That is ridiculous.
Is it money-laundering?
So if we wanted to dig deeper, we'd ask:
→ whose money was spent for the 'art'?
→ how was that money acquired?
→ why did the buyer want to hide it?
→ why did the buyer use a strawman (broker) to effectuate the purchase?
→ was the artist 'in the know' about the purpose of the transaction?
I dunno, can you think of other questions to be dug? A transaction has a buyer and a seller. A economic exchange takes place when both buyer and seller think it's a fair price. In this case it's a ridiculous price a bullshit inflatable rabbit? (symbol) So what's really going on?