Lisa Schiff, once a sought-after art adviser with a clientele that included Hollywood A-listers like Leonardo DiCaprio, has been sentenced to 2.5 years in prison for orchestrating a multimillion-dollar fraud scheme that unraveled in 2023. She is due to surrender on July 1 and is subject to two years of supervised release after her prison term.
In October, Schiff, who built her reputation as an expert in blue-chip contemporary art, admitted to defrauding clients of at least $6.4 million through a series of deceptive transactions that prosecutors have likened to a Ponzi scheme.
Related Articles
At the sentencing hearing, held at Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse in downtown Manhattan, Schiff was dressed in a white collared shirt, green sweater, and a black skirt and her hair tied in a high, tidy bun.Before proceedings began, she focused on a sheet of printed sheet of remarks and apologies, that she would later read to the gallery, which included artist Nicole Wittenberg, and former clients Candice and Michael Barasch.
“I’m standing here as a criminal, who hurt clients, colleagues, and friends,” Schiff said, reading her prepared remarks from a podium in the courtroom. She then turned to the gallery and apologized to her victims by name. “I’m standing here a guilty person,” she said, as her voice began to tremble and crack, tears filling her eyes. I’m here and ready.”
Her statement proved to be cold comfort for the victims in attendance, who, throughout the proceeding shook their heads or rubbed their temples when Schiff’s lawyer, Randy Zelin, outlined the “tremendous amount of cooperation” between Schiff and the government in getting works and money back to her victims.
Michael Barasch, too, gave a statement, telling the judge, “The victims are more than just names on a piece of paper. We are people who have been betrayed.” He told the judge to consider that, only a week before she turned herself into the authorities Schiff asked the Barasches for $190,000 for works they “simply had to have” in their collection. “This isn’t someone who was racked with guilt,” he said. “If she was, why did she continue to steal from us?”
“Lisa, your disgraceful conduct goes beyond money,” Barasch said, facing Schiff. “You broke my wife’s heart. For months, she’s been weeping. You were her best friend…or so she thought. Shame on you.”
For nearly two decades, Schiff positioned herself as a tastemaker and financial strategist in the art world, advising collectors on acquisitions, sales, and long-term investment strategies. She operated Schiff Fine Art, an advisory firm specializing in high-end contemporary artists such as Adrian Ghenie, Christopher Wool, and Mark Bradford. She cultivated an image of expertise and exclusivity, frequently appearing on panels and in interviews discussing the market’s inner workings.
Her success was fueled in part by her close relationships with major galleries, auction houses, and collectors, which allowed her to secure sought-after works before they reached the open market. But beneath the surface, Schiff’s business was built on deception. Prosecutors have alleged that instead of properly managing funds for clients, she routinely misappropriated money from sales and acquisitions to cover personal expenses, pay off earlier clients, and maintain the illusion of financial stability.
Carmel Barasch and Richard Grossman were the first to take legal action against Schiff. In a lawsuit centered around a $2.5 million Adrian Ghenie painting, Barasch and Grossman alleged that Schiff had led a “Ponzi scheme” that involved “taking money from one client to pay another,” all in an effort to to fund what they described as her “lavish lifestyle.”
The collectors said they had entrusted Schiff with selling the Ghenie painting at Sotheby’s in Hong Kong, and while they claimed to have received some of the money owed to them, they also alleged that Schiff had failed to turn over $1.8 million due as part of the transaction. That money, Barasch and Grossman claimed, was diverted to Schiff’s “shopping sprees” and other personal expenses, such as stays at luxury hotels and limousine rides.
This did not appear to be an isolated case. In a separate lawsuit, the Baraschs also alleged that they had given $6.6 million to Schiff with the intention of buying works by Wangechi Mutu, Sarah Lucas, and many others. But Schiff never gave those works to the Barasches, the lawsuit claimed, and dealers allegedly said they were still owed money for the purchases.
As the legal process continued for these two suits, an inventory submitted to the court revealed that, as of mid-2023, Schiff still held some 900 artworks worth $3.3 million in her firm’s possession. Her firm is now defunct, and some of those artworks have begun heading to sale in auctions run by courts and Phillips.
Other victims have since come forward alleging similar stories, revealing a pattern of delayed payments, missing funds, and false promises. Some collectors said they paid Schiff substantial sums for works that were never delivered, while others said they trusted her to facilitate sales that were never completed. Schiff allegedly moved money between accounts, fabricated wire transfer confirmations, and stalled clients with elaborate excuses when they demanded repayment.
By the time her scheme collapsed, Schiff had already been struggling with financial mismanagement for years. She filed for bankruptcy in May 2023, revealing a tangled web of debts and unpaid obligations.
Schiff’s fall from grace sent shockwaves through the art world, raising questions about the lack of oversight in high-value private transactions. While she has pleaded guilty and expressed remorse, many of her former clients remain unconvinced, viewing her admissions—particularly an interview with the New York Times—as an attempt to secure a lighter sentence.
In a sentencing memo, the government argued that Schiff deserved a “substantial term of imprisonment” in order to deter and dissuade others from committing similar offences in a market that’s built on trust, relationships, and confidentiality. Prosecutors argued that “the reliance on art dealers and advisors as intermediaries to exchange payments, communicate between buyers and sellers, and take custody of artworks” leaves ample opportunity for the kind of fraud Schiff copped to.
In the art world, similar cases have filtered through the courts at a steady pace for years, from the Bouvier Affair, which pitted Russian billionaire Dimiti Rybolovlev against his erstwhile art advisor, the freeport magnate Yves Bouvier, to Pace Gallery’s 2022 lawsuit against a man who claimed to be a descendent of Pointillist George Seurat and who sold the gallery a bogus drawing by the artist with phony documents.
The last blockbuster fraud case that shook the art world involved Inigo Philbrick, an up-and-coming wunderkind art dealer who, in 2021, pleaded guilty to wire fraud by overselling shares of artworks, often in works that he didn’t own, and using similar works to secure loans. In May 2022 he was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in 2024, three years shy of his full sentence (two of those years had been served before he was sentenced. (Philbrick has since started his own comeback tour.)
In a written statement given to the court, one of Schiff’s victims who described herself as an ARTnews Top 200 collector and the person most affected by Schiff’s fraud (the victim’s names are redacted) said that despite Schiff’s post guilty-plea comments to the press—especially the February profile in the Times in which Schiff claimed that she was miserable when she was using her client’s money for luxury vacations and designer clothes—she still missed the point.
“There isn’t a word indicating she understands the impact of her actions on the people she stole from. The focus is still on herself,” the collector wrote, “I have heard that Lisa is working with other former clients, has apologized to them, and her criminal attorney has talked about her wanting to make things right. I have not seen any action like this by Lisa toward my family, or demonstrating remorse.”
The letter also provided bullet pointed examples of how Schiff chose to spend her money, or rather, the money she had access to, including buying her son 12-year-old son $600 Smythson personalized leatherbound notebooks for elementary school, spending $2 million to renovate the rented space she used as an office/storefront in Tribeca, her $25,000 a month apartment in the same neighborhood, and spending $30,000 in two visits to a Loewe boutique in Paris in the company of one of her victims. There are eight similar letters.
The drama surrounding Schiff represented a fall from grace for an adviser who had gained attention in the press as someone who could demystify the inner workings of the art world. “My main job is to make the art world transparent, to help empower collectors,” she told the Financial Times in 2017. “It’s such a complex world and very opaque.”
She amassed a loyal following along the way. Her connections included DiCaprio, who reportedly purchased a Basquiat painting through Schiff, and the actress Lisa Edelstein, who would ultimately mount a show of her paintings at Schiff’s advisory.
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
