An auction house worker poses in prior of a Rembrandt masterpiece licensed has been granted "A Bust that a male in a Gorget and Cap" the was offered at auction for 8.4 million pounds in London 2012. (Lefteris Pitarakis/AP)This article is much more than 2 year old.Assessing the worth of art is constantly a tricky business. In a ar where the intrinsic worth of a painting deserve to be much more important than its dollar value, assessing a fair tax is unimaginably difficult. This is why Elizabeth Warren’s proposed wealth tax, in i m sorry she boldly states that she wants the “tax to incorporate … the Rembrandts,” is an ill-conceived idea.

You are watching: How much is a rembrandt painting worth

It’s ironic the Warren determined Rembrandt, as his works present a particularly an overwhelming case. For example, the well-respected "A corpus of Rembrandt Paintings," assembled by the esteemed Rembrandt research Project, divides his purported paintings right into three categories: paintings by Rembrandt; paints that are attributed to him, yet whose authorship cannot be definitely determined; and Rembrandt-like paintings that he did no paint. The secret nature of the middle category illustrates the difficulty in affixing a fair price to among Warren’s targeted emblems that wealth. What if proof comes along that suggests a "Rembrandt" wasn"t in reality painted through him? Such a change can average that numerous dollars in value disappear through the discovery of simply one not correct pigment or uncharacteristic brush stroke.

A Sotheby's employee looks in ~ a paint by Wassily Kandinsky referred to as 'Vertiefte Regung' (Deepened Impulse) in ~ Sotheby's auction rooms in London, Feb. 20, 2019. (Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP)

Such alters are no uncommon. Case in point: the painting "Portrait of Rembrandt wearing a Feathered Bonnet," in the repertoire of The nationwide Trust, joined Kingdom, has actually seen that is attribution readjust dramatically over the past 50 year alone. Thought to it is in painted in 1635, that was thought about an autographed Rembrandt for much more than 350 year until, in 1968, an expert proposed the it was instead painted by one of the master’s students, Govaert Flinck. While no all historians were automatically swayed by this new opinion, in 1989, the Rembrandt Research project attributed the occupational to Rembrandt’s workshop. Amid disagreement through scholars, the study team again readjusted the attribution to group B. But according to the latest edition of the "Corpus," the paint is now taken into consideration an “autograph Rembrandt with the opportunity that the understand was assisted by one of his pupils.”

It’s sufficient to provide a taxes accountant reason to choose another profession. And there’s no such thing as a Kelley Blue publication for paintings, together there is because that cars. Nor is one even possible.

Buying a paint is not favor buying a used car, where a potential buyer can have a reliable mechanic provide it a reasonable appraisal after ~ a quick and also cheap once-over. Gaining assurance the a painting is specifically what it is purported to be is very complex for any type of of the good masters. Take the now renowned painting meeting by part to another an excellent master, Leonardo da Vinci, title "Salvator Mundi," which newly snatched the highest price ever before paid for a job-related of art.

Edvard Munch's "The Scream" is auctioned in ~ Sotheby's might 2, 2012, in brand-new York. The picture is one of 4 versions developed by the Norwegian expressionist painter, and also the just one left in private hands. The hammer price was $107 million. (Frank Franklin II/AP)

The authenticity that "Salvator Mundi" has been the subject of extreme debate about exactly how much that the surviving work was actually created by the hand the Leonardo and not the of a restorer. For instance, at one point, Christ’s mustache is stated to have been removed and also then, years later, repainted. The painting presents the can be fried conundrum because that assessing that value: It was purchased in 1958 for £45 and sold in 2017 because that $450 million. But despite that recent price, no one is quite sure i m sorry of those two numbers is closer come the true value. So just how would it be fairly taxed? If her answer is based on the recent sale price, the won’t work, specifically for the buyer that is duped fairly than merely misinformed.

Take entertainer and noted art collector Steve Martin, who purchased a Heinrich Campendonk painting for about $850,000 in 2004. The painting later on turned out to be a fake and worth approximately the expense of the canvas on i m sorry it was painted. Imagine the wealth taxes boy name would have actually paid ~ above the piece throughout the years that he — and the federal government — thought his forgery to be a Campedonk.

Some may take into consideration Warren’s proposal as a arrangement that concerns only the super-rich. However even those of us who space not in the market for a masterwork should take note: By do fine art a more costly investment, Warren’s arrangement would drive under its value. Contracting prices average a contracting market, and as the industry shrinks, so will the earnings potential of living artists as well. After ~ all, even Rembrandt was as soon as a struggling artist.

See more: How Much Sodium In Mozzarella Cheese Have A Lot Of Salt? Fresh Mozzarella Vs

As v so countless quick-fix project proposals, Warren stops working to think about the unmanageable complexities behind her policy. This one would press the federal government into yet an additional realm whereby it doesn"t belong.