Tribune. It is a surprising choice that the Pinault family made for the creation of the Bourse du commerce-Collection Pinault, operated under a long-term lease signed with the City of Paris, owner of the building, because it gives the impression of being unfamiliar with the principles that guide philanthropic action around the world. In accordance with the model implemented in Venice for the Grassi Palace and the Customs Point, it is in fact a commercial company subsidiary of the family holding company Financière Pinault which will manage this new exhibition space devoted to contemporary art.
At the same time, the representatives of the SAS do not systematically deny the denomination “foundation” used by certain journalists or commentators, thus leaving a doubt on the will of the Pinault family to drape themselves in the tinsel of philanthropy while s’ free from its rules.
Another choice would have seemed more in line with an action that appears to be generous and disinterested: that of a foundation, which also offers the right to substantial tax reductions (60% for corporate foundations and 66 % for those created by individuals). If it had been endowed with a capital of 800 million euros, an amount compatible with a family fortune estimated at some 30 billion euros, the annual income from the endowment would have been around 40 million euros. .
A notable fiscal choice
This would have made it possible both to properly operate the Bourse du Commerce and at the same time to offer free access to its spaces to all, as is frequently the practice in American museum foundations – whether it be through example of the famous Getty, Hammer, Broad or Glenstone museums – but also in France.
By choosing a commercial company to manage a cultural institution, isn’t the Pinault family taking the risk of raising certain questions? First, isn’t the choice notably fiscal, making it possible to consolidate the financial losses expected from the commercial stock exchange with the profits of the holding company, thus reducing the amount of its tax?
Secondly, was the choice not encouraged by the ability to pass on the collection (whose value is estimated at more than one billion euros), excluding inheritance rights, to the children and grandchildren of Mr. Pinault? Thirdly, was the choice of the foundation not ruled out due to the risk of conflicts of interest, Mr. Pinault being at the same time the owner of the auction house Christie’s, which has an international file of buyers of contemporary art, lender to many museum institutions, collector himself and led to resell works whose value has increased through their public presentation?
You have 61.81% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.