>>3974834Sure donations can be used for money laundering.
Suppose you have $100,000 from a drug deal that you need to launder. You give it to your richfag friend, who donates $75,000 to a gallery. The gallery curator then buys a snapshit from your artfag friend for $50,000 and embezzles the rest. Your artfag friend pays your $25,000 credit card debt (that happens to be in his name).
Then everyone gets $25,000 each, and your $25,000 happens to have a somewhat plausible paper trail, while the other four needs to either launder their shares, or spend it on things like hookers and blow.
The good thing about modern art is that it costs nothing to produce and there is an endless supply of it. But the authorities wouldn't believe some shady guy off the streets buying a $50,000 artwork that looks like shit (if not actual shit), you need the pretentious gallery people to generate the hype, and the rich philanthropist to serve as a plausible source of the money.