EU Import Rules Cast a Shadow Over Tefaf Maastricht as Dealers Rethink What They Bring
As exhibitors prepare to ship to Tefaf Maastricht, a new anxiety has settled in: not whether a work will sell, but whether it will clear customs. Dealers, shippers, and trade groups say the European Union’s updated import requirements for cultural goods are being applied unevenly, creating delays, added costs, and, in some cases, seizures of objects that industry sources insist are not even covered by the rules.
At the center of the confusion is documentation. Industry sources report that customs authorities have been detaining items that lack certain paperwork, even when those items are exempt. One trade association source says collectors have also struggled to obtain an EU EORI number (Economic Operator Registration and Identification), which is required for customs clearance. According to the source, some customs officials have incorrectly told private citizens they cannot be issued an EORI number, despite the fact that they can.
The result, the source says, is a measurable chill in buying. “Others have just given up because the process of buying and importing has become too complex and difficult for them,” the source says, adding that auction houses and dealers are losing business.
A fair with a more European tilt
Because the law applies to goods imported from outside the EU, some dealers expect the Maastricht edition to skew more heavily toward objects with European origins. Salomon Aaron, a director of the London-based antiquities dealership David Aaron, says the practical effect is straightforward: European material moves with fewer obstacles, while non-European objects demand more proof of provenance. “As a result, dealers will gravitate towards showing more items discovered in Europe, just to make life simpler,” he says.
That shift is already visible in what some galleries are choosing not to bring.
Charis Tyndall, a director at Charles Ede gallery in London, says the gallery’s Greek and Roman artefacts are exempt from the new requirements, but Egyptian antiquities are not. This year, she says, the gallery will leave behind Egyptian amulets, a category that has typically drawn strong interest from museums and private collectors. The administrative burden, she argues, can quickly eclipse the value of modestly priced objects. “Why would you spend €900 on administration to buy something that’s worth a thousand?” she says.
Instead, Charles Ede will bring one Romano-British piece and one Egyptian piece, framing the fair as a trial run. “We’re very much using this as a test to see how easy or difficult it is,” Tyndall says.
Fairs amplify the risk
Art fairs pose a particular problem under stricter import scrutiny: works often need to be imported before any sale is secured. Tyndall says Charles Ede is still listing Egyptian pieces in the catalogue produced for Maastricht, but plans to address shipping and import requirements only after a sale is agreed. Even then, she says, the administrative responsibility is likely to remain with the gallery, though dealers may increasingly pass added costs on to collectors.
Shipping bottlenecks are also reshaping logistics. With uncertainty high and practices varying among transport providers, Tyndall says Kortmann is currently the only company willing to bring affected items into the Netherlands under temporary admission for Tefaf Maastricht. “They’re the only [firm] willing to bring in items [that are affected] under their temporary admission, so they’ve got a monopoly right now,” she says.
Some shippers are stepping back entirely. Sonja Kappenburg, the director of Gander & White Paris, confirms that her firm is not shipping to Maastricht this year. She describes a broader shift in the burden of proof: where authorities once pursued suspected illicit imports and required owners to demonstrate lawful ownership, she says the expectation now is that legitimacy must be established before an object crosses a border. “Now, right off the bat, everyone must prove an object or work of art is legal before it even enters [a country],” she says.
Delays are mounting, particularly for older objects. Kappenburg notes that an application for an archaeological object submitted in November remains unprocessed, even though importer statements are typically issued immediately online once an item has been reviewed and approved.
Trade groups seek clarity
Trade associations are pressing for clearer guidance, including on how authorities distinguish between category B (archaeological items) and category C (antiquities). UK trade associations and Lapada have requested direction from the European Commission, but, according to industry sources, have not received a definitive response.
For now, the uncertainty is influencing where business happens. Some dealers are considering shifting certain objects to fairs outside Europe, including Tefaf New York, rather than risk unpredictable enforcement in the EU.
Whether the current turbulence settles into a workable routine or hardens into a long-term barrier will shape not only what appears in Maastricht this year, but also how the international antiquities trade navigates Europe’s borders in the seasons ahead.
