. Schiff has agreed to forfeit $6.4 million, with sentencing set for January, facing a maximum of 20 years in prison. This jail sentance is highly unlikely for a white color crime.

It's hard to believe Lisa was once a leading figure in the art world with alist clients like Leonardo DiCaprio and has fallen to this level of disgrace. Schiff's firm, SFA Advisory, has closed, and artworks are being auctioned, including pieces estimated to be worth $2 million at Phillips next month. Her lawyer, Randy Zelin, emphasized that this marks the start of Schiff’s journey toward making amends.

Lisa Schiff will likely try to rebuild her reputation in the art world post-sentencing, but regaining trust should be difficult. If she returns, it would likely involve smaller projects to demonstrate integrity. A full comeback to her previous prominence seems unlikely, nevertheless, it's best to stay clear of Lisa Schiff.

- J.Larson

Investigators say Chicago's Art Institute is holding onto 'Looted Art'

The Art Institute of Chicago. Ando Gallery. Courtesy of the Art Institute of Chicago.
by Tom Mashberg and Graham Bowley

NEW YORK, NY.- New York investigators trying to seize a drawing from the Art Institute of Chicago filed an exacting 160-page motion Friday accusing the museum of blatantly ignoring evidence of an elaborate fraud undertaken to conceal that the artwork had been looted by the Nazis on the eve of World War II.

While the court papers, filed by the Manhattan district attorney’s office, did not accuse the museum of being party to the fraud, they said it had applied “willful blindness” to what the investigators said were clear indications that it was acquiring stolen property.

The drawing, “Russian War Prisoner,” by Egon Schiele, was purchased by the Art Institute in 1966. It is one of a number of works by Schiele that ended up in the hands of museums and collectors and have been sought by the heirs of Fritz Grünbaum, a Jewish cabaret entertainer from Vienna who was murdered in a Nazi concentration camp. The institute paid about $5,500 for the drawing, which has been valued by investigators today at $1.25 million.

In a statement, the Art Institute said it had good title to the work by Schiele, an Austrian expressionist, and would fight the district attorney’s attempt to seize it.

“We have done extensive research on the provenance history of this work and are confident in our lawful ownership of the piece,” the museum said, adding: “If we had this work unlawfully, we would return it, but that is not the case here.”

But the investigators said in their court filing that the institute’s “failure” to vet the work properly “undercuts any arguments that AIC were truly good-faith purchasers.”

Much of what was presented in the investigators’ voluminous filing had been cited in civil court cases pursued in recent years by the Grünbaum heirs. The current detailed presentation — which included more than 100 exhibits designed to trace the path of the artwork from the hands of Grünbaum to the Nazis to the museum — was aimed at pressuring the institute to follow the lead of seven other museums and collectors who have recently turned over Schiele works once owned by Grünbaum to the district attorney’s Antiquities Trafficking Unit.

The Art Institute has argued that the federal courts have already ruled in the matter, deciding that the heirs had come forward too late to lay claim to the work and that there was reason to believe the works were all inherited by Grünbaum’s sister-in-law, who passed them on to a Swiss dealer in the 1950s.

The New York investigators took aim at that account in their motion, devoting page after page to evidence that they said showed the provenance documents brought forward by the dealer, Eberhard Kornfeld, to prove his account, contained forged signatures or were altered long after he came into possession of the Schieles in the mid-1950s.

“There is one person in this case who doctored” documents, “and always did so in pencil — Eberhard Kornfeld,” Matthew Bogdanos, chief of the Antiquities Trafficking Unit, said in the court filing.

The investigators contend that, while it is not possible to absolutely determine how Kornfeld secured the Grünbaum art, it was most likely provided to him by other art dealers known to have relations with the Nazis. The court filing includes inventory records that prosecutors said establish that the works were in the possession of a Nazi-controlled storehouse in Austria in 1938 after Grünbaum was sent to the Dachau concentration camp in Germany, where he was killed in 1941.

The filing also cites documents to show that the sister-in-law, Mathilde Lukacs, had already fled the country when the “Prisoner” drawing, and others later obtained by Kornfeld, were in the Vienna storage facility. As a result, the investigators said, the works could not have been sold by her to Kornfeld.

In arguing it holds good title to the work, the Art Institute has relied on two federal court rulings. In one, rendered in 2011 involving another Schiele work once owned by Grünbaum, the judge described Kornfeld’s account as credible, and added that, regardless, the heirs were not timely in bringing a claim.

In a second case brought by the heirs and decided in November, a federal court in New York, citing the earlier federal case, awarded the Art Institute ownership of “Prisoner” because it, too, ruled that the Grünbaum heirs had waited too long to make a claim for the drawing.

A lawyer for the heirs, Raymond Dowd, said he had filed to ask the judge to reconsider the decision in this case and to allow him to file an amended complaint.

“The Art Institute of Chicago recently prevailed in civil litigation in federal court regarding Egon Schiele’s ‘Russian War Prisoner,’ successfully demonstrating that the claimants’ suit lacked merit,” the institute said in its statement.

“Federal court,” the statement said, “has explicitly ruled that the Grünbaums’ Schiele art collection was ‘not looted’ and ‘remained in the Grünbaum family’s possession’ and was sold by Fritz Grünbaum’s sister-in-law Mathilde Lukacs in 1956.”

The institute’s decision to continue to fight the efforts by Manhattan prosecutors to retrieve its Schiele work makes it a lone holdout among the museums and collectors who received warrants from investigators telling them they possessed stolen property.

Among those returning Grünbaum works in September were the Museum of Modern Art and the Morgan Library & Museum, both in New York; the Santa Barbara Museum of Art in California; Ronald S. Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress and a longtime advocate of Holocaust restitution; and the estate of Serge Sabarsky, a well-known art collector.

Since then, two other institutions — the Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh and the Allen Memorial Art Museum at Oberlin College — agreed to surrender artworks once owned by Grünbaum.

One of the confusing aspects of the dispute is that a state court in New York has ruled in a completely opposite way and found that the Grünbaum Schieles were indeed looted.

While decisions in federal court have held that the Grünbaum heirs waited too long to start reclaiming the works, the 2018 New York state Supreme Court ruling found that Grünbaum had never sold or surrendered any of his works before his death, and that they were looted by the Nazis, making his heirs their true owners.

The ruling relied on the terms of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, a U.S. law that seeks to ensure that “claims to artwork and other property stolen or misappropriated by the Nazis are not unfairly barred by statutes of limitations.”

Investigators for the Manhattan district attorney’s office became involved after the New York state court ruling. Prosecutors have said they have jurisdiction because some of the Grünbaum works passed from Kornfeld to a Manhattan dealer, Otto Kallir.

The Schiele works, including the “Prisoner” drawing, were sold by Kallir to a variety of buyers, and the drawing ultimately ended up at the Art Institute.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.https://artdaily.cc/news/166994/Investigators-say-Chicago-s-Art-Institute-is-holding-onto--Looted-Art-

A German Museum Employee Has Been Caught ‘Shamelessly’ Swapping Original Paintings for Fakes to Fund His Lavish Lifestyle

The man is said to have spent the money on a new apartment, wristwatches, and a Rolls-Royce.

Franz von Stuck, The Fairy Tale of the Frog King (1891). Photo by Fine Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images.

A German museum employee has confessed to an audacious scheme, after he was caught swapping out paintings with forgeries and selling the originals to fund a luxury lifestyle. He has received a suspended prison sentence of one year and nine months and must pay back more than €60,000 ($63,500) to the unnamed German museum, the Munich District Court ordered on September 11.

The man, now aged 30, stole three paintings while working at the museum in Munich as a technician between May 2016 and April 2018. He replaced the paintings with fakes while they were in storage, consigning the originals to a Munich auction house.

The defendant allegedly used the money to pay debts and fund a luxury lifestyle, the court heard. “Among other things, he bought a new apartment, expensive wristwatches, and bought a Rolls-Royce,” read the verdict, noting that the man now showed remorse. “He stated that he had acted without thinking. He could no longer explain his behavior today.”

After replacing Franz Stuck’s Das Märchen vom Froschkönig (The Fairy Tale of the Frog King) (1891) with a forgery, the man pretended the original was a family heirloom and it was sold at Ketterer Kunst auction house in May 2017 to a Swiss gallery for €70,000 ($74,000). After auction house fees, he received $49,127.40 ($52,000).

Two more paintings that were switched out for fakes, Franz von Defregger’s Zwei Mädchen beim Holzsammeln im Gebirge (Two Girls Gathering Wood in the Mountains) and Eduard von Grützner’s Die Weinprüfung (Tasting the Wine), brought in an additional €11,490.50 ($12,700). An attempt to sell a fourth painting, Franz von Defregger’s Dirndl, at another Munich auction house was unsuccessful. The man made €60,617 ($64,000) in total.

“We have, of course, fulfilled our duty of care in full and have researched the works mentioned extensively,” a spokesperson for Ketterer Kunst told Artnet News. “We regret that the works were stolen from the museum with such high criminal energy. We cooperated closely with the LKA (Bavarian State Criminal Police Office) at an early stage and handed over all documents to solve this case.”

The unnamed German museum is currently trying to arrange for the return of the pictures, according to Süddeutsche Zeitung. It apparently has many valuable German paintings languishing in storage thanks to a history of receiving bequests from local foundations and families.

“The defendant shamelessly exploited the opportunity to access the storage rooms in the employer’s buildings and sold valuable cultural assets in order to secure an exclusive standard of living for himself and to show off,” the verdict summarized.

The apparent vulnerability of the museum’s collection to theft while in storage recalls the recent scandal of a senior curator at the British Museum accused of stealing some 1,500 objects, several of which were sold for cheap on eBay. Most of these items had never been catalogued, revealing the complex challenges faced by museums tasked with keeping track of vast holdings.


https://news.artnet.com/art-world/german-museum-employee-swapped-paintings-fakes-2367937Jo Lawson-Tancred, September 25, 2023

Florida art scammer sentenced to over 2 years in federal prison

An undated photo provided by The United States Department of Justice of a fake Jean-Michel Basquiat work sold by Daniel Elie Bouaziz for $12 million. The Florida art dealer who promised bargains on works he claimed were originals by master artists including Roy Lichtenstein, Keith Haring and Henri Matisse has been sentenced to more than two years in federal prison for laundering money made running a counterfeit scheme, federal officials said. (The United States Department of Justice via The New York Times) by Livia Albeck-Ripka

NEW YORK, NY.- A Florida art dealer who promised bargains on works he claimed were originals by master artists including Roy Lichtenstein, Keith Haring and Henri Matisse has been sentenced to more than two years in federal prison for running a counterfeit scheme, federal officials said. The man, Daniel Elie Bouaziz, 69, owned several art galleries in Palm Beach County, Florida, through which he operated the counterfeit scheme. He was sentenced on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Miami to 27 months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, and was ordered to pay a $15,000 fine, court filings show.

Bouaziz pleaded guilty in February to one charge of money laundering on the condition that federal prosecutors drop 16 other counts, according to the documents. Neither Bouaziz nor his lawyer could immediately be reached for comment on Tuesday evening.

According to prosecutors, Bouaziz, a French and Israeli citizen born in Algeria, was in the United States on a B-2 visitor’s visa. They said the pieces he had represented as authentic works were cheap reproductions he had bought through online auctions. He was charged in June after an investigation that included the serving of search warrants at his galleries, a review of financial records and undercover purchases of what prosecutors had deemed to be fraudulent art.

According to the federal complaint, Bouaziz conducted his art dealing through three companies: Galerie Danieli, Danieli Fine Art and VIP Rentals LLC. The website for Danieli Fine Art advertises a collection from a wide range of notable artists, including Monet, Rodin, Jean-Michel Basquiat and Willem de Kooning. But counterfeit Andy Warhols were what sent Bouaziz to prison.

On Oct. 25, 2021, Bouaziz sold what he had claimed were “authentic, original Warhol pieces,” some of them “signed by the artist,” to an unwitting customer, federal prosecutors said. The customer gave Bouaziz a $200,000 down payment, which he then wired to other accounts. According to court documents, Bouaziz then took five artworks to the buyer’s house. Federal prosecutors did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday evening, but in a sentencing memorandum, they noted that Bouaziz “knew some of the pieces he sold were not genuine.” In one instance, they added, he sold fraudulent art to an undercover agent for $25,0000.

Bouaziz, they added, had won over many in Palm Beach with his philanthropy, his luxury cars and invitations to lunch and art events. But his generosity, prosecutors said, belied a darker reality. “Bouaziz painted a picture of himself that he wanted others to see and believe,” they said.

A restitution hearing is scheduled for Aug. 16. This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

https://artdaily.cc/news/157920/Florida-art-scammer-sentenced-to-over-2-years-in-federal-prison

The mystery of the disappearing van Gogh

The Shanghai apartment complex that is home to Liu Hailong, the man who paid the nearly $62 million bill for the van Gogh, on March 10, 2023. After “Still Life, Vase with Daisies and Poppies” by Vincent van Gogh sold at auction in November 2014, a movie producer claimed to be the owner. It later vanished from sight, with a trail leading to Caribbean tax havens and a jailed Chinese billionaire. (The New York Times) by Michael Forsythe, Isabelle Qian, Muyi Xiao and Vivian Wang

NEW YORK, NY.- The bidding for Lot 17 started at $23 million. In the packed room at Sotheby’s in New York City, the price quickly climbed: $32 million, $42 million, $48 million. Then a new prospective buyer, calling from China, made it a contest between just two people.
On the block that evening in November 2014 were works by impressionist painters and modernist sculptors that would make the auction the most successful yet in the firm’s history. But one painting drew particular attention: “Still Life, Vase with Daisies and Poppies,” completed by Vincent van Gogh weeks before his death. Pushing the price to almost $62 million, the Chinese caller prevailed. His offer was the highest for a van Gogh still life at auction. In the discreet world of high-end art, buyers often remain anonymous. But the winning bidder, a prominent movie producer, would proclaim in interview after interview that he was the painting’s new owner.

The producer, Wang Zhongjun, was on a roll. His company had just helped bring “Fury,” the World War II movie starring Brad Pitt, to cinemas. He dreamed of making his business China’s version of The Walt Disney Co. The sale, according to Chinese media, became a national “sensation.” It was a sign — after the acquisition of a Pablo Picasso by a Chinese real estate tycoon the year before — that the country was becoming a force in the global art market. “Ten years ago, I could not have imagined purchasing a van Gogh,” Wang said in a Chinese-language interview with Sotheby’s. “After buying it, I loved it so much.” But Wang may not be the real owner at all. Two other men were linked to the purchase: an obscure middleman in Shanghai who paid Sotheby’s bill through a Caribbean shell company, and the person he answered to — a reclusive billionaire in Hong Kong.

The billionaire, Xiao Jianhua, was one of the most influential tycoons of China’s gilded age, creating a financial empire in recent decades by exploiting ties to the Communist Party elite and a new class of superrich businessmen. He also controlled a hidden offshore network of more than 130 companies holding more than $5 billion in assets, according to corporate documents obtained by The New York Times. Among them was Sotheby’s invoice for the van Gogh.

The secrecy that pervades the art world and its dealmakers — including international auction houses such as Sotheby’s — has drawn scrutiny in the years since the sale as authorities try to combat criminal activity. Large transactions often pass through murky intermediaries, and the vetting of them is opaque. Citing client confidentiality, Sotheby’s declined to comment on the purchase. Today, Xiao, 51, is a man who has fallen far. Abducted from his luxury apartment and now imprisoned in mainland China, he was convicted of bribery and other misdeeds that prosecutors claimed had threatened the country’s financial security. Meanwhile, Wang is struggling, liquidating properties as his film studio loses money each year. And the still life, according to several art experts, has been offered for private sale. For a century after van Gogh gathered flowers and placed them in an earthen vase to paint, the artwork’s provenance could be easily traced, and the piece was often exhibited in museums for visitors to admire. Now the painting has vanished from public view, its whereabouts unknown.

A Painting’s Many Lives
In May 1890, van Gogh arrived in Auvers-sur-Oise, a rustic village outside Paris. Deeply depressed, he had cut off much of his left ear a year and a half earlier. His stay at an asylum had not helped. But within hours of coming to the village, he met Paul-Ferdinand Gachet, a doctor and an art enthusiast. “I’ve found in Dr. Gachet a ready-made friend and something like a new brother,” van Gogh wrote to his sister. The physician encouraged van Gogh to ignore his melancholy and focus on his paintings. He completed nearly 80 of them in two months, including “Portrait of Dr. Gachet,” considered a masterpiece. He produced “Vase With Daisies and Poppies” at the physician’s home and may have given it to him in exchange for treatment, biographers say. After van Gogh’s death in July 1890, the painting passed to a Parisian collector, and then, in 1911, as the artist’s fame was rising, to a Berlin art dealer. A series of German collectors owned it before A. Conger Goodyear, a Buffalo, New York, industrialist and co-founder of the Museum of Modern Art in New York, bought it in 1928. His son George later granted partial ownership to Buffalo’s Albright-Knox Art Gallery, which displayed it for nearly three decades.

In May 1990, capping years of record-breaking prices for van Goghs, a Japanese businessman spent $82.5 million for “Portrait of Dr. Gachet” at Christie’s, then the highest price paid at auction for any artwork. About that time, Goodyear wanted to sell the 26-by-20-inch still life to raise money for another museum. It failed to sell at Christie’s in November 1990, where it had been expected to fetch between $12 million and $16 million. Soon after, a lower offer was accepted from a buyer who remained anonymous.

Most of the 400 or so oil paintings van Gogh produced during his last years — considered his best work — are at arts institutions around the world. About 15% are in private hands and not regularly on loan to museums. In the past decade, just 16 have been offered at auction, according to Artnet, an industry database. Among them was “Orchard With Cypresses,” from the collection of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, which Christie’s sold last year for $117 million to an undisclosed buyer.

The Producer and the Billionaire

For a year after the November 2014 auction, Wang kept the still life at his $25 million apartment in Hong Kong. In October 2015, the film producer was the guest of honor at a five-day exhibition in the city. An amateur artist, he had more than a dozen of his own oil paintings on display. But the main attractions were the van Gogh and a Picasso he had recently bought, “Woman With a Hairbun on a Sofa.” Sotheby’s said Wang had paid nearly $30 million for the work. Until then, Japanese industrialists, followed by American hedge fund managers and Russian oligarchs, had captured headlines for record-breaking purchases. Around 2012, newly rich Chinese buyers, who had benefited from their country’s market-opening policies, came on the scene. “All the auction houses really jumped on that,” said David Norman, who headed Sotheby’s impressionist and modern art department when the van Gogh was sold.

Chinese billionaires were often delighted to announce their big-ticket purchases. In 2013, a retail magnate bought a Picasso for $28 million at Christie’s, following up with a $20 million Claude Monet at Sotheby’s in 2015. The same year, a stock investor spent $170 million at Christie’s for an Amedeo Modigliani. “It is a combination of vanity, investment and building their own brand,” said Kejia Wu, who taught at Sotheby’s Institute of Art and is the author of a new book on China’s art market. Wang, 63, basked in the spotlight. In interviews, he spoke of his admiration for van Gogh and the artist’s influence on him. “Few people in the world would buy this kind of painting — there aren’t that many who love impressionist art this much and can afford it, right?” Days after the hammer fell at Sotheby’s, Wang had told a Chinese publication that he had not bought the painting alone, although he offered no details. Later, he no longer mentioned any partner. “When I saw the painting at a preview, I just felt like owning it — it stirred my heart,” he said in an interview published on Sotheby’s website. The high-profile acquisition, made through an intermediary and with the ultimate source of funds remaining a secret, is the kind of transaction governments have been trying to curb in recent years.

In one scandal, the United States charged a Malaysian businessman with laundering billions of dollars from a state development fund, using some of it to buy art at Sotheby’s and Christie’s. In 2020, the Senate issued a scathing report on how auction houses and art dealers had unwittingly helped Russians evade sanctions by allowing others to buy art for them. A spokesperson for Sotheby’s said it vetted all buyers and, when necessary, enlisted its compliance department for “enhanced due diligence.” Sotheby’s applies worldwide a 2020 European Union rule that requires auction houses to verify the legitimacy of funds. Although the financial documents involving the van Gogh do not show wrongdoing, the transaction was hardly routine. Soon after the auction, Sotheby’s transferred ownership of the painting to the Shanghai man, neither a known art agent nor a collector, who paid the bill. But in a public ceremony, Sotheby’s handed over the painting not to him or the billionaire who employed him but to the producer, Wang. “There’s a connection to someone who is now incarcerated,” said Leila Amineddoleh, a New York-based art lawyer. “Something unusual is going on.”

‘White Gloves’
The man Sotheby’s considers the owner of the van Gogh lives in a Shanghai apartment complex where gray tiles and grimy grout frame a weather-beaten door. A mat out front states nine times, in English, “I am an artist.” The occupant, Liu Hailong, is listed as the sole owner and lone director of the shell company in the British Virgin Islands that paid for the painting: Islandwide Holdings Limited. Other than his date and place of birth, little is known about Liu, 46. When a reporter recently showed him the Sotheby’s invoice and a bank wire document and asked whether the signature was his, he said, “Please leave immediately,” and shut the door. A woman living with him, Zhao Tingting, has her own connection to the jailed billionaire, Xiao. She was once a top official at a company he co-founded, which had business dealings with relatives of China’s top leader, Xi Jinping. Zhao, 43, who no longer holds that position, now teaches piano. Asked about Liu’s purchase of the van Gogh, she responded, “Do you think our house comes close to the price of that painting?”

She and Liu were “just ordinary little employees,” she said, with no connection to the Tomorrow Group, the collection of companies controlled by the billionaire. “We have no right to make any decisions and no right to know anything.” The couple appear to have been “white gloves,” a term used in China to describe proxy shareholders meant to hide companies’ true owners. Among the thousands of pages of records providing details about the Tomorrow Group is a spreadsheet listing dozens of such people. At least four offshore companies were registered in Liu’s name. Those companies were part of Xiao’s vast enterprise. He had showed early promise, gaining admission to China’s prestigious Peking University at age 14 and serving as a student leader during the 1989 Tiananmen protests. He sided with the government, an allegiance that would help him become one of the country’s richest men, acquiring control of banks, insurers and brokerages, as well as stakes in coal, cement and real estate. Unlike the many brash billionaires with whom he did business, Xiao preferred to operate in the shadows, building ties to some of China’s princelings. He settled into a quiet life at the Four Seasons, where a coterie of female bodyguards attended to his needs. Why one of his lieutenants paid for the van Gogh is not clear. Wang, the producer, was among the ranks of China’s wealthiest people, though not nearly as rich as Xiao.
Xiao’s easy access to money outside China through his offshore network allowed him to bypass the country’s strict currency controls; he may have acted as a kind of banker for Wang. The documents show that the two men were drawing up art investment plans the same month as the auction, but their joint venture, based in the Seychelles, wasn’t formed until a year later. Meanwhile, the two set up another offshore company, aimed at investing in film and television projects in North America. There could be another explanation for the payment: Xiao may have wanted to acquire an asset that could be transported across borders in a private jet, free from scrutiny by bank compliance officers and government regulators.

An Abduction, and a Vanishing Act
The fortunes of the men connected to the van Gogh purchase began to turn in 2015 with the crash of the Chinese stock market. Xi’s government blamed market manipulation by well-connected traders, and regulators wrested economic power back from the billionaires. Dozens of financiers disappeared, only to resurface in police custody. Art purchases became more discreet. In 2016, Oprah Winfrey sold a Gustav Klimt painting to an anonymous Chinese buyer for $150 million.
By early 2017, Xiao’s life as a free man was over. One night, about a half-dozen men put him in a wheelchair — he was not known to use one — covered his face and removed him from his Hong Kong apartment. He was taken to mainland China and eventually charged. Prosecutors claimed that his crimes dated back before 2014, the year the van Gogh was sold. He was sentenced last August to 13 years in prison for manipulating financial markets and bribing state officials. The court said Xiao and his company had misused more than $20 billion.

Government officials dismantled his companies in China. At some point, the British Virgin Islands business that bought the van Gogh changed hands and Liu was removed as its owner. For a while, Wang, the producer, maintained a high-flying lifestyle, opening a private museum in Beijing in 2017 that showcased the van Gogh and Picasso paintings for a few months. But the market value of his film studio, Huayi Brothers, vaporized as it backed flops. Wang let go much of his art collection and his Hong Kong home. Last year, the Beijing museum was sold off, along with a mansion that was tied to him in Beverly Hills, California. Wang and a spokesperson for his company did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Xiao could not be reached for comment in prison, although a family representative said the billionaire’s wife did not know of any involvement in the van Gogh purchase and was unfamiliar with Liu.

Van Gogh’s floral still life — a vibrant painting by one of the world’s most acclaimed artists — hasn’t been seen publicly for years. But there are reports that the artwork may be back on the market. Three people, including two former Sotheby’s executives and a New York art adviser, requesting anonymity, said the painting had been offered for private sale. Last year, the adviser viewed a written proposal to buy it for about $70 million. The art experts did not know whether the painting had sold or if concerns had been raised about the 2014 sale — a purchase by a onetime lieutenant to a now disgraced billionaire linked to a beleaguered film producer who claims the art belongs to him. “Nobody needs a $62 million van Gogh, and nobody wants to buy a lawsuit,” said Thomas Danziger, an art lawyer. “If there’s any question about the painting’s ownership, people will buy a different artwork — or another airplane.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
https://artdaily.cc/news/157846/The-mystery-of-the-disappearing-van-Gogh

Spanish Police Have Seized Five Fake Goya and Velázquez Paintings Supposedly Worth a Collective $84 Million The works will go on view in an exhibition of seized forgeries curated in conjunction with Spanish police.

Sarah Cascone, April 14, 2023

Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Mariana of Austria (1652–1653), detail. Collection of the Museo del Prado, Madrid. A recently seized forgery.

Spanish police have seized five Old Master forgeries that were being sold for a collective €76 million ($84 million). Four of the works were being marketed as the work of Francisco Goya, and the fifth as a Diego Velázquez. Investigators got wind of the paintings earlier this year, when the sellers were offering them to a number of art dealers, the London Times reported.

Police from the Patrimonio Histórico division confiscated the works on two separate raids in the coastal city of Valencia—the faux Velázquez on February 8, and the rest some weeks later. Authorities are investigating four suspects, who have been interviewed, but not arrested, CNN reported. The sellers had also allegedly produced fake provenance documents in the hopes of fooling potential collectors into believing these workers were the genuine article.

“The most important thing about this crime is that it devalues the work of our creative people, in this case, great painters in our history,” Gabriela Bravo, head of the regional government’s justice department, said in a statement, noting that art forgery is the fourth-most lucrative type of crime in Spain, after drugs, weapons, and prostitution.

Manuela Mena, a Goya specialist, and David Gimilio, an art technician at the Museo de Bellas Artes de Valencia, have both confirmed that the works were forgeries—but it doesn’t seem like it was that difficult to tell. The priciest of the five works, at €50 million ($55 million) was a copy of Velazquez’s Portrait of Mariana of Austria, the composition cropped to show only her face. The full-length original was painted for the Spanish Royal Family, and is famously in the collection of the Museo del Prado in Madrid.

Two of the ersatz Goyas were also copies of works at the Prado, but by the 18th-century German artist Anton Rafael Mengs. Each priced at €7 million ($7.7 million), the works were based on details from Portrait of Charles IV and Portrait of María Luisa de Parma, Princess of Asturias.

The €8 million Blessing of Santa Rosa de Lima appears to be done in the style 17th-century Italian painters Carlo Maratta or Pietro Antonio de Pietri. The final forgery, titled Allegory of the Pillar of Zaragoza, “was a work of very low quality and not even done by a professional painter,” according to authorities. It had an asking price of €4 million ($4.4 million).

All the forgeries are believed to have originated with the same owner, a Valencia collector who died in 2020. The Patrimonio Histórico police have partnered with the Museu Valencià de la Illustració i de la Modernitat on an exhibition of 112 counterfeit artworks it has seized in recent years.

A recently seized forgery, offered as Blessing of Santa Rosa de Lima by Francisco Goya. It appears to be done in the style 17th-century Italian painters Carlo Maratta or Pietro Antonio de Pietri. A recently seized forgery, offered as Blessing of Santa Rosa de Lima by Francisco Goya. It appears to be done in the style 17th-century Italian painters Carlo Maratta or Pietro Antonio de Pietri.

The newly identified fakes will soon join the display, according to Spanish news outlet Vozpópuli. Titled “False: The art of deception or art deception,” the exhibition opened late last month and runs through September 3. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/spanish-police-seize-goya-velazquez-forgeries-2285486

Man Accused of Selling Faked Warhols Arrested After Wife Goes Missing

BY SHANTI ESCALANTE-DE MATTEI
January 10, 2023 2:16pm

One of the paintings Walshe sold to Revolver Gallery.

Brian Walshe, a Massachusetts man who was arrested after his wife went missing, is the subject of renewed scrutiny after the investigation into him brought back to light his alleged sales of fake Andy Warhol paintings.

In 2016, Walshe, with some assistance from his wife Ann, listed two paintings that they claimed were made by Warhol as a part of his 1979 “Shadows” series on eBay for a combined price of $100,000. According to the original complaint, written that same year by FBI special agent Kristin D. Koch, the item description of the paintings claimed that Walshe had “terribly overpaid” for the pair of paintings in a 2007 Christie’s auction for $240,000. He was offering them for $100,000 on eBay, he explained, because “it is much cheaper and because Christie’s won’t be able to auction our pieces till May 2017.”

Due to some dire financial need, Walshe was willing to offer the pieces for much less than they were worth. Walshe also wrote that the pieces were numbered and registered with the Warhol Foundation, and that they had additional provenance documents from Christie’s.

Two employees from Los Angeles’s Revolver Gallery flew to Boston, where Walshe resides, to pick up and pay for the two paintings, which they bought for a total of $80,000. One representative of the gallery waited in the car while an assistant went into the Four Seasons hotel to retrieve the paintings and hand over a cashiers check made out to Walshe’s business account.

The assistant couldn’t see the authentication stamps from the Warhol Foundation because a frame was covering the backs of the paintings. She sent a photo of the paintings to her boss, who was waiting in the car, and he approved the transaction. However, after the Revolver Gallery employees compared the pictures they had originally seen of the paintings on eBay to the works they had in their hands, they saw significant differences and demanded a refund.

In the coming months, Walshe would allegedly delay, and according to the complaint, he ended up sending only $30,000 of the $80,000 he owed Revolver Gallery. After some time, Revolver Gallery got the FBI involved.

Upon an investigation, the FBI found that Walshe was, in fact, in possession of two possibly authentic Warhol paintings that he had stolen from a South Korean friend he had made in the one year he attended Carnegie Mellon.

The FBI said that Walshe had offered to sell numerous works his friend held, including a porcelain statue from the Tang Dynasty, two Keith Haring Prints, and the two Warhol paintings in question. But after Walshe took them, his friend was never able to get back the two Warhols that Walshe had taken from him.

When Walshe posted the paintings for sale on eBay, he had allegedly taken pictures of these stolen paintings to land the deal with Revolver Gallery, but passed off two faked paintings to Revolver Gallery when it came time to sell. Although Walshe faces counts of wire fraud and other crimes, he has not yet been charged, in part because there is another case open against him that concerns whether he stole from his late father’s estate after destroying his father’s will, according to the New York Post.

Walshe’s wife, Ana, was declared missing by her company on January 4. Walshe was arrested and appeared in court on Monday after investigators found that he had violated the terms of his probation, reported Fox News.

Investigators found blood in the family basement and a damaged knife. They also found that Walshe went to Home Depot, a violation of his house probation, to purchase $450 worth of cleaning supplies and had Googled “how to dispose of a 115-pound woman’s body.” The Walshes have three young sons.

https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/man-faked-warhols-arrested-after-wife-goes-missing-brian-walshe-1234653123/