Norwegian/English
The facts
1998 13. november check 50 000 $ income taxed in Norway
Safety deposit box (deposits)
1998: 100 000 $ ( taxed in Norway in 2002, contains in
1999: 100 000 $ amount 450 000 $ )
2000: 300 000 $ ( taxed in Iceland in 2003, contains )
in amount 325 000 $ )
2000: 200 000 $ ( taxed in Iceland in 2007 )
2001: 200 000 $ ( taxed in time: in 2002 . Contains within
the amount: 450 000 $ from Sept. 2002 )
The deposit was returned to the gallery as there were less danger for compensation. Many costumers had received compensation. Costumers received compensation in form of paintings, money or insurrance contracts. An amount of ( 200 000 $ ) still remained untill 2007 for eventual compensation.
The deposit as a whole, can be explained through agreements between Odd Nerdrum and the gallerist.
Explaining why the revenue recognition happens on different times:
* Cash basis
* Deposit for destroyed paintings
Explaining why the first check from the gallery is 325 000 $ and the second, 450 000 $:
*The gallery did not take into account that Odd Nerdrum relocated during this period of time. Odd Nerdrum did not think of this either.
*In addition to the payment of the deposit, the gallery has sold a painting of which Odd received 50 % of the sales price : 75 000 $
1999 9. juni check 1000 $ taken out in cash in NY ( food , stay )
2000 13. januar check 1000 $ taken out in cash in NY ( food, stay )
2000 22. may invoice 20 000 $ compensation money, not income.
2000 23. august transfer 80 000 $ income taxed in Norway.
2002 14. may check 27 000 $ income taxed in Norway.
14. may check 31500 $ income taxed in Norway.
2002 26. sept. transfer 450 000 $ income taxed in Norway ( parts of the deposit + sale of a painting)
2002 14. nov. transfer 325 000 $ income taxed in Iceland (the rest of the deposit
( of what is income
in 2002 is to be taxed the year after. This was also done. )
Comments and insight from Turid Spildo
P. 3: The notification of emigration was delivered 20. November (not 21.
November, as claimed in the sentence).
An agreement on retention of money was established simultaneously with the agreement on presentation and sales. The gallery knew about the problems.
9. June 1999: 1.000 dollar for stay and food. Odd was in NY.
13. January 2000: The same.
22. May 2000: This is an expense! Beneficial er the recipient. Marc Duncan received reimbursement. The sum was so small that itwas paid directly from the gallery, on behalf of Odd.
6. April 2001: USD 200 000 were reported for taxation in 2002 (this sum is in reality a part of the USD 450 000 that arrived in September 2002).
14. November 2002: USD 325 000. This was reported as income in Iceland. Petter should have papers on this.
P. 4: USD 20 000 is an expense!
Second paragraph: Tax has been paid for USD 450 000 and USD 325 000.
P. 5: At this point of time Odd could not take it anymore, and I took over together
with our lawyer Wenche Riiser. I misunderstood the sum, thinking it was USD 500 000. (Odd has never mentioned such a sum in any letter. It was I who mentioned it to Riiser, thinking it was USD 500 000). Odd was travelling and painting a lot in this period, and we did not have contact when I wrote the letter to Riiser.
This sum has been following us ever since. The real sum is USD 700 000, as USD 200 000 of the bank box money were reported for taxation in due time: the year after receiving them.
P. 6: Again the same sum, which they have stared themselves blind at (and which is wrong). The USD 500 000 stems from me - it is a mere question of looking at all the papers. Odd has never mentioned this sum. Such things may occur in a situation where I took over much of the responsibility for the contact with our accountants and lawyer.
It is bad that they exploit such a mistake, committed by myself – that is, the whole thing is quite simply a misunderstanding.
P. 7: USD 325 000 has been reported for taxation in Iceland. Received by Odd in 2002 and taxed for in 2003.
As mentioned: USD 20 000 is an expense!
P. 8: Ok, USD 1000 two times. You do not live in NY a few nights for free.
P. 9: They take advantage of my mistake to the fullest, and USD 500 000 lingers on. It shall read USD 700 000. (Of the USD 900 000 in the bank box, USD 200 000 was reported as income in 2002. These USD 200 000 are in reality a part of the USD 450 000).
P. 10: The agreement was there from the start, but the actual manner of the retention was negotiated over time. This should be logical to anyone. You do not know how life will turn out.
The reason for Odd being in charge of the box was that the gallery was in danger of going bankrupt. The gallery was in possession of a lot of Odd´s pictures. I do not know how many, but it was a considerable number! These would be lost if the gallery went bankrupt. Consquently, it was natural that Odd was in charge for the bank box.
Odd has never had an account in NY!! Morgan Chase Bank is Forum Gallery´s bank!!
Nerdrum´s account in NY, such nonsense. Their fantasy is great.
”Payment of paintings” is written on almost all transfers, I believe this is written on the transfer to Marc Duncan as well (the USD 20 000 transfer). The reason for Odd´s name being mentioned there, is that this conserns a painting made by Odd and for which Duncan is to receive reimbursement.
P. 12: The gallery often pays too late. Even up to two-three years after the sale. This might be for different reasons. The buyer, for example, often pays in parts.
Second paragraph: It is provent hat USD 700 000 was transferred from the Austrian bank to Morgan Chase Bank – in which Odd does not have an account!! The money was sent to Forum Gallery.
The prosecuting authorities have such fantasies. And what paintings did he supposedly sell, according to them? As it is their claim, shouldn´t they bare the burden of proof?
Last paragraph: Proven that the sum has not been taxed for in Iceland? I do not believe that. I am sure Petter has the documents.
P. 13: Well – income from 2002 is supposed to be taxed for in 2003? One cannot tax for them in 2002??
Bank account in USA!!! Wrong!
Made a considerable income selling property in Iceland... ! What has that got to do with the case? We were pretty proud of the sale, it should be noted - and we did not earn NOK 10 million on the sale, but 20! Consequently, we could buy a house in France.
P. 14: Account in Luxembourg... Well, they know very well that this was a branch office of the icleandic Bunadarbanki in Luxembourg. Norwegian DnBNOR also has branch offices in Luxembourg. It is not illegal.
T
DOWNLOAD VERDICT
