When the gallery becomes a partner: These models that are reinventing artist remuneration

This historical model, inherited from the impressionist dealers of the 19th century, is now showing its limits. According to a 2023 study by Artists’ Union England, 72% of British artists earn less than £10,000 a year from their practice. In France, a 2022 CIPAC report reveals that 60% of visual artists live below the poverty line. Faced with these figures, some pioneering galleries are experimenting with new revenue-sharing models, transforming their relationship with artists from a commission-based logic to a true economic collaboration.

The 50/50 split, a 19th-century legacy that persists

The 50/50 rule traces its origins to the 1870s, when Paul Durand-Ruel began representing the impressionists. The Parisian dealer offered artists like Monet and Renoir an equal share of profits—a revolutionary model for the time. This practice became institutionalized in the 20th century with figures like Leo Castelli, who applied it to artists such as Warhol and Lichtenstein.

Yet this system rests on a fundamental asymmetry. While galleries do cover production, promotion, and sales costs, they also benefit from a structural advantage: control over collector networks, access to fairs, and relationships with institutions. As art critic Isabelle Graw notes in her book High Price, “The 50/50 split is less an economic rule than a historical power dynamic.”

The numbers speak for themselves. According to the 2023 Art Basel/UBS report, the art market generated $67.8 billion in 2022, but only a tiny fraction of that sum went to artists. Galleries, meanwhile, saw their margins grow, with average profits estimated between 20% and 30% for established structures. This disparity explains why artists like Rirkrit Tiravanija and Liam Gillick have chosen to work with galleries like Gavin Brown’s Enterprise, which negotiates case-by-case splits—sometimes as high as 70/30 in the artist’s favor.

Hauser & Wirth: when the gallery becomes an ecosystem

Founded in Zurich in 1992, Hauser & Wirth has gradually developed a model that goes far beyond simply selling artworks. The gallery, which now represents artists like Pipilotti Rist and Mark Bradford, has diversified its activities to create a true economic ecosystem around artistic practice.

Their approach rests on three pillars. First, the management of major artists’ estates, such as Louise Bourgeois and Philip Guston, which generates recurring revenue. Second, hybrid spaces like Hauser & Wirth Somerset, which combines gallery, farm, and education center. Finally, a flexible remuneration system where certain projects benefit from a 60/40 split in the artist’s favor.

This strategy allows the gallery to offer advantageous terms. For example, artist Rashid Johnson was able to develop his Anxious Red Paintings project with unprecedented financial and logistical support, including a dedicated studio and a global promotional campaign. As Marc Payot, president of Hauser & Wirth, explains, “Our role is no longer just to sell artworks, but to enable artists to realize their most ambitious projects.”

This model is not without criticism. Some observers point to the gentrifying effect of the gallery in Bruton, where property prices have soared since its arrival. Others note that this system remains inaccessible to smaller galleries, creating a new form of inequality in the art market.

David Zwirner and the shock of transparency

The “Fair Share” initiative launched by David Zwirner in 2020 marked a turning point in the industry. For the first time, a major gallery publicly challenged the 50/50 split, proposing a 60/40 share for online sales. This decision, made in the urgency of the pandemic, proved to be more than a temporary measure.

Zwirner took the logic further by introducing monthly stipends for certain artists. During the first lockdown, twelve artists received $10,000 per month with no obligation to produce work. This approach breaks with the traditional model, where artists are only paid after a sale.

The New York dealer also introduced unprecedented transparency about costs. In an interview with The New York Times, he detailed the real expenses of running a gallery for the first time: “Between rent, salaries, insurance, and fair fees, our fixed costs represent about 40% of our revenue. The 50/50 split isn’t sustainable for artists if we don’t share this information.”

This transparency set a precedent. Galleries like Pace and Marian Goodman have since begun communicating more about their cost structures, though the 50/50 model remains dominant in large institutions.

Cooperatives: when artists take control

Faced with the limitations of traditional models, some initiatives have chosen to completely rethink the relationship between artists and galleries. Company Gallery in New York and Auto Italia in London exemplify this cooperative approach, where artists are no longer mere suppliers but decision-making partners.

Founded in 2014, Company Gallery operates with a unique structure. Artists receive 70% of sales and actively participate in the gallery’s programming. This approach has allowed emerging artists like Tau Lewis and Genesis Belanger to develop their practices without the constraints of traditional exclusivity contracts.

Auto Italia, based in London, goes even further. Founded in 2007, this artist- and curator-owned structure makes decisions collectively, with revenues distributed equally among all members. As artist and co-founder Marie d’Elbée explains, “Our goal isn’t to maximize profits, but to create an environment where artistic practice can thrive.”

These cooperative models present specific challenges. Their financial sustainability is often fragile, and their ability to attract institutional collectors remains limited. Yet they offer a concrete alternative to the traditional system, particularly appealing to young artists.

The hybrid model: between tradition and innovation

Some galleries have chosen a middle path, combining the best of both worlds. Unit London, founded in 2013, has developed a progressive remuneration system that adapts to an artist’s career stage.

Their approach rests on three principles. First, a 55/45 split in the artist’s favor for all sales. Second, no exclusivity clauses, allowing artists to work with other galleries or sell directly to collectors. Finally, a bonus system for artists who meet certain sales targets.

This flexibility has allowed Unit London to work with artists at different career stages, from emerging to internationally recognized. As co-founder Joe Kennedy explains, “Our goal is to build long-term relationships of trust. We don’t want to be dealers, but partners.”

Their model has inspired other galleries, like Thaddaeus Ropac, which has recently introduced variable splits depending on the project. This hybrid approach seems particularly suited to the current market, where artists often need to diversify their income streams.

The limits of the system: when innovation meets reality

Despite these advances, new remuneration models face several structural obstacles. The first is economic: galleries’ already narrow margins don’t always allow for more favorable terms. According to a 2023 CPGA study, 40% of French galleries report losses or profits of less than 5% of their revenue.

The second obstacle is cultural. The 50/50 split remains deeply ingrained in the mindset of both galleries and artists. As gallerist Nathalie Obadia notes, “Many artists prefer a less favorable split with a gallery that offers international visibility over a better deal with a smaller structure.”

Finally, there’s a risk of market fragmentation. The most innovative models, like cooperatives or variable splits, are often reserved for established artists. Young artists, meanwhile, remain largely dependent on the traditional system.

Toward a new social contract?

The experiments conducted by these pioneering galleries sketch the outlines of a new social contract between artists and dealers. Three clear trends are emerging.

First, the diversification of revenue streams. Galleries can no longer rely solely on selling artworks. They must develop ancillary activities like publishing, education, or estate management to offer better terms to artists.

Second, cost transparency. David Zwirner’s model of sharing financial information with artists seems poised to become more widespread. This transparency is also encouraged by initiatives like W.A.G.E. (Working Artists and the Greater Economy), which advocates for better artist remuneration.

Finally, the personalization of contracts. Variable splits, stipends, and bonuses are becoming common tools to tailor remuneration to each artist’s specific situation.

These developments don’t spell the end of the 50/50 split, but they do limit its scope. As Marc Spiegler, global director of Art Basel, puts it, “The art market is shifting from a one-size-fits-all model to a multitude of models adapted to the specific needs of artists and galleries.”

Key takeaways for artists and galleries

For artists, these new approaches offer concrete opportunities. Here are some avenues to explore:

Negotiate variable splits depending on the project. An emerging artist might accept a 50/50 split for a first exhibition but request 60/40 for subsequent sales. Demand stipends or advances for ambitious projects. Galleries like Hauser & Wirth and David Zwirner now offer this type of support. Explore cooperative models. Structures like Auto Italia and Company Gallery provide an interesting alternative for artists who want to maintain control over their practice. Diversify income streams. Artists can combine traditional gallery representation, direct sales, and online platforms to maximize revenue.

For galleries, these models represent both a challenge and an opportunity:

Cost transparency is becoming a selling point. Artists are increasingly sensitive to how revenue is actually distributed. Diversifying activities allows for more favorable terms. Galleries that develop ancillary activities (publishing, education, estate management) can offer better splits. Personalizing contracts is a tool for retention. Variable splits and stipends allow remuneration to be tailored to each artist. Hybrid models offer a middle ground between tradition and innovation. Galleries like Unit London show that it’s possible to balance profitability and fairness.

The art market is at a crossroads. While traditional models still dominate, their limitations are becoming clear. Galleries that innovate in their economic relationships with artists will be the ones to survive the next decade. As artist Liam Gillick puts it, “The art economy isn’t an exact science, but an ongoing negotiation between creators and intermediaries.” That negotiation is more open today than ever before.