Art&Law in a nutshell: A new framework for the cross-border circulation of “below-threshold” artworks in Italy (Italian Constitutional Court, Judgment No. 51/2026)
Italian Constitutional Court Judgment No. 51/2026: Updates on the international circulation of 'below-threshold' works of art.
With Judgment No. 51/2026, filed on 14 April 2026, the Italian Constitutional Court examined the legal framework governing the international circulation of artworks, with specific reference to “below-threshold” artworks, i.e. those with a value below EUR 13,500.
This threshold is relevant both for compulsory acquisition by the State and for the entry certification of artworks temporarily imported into Italy.
It should also be noted that the economic threshold has recently been increased by the legislature to EUR 50,000 (except for certain categories, including books and archival materials). The Court’s conclusions nonetheless remain fully relevant, as they concern the legitimacy of relying on the economic value criterion as such.
1. Compulsory acquisition limited to above-threshold artworks
The Court held that the constitutional challenges brought against the provisions excluding compulsory acquisition for “below-threshold” artworks—namely works created by non-living authors more than seventy years ago—were unfounded.
The constitutional question concerned the combined provisions of the Cultural Heritage Code (Articles 65(3)(a), 68 and 70 of Legislative Decree No. 42/2004), which link both compulsory acquisition and entry certification to artworks subject to an export licence (attestato di libera circolazione), namely works by non-living authors, created more than seventy years ago, and above the applicable value threshold.
According to the Court, limiting this power to above-threshold works reflects a reasonable balance between the protection of cultural heritage, property rights, freedom of economic initiative, and the proper functioning of public administration.
However, the Court clarified that the economic value of work does not affect the administration’s power to impose a cultural heritage restriction or to apply the ordinary protection measures provided under the Code.
2. Entry certification extended to below-threshold and recent works
A different outcome was reached with respect to the entry certification regime under Article 72 of the Cultural Heritage Code.
The Court issued a partially additive judgment, declaring Article 72(1) of the Code unconstitutional insofar as it does not provide that, upon request, entry into the national territory must also be certified for “below-threshold” artworks—namely works by non-living authors, created more than seventy years ago and, at least prior to the recent legislative amendment, valued below EUR 13,500.
According to the judgment, excluding such works from certification results an unequal treatment and entails an unjustified restriction of the freedom of economic initiative and property rights.
The Court clarified that entry certification allows for the simplified re-export of the artwork through an expedited procedure and helps distinguish works temporarily imported into Italy from those permanently located within the national territory. Moreover, according to the case law cited, it operates as an exception to the principle of territoriality, preventing the application of Italian cultural heritage protection rules during the temporary stay of the artwork in Italy.
In light of this, denying entry certification to “below-threshold” works was deemed unreasonable.
The decision also has broader effects: by way of consequential ruling, the Court extended its declaration to works falling under Article 65(4)(a), namely works by living authors or created less than seventy years ago. Entry certification must therefore also be available, upon request, for these categories.
3. Conclusions: practical implications
Following the judgment, any party temporarily importing an artwork into Italy from abroad may request entry certification both for “below-threshold” works that may qualify as cultural property and for recent works.
This strengthens legal certainty for market participants—including collectors, galleries, auction houses, and art shippers—by extending to such works a tool that formally documents their foreign provenance and facilitates their subsequent re-export from Italy.
The judgment removes a clear inconsistency in the system: while economic value may legitimately serve as a criterion for administrative simplification (such as in limiting compulsory acquisition), it cannot justify excluding artworks from entry certification where they are temporarily circulating across borders.
The Court thereby enhances the coherence of the legal framework governing the international circulation of artworks and contributes to making the lawful art trade safer, particularly for lower-value and more recent works.