According to Joshua Knelman’s novel Hot Art the value of stolen, looted or confiscated art is only worth roughly around 10% of the arts actual value. This is because the art is “hot” meaning no buyer, who is aware that the art is stolen, will pay full price due to the liability. One Rembrandt oil painting from 1632, a portrait of Jacob de Gheyn III, has been given the nickname the “takeaway Rembrandt” as it has been stolen four times since 1966- the most recorded of any painting.
Two friends Maurits Huygens and de Gheyn had commissioned Rembrandt to paint them in identical formats and he did so upon the same oak panel. The friends had agreed that the first of them to die would receive the painting owned by the other, as evidenced by inscriptions on the their reverse. They were reunited when de Gheyn died.
"Takeaway Rembrandt": Rembrandt's Portrait of Jacob de Gheyn III, 1632 Rembrandt's Portrait of Maurits Huygens, oil paint, 1632
The painting of De Gheyn is smaller than most of Rembrandt's works, measuring only 29.9 by 24.9 centimetres (11.8 by 9.8 inches). Its size is one factor that has contributed to its numerous thefts.
The painting was first stolen in August 1981 from the Dulwich Picture Gallery and retrieved in September 1981 when police arrested four men who had the painting with them. Just under two years later a burglar smashed a skylight and broke into the gallery. Using a crowbar he removed the same portrait from the wall. The painting was missing for three years, eventually found in 1986 in a luggage rack at a train station in Munster, Germany.
The other two thefts: the painting was found once underneath a bend in a graveyard in Streatham, London, and once on the back of a bicycle. Each time the painting had been retuned anonymously with nobody ever being charged for its disappearance.
In this particular case of theft because the Rembrandt was stolen so many times it became quite notorious. These thefts made the painting quite famous which would have increased the value. I read an article online written by a former attendant at Dulwich Picture Gallery who said “Without doubt the most commonly asked question by visitors to Dulwich Picture Gallery while I was an attendant there was, “Which is the picture that is always getting stolen from here?” The value of this portrait would have increased due to its theft fame. There were little to no political ramifications of the theft due to the fact that it was in a museum and not owned by a private collector. The only cultural ramification would have been that the Dulwich Picture Gallery became famous for it's less than perfect security. Perhaps after the 3rd theft, if the thief had tried to sell the painting, it would have been valued much higher due to its heisted notoriety.
Here is an interesting New York Times article from 1986 just after the painting was stolen for the second time.