In 1926 the Romanian artist Constantin Brancusi shipped his minimalist statue Bird in Space to New York for an exhibition. According to customs regulations (paragraph 1704 of the tariff act of 1922 to be exact) all original artwork imported into the U.S. was tax exempt.
Unfortunately for Brancusi, his statue looked nothing like a bird or a work of art. Customs officials thus determined that the artwork tax exempt did not apply to the piece. Instead it was classified as “manufactured metal” and taxed accordingly.
This kicked off two years of litigation in the United States Customs Court.
At issue was whether modern art, such as Bird in Space, qualified as genuine artwork under the law.
The trial included testimony from Brancusi and some of his colleagues who made the case for the new style. The government presented well-established sculptors to give their opinion. According to court documents,
These [government experts] pronounced the [statue] to be neither a work of art nor a sculpture.
Ultimately the customs court acquiesced to the modern artists’ demands that their abstract creations were in fact art.
In its opinion, the court concludes,
there has been developing a so-called new school of art, whose exponents attempt to portray abstract ideas rather than to imitate natural objects. Whether or not we are in sympathy with these newer ideas and the schools which represent them, we think the fact of their existence and their influence upon the art world as recognized by the courts must be considered.
Based on this reasoning, the court deemed Brancusi’s statue an original work of art. It was, therefore, exempt from taxation.
To read the case, in its entirety, click the document below.