Back

Canada pledges an artist’s resale royalty—can the United States follow “suite”?

April 9, 2026

Center for Art Law Canada Pledges Resale Royalty

The Enchanted Owl, 1960 courtesy of FirstArts.ca

By Donyea James

Canada may join the company of over eighty countries that incorporate an artist resale royalty as a statutory right for visual artists.[1] With the passage of the 2025 Budget, the Canadian government may soon provide a percentage of sales in the secondary market to Canadian visual artists. While the Canadian art market is not a dominating force in the global arena compared to that of France or the UK, instituting the reciprocal right could help Canadian visual artists access a percentage of sales when their pieces sell on the secondary market. To put in context, in 2025, the UK market saw $630.4 million in auction sales and the French market saw $363.9 million in auction sales.[2]

The question of if or when the United States may institute its own royalty resale right for visual artists has been on many minds for quite some time. The United States market dominated—with $2.2 billion in auction sales in the first half of 2025 alone.[3] However, unless stipulated in a contractual agreement, there is no federally provisioned right for American visual artists to help them access a share of that money.[4]

The Artist Resale Royalty Right

The artist’s resale right, or droit de suite, is a statutory right granted to artists, guarantee a royalty on the resale of their original works on the secondary market.[5] France enacted the first droit de suite law in 1920, but the right as a concept had first been introduced in France in 1893.[6] Today, over eighty countries have the Artist Resale Royalty as a statutory right.[7] The resale percentage rests between three and seven percent of the secondary sale price and varies country to country.[8] The Berne Convention recognizes the resale right as a voluntary, reciprocal right, meaning, that contracting parties to the convention are not obligated to provide the resale right in their own domestic statutory law, and artists are not eligible to collect unless [9] Some countries that have incorporated the artist resale royalty into their statutory framework include: the United Kingdom, all members of the European Union, Australia, and the Philippines. Notably missing from the list are the United States and China, two countries which dominate the global art market,[10] with the United States market accounting for approximately 43 percent of global sales by value.[11]

Canada’s budget proposal

In November 2025, Canada passed its federal budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year, including an intention to amend its Copyright Act, creating a statutory artist resale royalty right.[12] While there is only nominally legislation pending, the budget describes the measure as benefitting “visual artists in Canada, particularly Indigenous visual artists, who make up a higher proportion of visual artists (4.1 per cent) relative to other artforms (3.1 per cent),”[13] as visual artists are “great contributors to Canada’s cultural scene and among the lowest income earners” despite those contributions.[14] This purpose, providing low-income artists with an additional income stream, is a key motivating factor in the initial proposal of the droit de suite in 1893—supporting the starving artist.[15] The budget also highlights that in 2015, the median income for visual artists was 20,000 CAD (15,664 USD).[16]

The Canadian Artists’ Representation/Le Front des artistes canadiens, or CARFAC, is a Canadian non-profit organization that is dedicated to representing visual artists in the country and supporter of the implementation of a federal resale royalty right for Canadian visual artists.[17] The organization previously proposed an amendment providing that artists receive a five percent royalty for works sold in the secondary market in excess of $1,000, and that the market agent and secondary seller bear the responsibility for fulfilling the royalty.[18] As a matter of public policy, CARFAC highlights in their proposal how implementing an artist’s resale royalty provision in the Copyright Act could improve standard of living and “offer a long-term marketplace solution” for a profession in which 66 percent of visual artists are self-employed.[19] Additionally, CAFAC’s proposal advocates that implementation of an artist’s resale royalty is especially beneficial towards the Indigenous artist community—whose art is extremely valuable domestically and internationally and historically exploited in the secondary market—helping to ensure that indigenous artists may be fairly compensated for their cultural contributions to the country.[20]

Kenojuak Ashevak was an Inuk artist, known for her portrayal of animals, humans, and spirits.[21] One of her most famous works, a print titled The Enchanted Owl, which she created in 1960 originally sold for 75 CAD.[22] The print was later on a Canada Post stamp, making her the first Inuk to have her artwork produced on a stamp.[23] In 2018, a copy of the print sold for 216,000 CAD, which was, at that point, the highest amount paid for a print by a Canadian artist at auction.[24] This record was broken again in 2024, when a blue trial proof of The Enchanted Owl was sold for 366,000 CAD at auction in Toronto.[25] Per CARFAC’s proposal, following the precedent of the eighty countries who already instituted the royalty right, Ashevak’s estate could have acquired 10,800 CAD and 16,800 CAD respectively from these record-breaking sales.

A US Droit de Suite?

The United States is the top performer in auction sales in the global market.[26] Despite U.S.-based auctions bringing in over 2 billion USD in auction sale revenue in the first half of 2025, American-based visual artists are not afforded a federal royalty right to see any of that of money. Why? 17 U.S.C. § 109, or the first sale doctrine, effectively preempts the possibility of a federally enacted resale royalty right for visual artists.[27] Under the first sale doctrine, owners of a copyrighted work have free agency “to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy,” as well as display the copy publicly, without any input or authorization from the work’s creator.[28] This aspect of copyright law sees visual artists completely disengaged from the success of their pieces, despite their product earning auction houses in the United States billions.

Attempted legislation

Despite this long-held tradition in copyright law seemingly barring the prospect of a federal intervention—there have been attempts on the congressional floor to the contrary. Congress has considered implementing the federal resale royalty right since the nineties, specifically inquiring the U.S. Copyright Office on its feasibility.[29] Aside from the resale royalty right acting counter to the American doctrine of the alienability of property, the Copyright Office expressed concern that implementation will have negative effects on resale value for visual artists.[30] Most recently Jerry Nadler introduced H.R. 4017, or the American Royalties Too Act of 2025, in June of 2025.[31] The proposed bill would amend the Copyright Act by adding a provision in which visual artists and their estate with resale royalty, guaranteeing 5 percent of the price paid for the sale of a work on the secondary market up to 50,000 USD.[32] As of February 2025, this bill remains on the House floor.

There may be little hope for a federally recognized resale royalty right in the United States, and one may think that states have the ability to regulate sales made within their jurisdiction on their own—however, this strategy is misguided. At present, California is the only state in the United States that recognizes a resale royalty right.[33] The California Resale Royalty Act (1977) imposed a royalty right to visual artists, provided that the sale took place within state borders, or the seller is domiciled in California.[34] Extremely unique within the Union, the Act provided that should an original work of visual art be sold for more than what the seller originally paid in excess of 1,000 USD (and sold during the artist’s lifetime or within 20 years of their death), the artist would be entitled to five percent of the resale price.[35] The Act contained several exceptions, one of which exempting sales between art dealers 10 years after the initial sale by the artist to an art dealer.[36]

In 2018, the Act was effectively neutered, when the Ninth Circuit ruled in Close v. Sotheby’s Inc. that the Copyright Act barred resale royalties, unless the work was resold between 1977 and 1978.[37] So, the first sale doctrine preempts the possibility of even state action.

Conclusion

The pledge by the Canadian government to institute a federally protect royalty right for visual artists is a big win for the 21,000 visual artists who reside within Canada, specifically for Indigenous visual artists, whose works are extremely valuable in the art market.

Because the first sale doctrine is codified into federal law, there is little hope for a statutory resale royalty right within the United States unless amendments are proposed and enacted. Therefore, the singular remedy available to visual artists to assume appropriate share of financial control within the United States art market is to prescribe their right in contract agreements drafted at sale.

About the Author

Donyea James is a third-year law student at Fordham School of Law and an intern with the Center for Art Law for the Spring 2026 semester.  She graduated from Vanderbilt University in 2023, where she majored in French and Economics.  She is interested in the issues and legal questions pertaining to restitution, museum provenance, and artists’ rights.  After graduation, she will be joining a litigation group at a law firm in New York City.

Select References

  1. See Artist’s Resale Right, WIPO, https://www.wipo.int/en/web/copyright/activities/resale-right#:~:text=The%20Artist’s%20Resale%20Right%2C%20also,in%20more%20than%2080%20countries (last visited Feb. 14, 2026). ↑
  2. See Margaret Carrigan, Which Country’s Art Market Came Out On Top in the First Half of 2025?, ArtNet News (Sept. 23, 2025), https://news.artnet.com/market/countrys-art-market-2025-2683851. ↑
  3. See id. ↑
  4. See Getting a Cut When Your Work Re-Sells, Russell Law (July 28, 2020), https://erklaw.com/getting-a-cut-when-your-work-re-sells/; see also Resale Royalty Right, Copyright.gov, https://www.copyright.gov/docs/resaleroyalty/ (last visited Jan. 29, 2026). ↑
  5. See CISAC, What is the Artist’s Resale Right 1 (2014), https://www.cisac.org/media/3884/download. ↑
  6. See Jeremy Cohen, Give or Take—Is the Droite de Suite a Taking Without Just Compensation?, 51 Pepp. L. Rev. 123, 129 (2024), https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol51/iss1/3. ↑
  7. See id. at 123. ↑
  8. See id. at 126. ↑
  9. See Artist’s Resale Right, WIPO, https://www.wipo.int/en/web/copyright/activities/resale-right (last visited January 31, 2026); CISAC, supra note 2, at 2. ↑
  10. See Cohen, supra note 3, at 126; The Art Basel & UBS Art Market Report 2025 by Arts Economics, Art Basel, https://theartmarket.artbasel.com/the-art-market-2025/global-market (last visited January 29, 2026). ↑
  11. See The Art Basel & UBS Art Market Report 2025 by Arts Economics, supra note 7. ↑
  12. See Government of Canada, Canada Strong: Budget 2025 172 (2025), https://budget.canada.ca/2025/report-rapport/pdf/budget-2025.pdf. ↑
  13. See id. at 32. ↑
  14. See id. at 172 ↑
  15. See Nithin Kumar, Constitutional Hazard:The California Resale Royalty Act and the Futility of State-Level Implementation of Droit de Suite Legislation, 37 Colum. J. L. & Arts 443, 443 (2014). ↑
  16. See Government of Canada, supra note 9, at 32. ↑
  17. See About CARFAC, CARFAC National, https://www.carfac.ca/en/about-carfac (last visited Jan. 29, 2026). ↑
  18. See See CARFAC & RAAV, The Artist’s Resale Right: Copyright for Visual Artists 3 (2023), https://static1.squarespace.com/static/66c49e0beba964656e6bed43/t/6737a4bf196fbe0fc3df497f/1731699904472/ARR-Proposal-2023.pdf. ↑
  19. See id. ↑
  20. See id. ↑
  21. See Kenojuak Ashevak, Inuit Art Quarterly, https://www.inuitartfoundation.org/profiles/artist/Kenojuak-Ashevak (last visited Jan. 29, 2026). ↑
  22. See Kenojuak Ashevak Breaks Records at Auction, Inuit Art Quarterly (Nov. 20, 2018), https://www.inuitartfoundation.org/inuit-art-quarterly/iaq-online/kenojuak-ashevak-breaks-records-at-auction. ↑
  23. See Kenojuak Ashevak, supra note 17. ↑
  24. See Kenojuak Ashevak Breaks Records at Auction, supra note 18. ↑
  25. See Nehaa Bimal, Inuk artist Ashevak’s ‘The Enchanted Owl’ fetches record price at auction, Nunatsiaq News (Dec. 13, 2024), https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/inuk-artist-ashevaks-the-enchanted-owl-fetches-record-price-at-auction/. ↑
  26. See Carrigan, supra note 2. ↑
  27. See Resale Royalty Right, 77 Fed. Reg. 58175, 58176 (Sep. 19, 2012). ↑
  28. See 17 U.S.C. § 109. ↑
  29. See Resale Royalty Right, 77 Fed. Reg. at 58176. ↑
  30. See id. ↑
  31. See H.R. 4017, 119th Cong. (2025). ↑
  32. See id. § 2. ↑
  33. See Decision on the California Resale Royalties Act could mean more art business, Withers (July 10, 2018), https://www.withersworldwide.com/en-gb/insight/read/close-v-southebys. ↑
  34. See id. ↑
  35. See id. ↑
  36. See Cal. Civ. Code § 986(b)(6) (2017). ↑
  37. See Decision on the California Resale Royalties Act could mean more art business, supra note 34. ↑

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not meant to provide legal advice. Readers should not construe or rely on any comment or statement in this article as legal advice. For legal advice, readers should seek a consultation with an attorney.

Related Art Law Articles