For the purposes of this article, we discuss the tax scenario of a foreign artist or a Belgian Artist living abroad but participating in a Belgian exhibition. We deal with this question on the basis of three sub-questions. The first question is whether a copyright remuneration under Belgian law can be claimed. The second question concerns which part of the contractual remuneration can be considered as an author’s remuneration. Finally, we examine whether the artist living in another EU member state risks double taxation. The remuneration that the artist receives for participation in international art festival can be qualified as a movable income if there is income obtained as a result of a transfer of copyrights. If the exhibition agreement provides for a transfer of copyrights, one can claim a copyright payment. This is the basic rule of the favourable tax regime laid down in article 17 §1 , 5° WIB. This principle is further explained by Circular 13/2014 which stipulates that the qualification of the income is determined according to the legal and factual data specific to each case. If the work of art is specifically made for the exhibition, this means that a part of the performance must always be charged as compensation for delivery of the artwork. A full payment in copyrights is then not possible. Where appropriate, a contractual breakdown of the remuneration (performance/custody rights) must be made. If such breakdown is not available, the Belgian tax authorities consider the payment as compensation for delivery of the artwork. If the artwork comes from the artist’s portfolio and is exclusively selected by the curator, it is possible to qualify a payment as copyright only. if the contract only provides for a transfer of copyright and not for the performance of the artist, then the full payment is deemed to relate to the assignment or concession of copyrights or neighbouring rights, as determined by the circular letter. Apart from the qualification under domestic law, there is also the international tax aspect. The fact that a lump-sum payment is made and not a repeated payment is, according to most double tax treaties, not an obstacle to being considered as a ‘royalty’ or author’s remuneration. More problematic is the double taxation that is sometimes possible. A Belgian artist abroad or foreign artist is, according to Belgian law, taxed on all income of Belgian origin provided the debtor of the royalty is subject to Belgian taxation. This might lead to possible double taxation issues with the member state where the artists resides. The tie breaker in the OECD tax treaty is the residence. Taxation is exclusively levied, as a rule, in the state were the beneficiary is located If, however, Belgium authorities (or the artist for tax planning purposes) can prove the existence of a representative (e.g. an art gallery) or the establishment of a studio in Belgium, Belgium can levy taxes. However, even if no permanent establishment is available, some treaties provide that the home state is to a certain extent still allowed to levy taxes (e.g. Italian treaty provides a cap (5%) on the levy of taxes on movable income by the state where the income originates).