Tate Discloses Acquisition Prices

Bloomberg reports that the Tate Gallery, London, released at its annual press conference today “prices paid for recent art purchases, moving to boost transparency after criticism that the London museum bought from an artist on its board—Chris Ofili—without seeking regulatory permission.”
There are museums in this country that have previously disclosed prices of privately purchased works—regularly (Smithsonian purchases with government money) or sporadically (the Detroit Institute of Arts, the Minneapolis Institute of Arts). But here’s the shocker, again quoted from Bloomberg:
The Tate also published the names and values of works handed to it as gifts.
I’m all for transparency, especially in the expenditure of museum funds. But disclosing the appraised value of art donated to museums could chill or kill such munificence, without creating any public benefit. Museums in this country, quite properly and legally, have a hands-off stance towards appraisals of donated works. The donor must, for tax-deduction purposes, obtain such appraisals independently and report them to the IRS, which has an Art Advisory Panel of outside art experts to review and, if necessary, challenge, valuations of high-ticket items. Since the taxman already has access to this information, no abuses are being curbed by making it public. The only thing that would be curbed is the largesse of donors who prefer to keep the value of their gifts private.