<p>This paper develops a normative account of our epistemic duties towards experts and expertise, advancing two complementary models of such duties. In an optimisation model, disregarding expertise constitutes a violation of the general norms of epistemic efficiency. In a reputational model, the manner in which expert testimony is accepted or disregarded has tangible effects on the epistemic social environment, thereby generating context-sensitive commitments. In many cases, disrespect for expertise undermines the collective calibration of epistemic trust. This account explains why disrespect for expertise constitutes a distinctive epistemic fault while avoiding the excesses of assurance-based and pre-emption theories. It also addresses the problem of predatory experts, showing how norms of epistemic reputation can justify the suspension of trust in cases of abuse without collapsing into general scepticism about expertise.</p>