The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1081  
Old 08-23-2017, 12:01 PM
JR76's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Marie Christine of Kent is an über-glamorous lady but I dare to doubt that her husband Prince Michael is a very wealthy gentleman, to name an example.
I remember reading in an interview some time ago Marie-Christine saying she buys most of her clothes from catalogues these days. Though I'll take that with a pinch of salt since I think thats the same interview where she said they can't afford to go out and eat anymore but still.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1082  
Old 08-23-2017, 01:21 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,584
Well the Prince has had his own consultancy business for years and the Princess writes books so unlike the other royals they have been able to legitimately make their own money.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1083  
Old 10-10-2017, 02:17 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
A very long article from the Telegraph:
SNP members vote to stop Royal Family's source of public funding
Quote:
SNP members have overwhelmingly voted to stop the Royal Family’s public funding after hearing how the Queen is “purring all the way to the bank.”

Julie Hepburn, the Nationalists’ political education convener, told the party conference in Glasgow that the Sovereign Grant system was “the equivalent of the Royal Family winning the lottery every single year.”

She argued that the £76 million the Royal Household received last year was “a good rate of pay for charity work” and the money could instead be spent on mobility scooters.
Don't make me laugh.


Quote:
Ms Hepburn, who is the wife of Scottish Employability Minister Jamie Hepburn, told the conference: “It’s basically the equivalent of the Royal Family winning the lottery every single year.

“No need for the Royal Household to play Euromillions, with the Sovereign Grant Her Majesty is purring all the way to the bank.”

She claimed “there can be no moral justification for giving just one family over £70 million” at a time of austerity and urged delegates to take a step back “and see how ordinary people are being shafted by a rich elite”.

Arguing that the Sovereign Grant was “a symbol of everything that is rotten at the core of the UK’s political system”, she said that in an independent Scotland all people would be treated as “valued citizens, not subjects.”
For the 1000th time (and as Dickie Arbiter and the other royal experts/commentators tries to tell them), this isn't a private salary for HM or the royal family. And are they really so ignorant, or are they just trying (as Arbiter and others says) to get attention? I think it's both.

Some questions from me to these people - If we stop royal funding and stop paying for tours etc:

1. Who should then pay for the head of state's staffers, engagements, state visits (which the Queen no longer does because of her age), entertainment, uppkeep of palaces etc? Things the state also pays for when you have an apolitical president.

2. Who should pay for royal tours (which the government ask them to do) and royal engagements etc?


Quote:
In an apparent reference to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Alison Thewlis, the Glasgow Central MP, said that Theresa May congratulates Royal couples who are having a third child but condemns poor people in the same situation by cutting their tax credits.
So prime ministers should not congratulate when the eldest son of the heir is having a child? Is she serious.


Quote:
Speaking after the vote, Jackson Carlaw, the Scottish Tory leader, said: “This is unsurprising given how extreme and out-of-touch so many elements of the nationalist conference delegation are.

“What they need to remember is people in Scotland like and respect the Monarchy, and would disagree entirely with the conclusion of this vote.”

Derek Mackay, the SNP’s Finance Minister, said the resolution does not change SNP policy that the Crown Estate’s proceeds should be spent in local communities.
It's not just the SNP, just take a look at the Labour MP Emma Dent Coad (who was discussed in the Harry thread), because she's even worse when it comes to spreading lies about royal funding/spending. And she's now paying the price in living with death threats after the horrible things she said about Philip, the Cambridges and Harry.

Am I against criticism of the royal family? Of course not.

As everyone here knows, I adore the Queen and I am a great admirer of Charles and a big fan of William and Kate. I am also (like 70/80% of the UK population) a big supporter of our constitutional monarchy, but I respect those who think it's wrong to have an unelected head of state.

What I don't respect is lying manipulating ignorant bullies sush as Graham Smith, Kevin Mcguire and Stig Abell or crazy psychopaths such as Russell Brand or the thugs in Daily Fail comment section. They (the DF trolls) are (as I've said many times on these threads) a bunch of racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, sick, spiteful bullies who hates everyone. And they represents a very tiny minority of the UK public, and many of them are from other countries.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1084  
Old 10-10-2017, 02:21 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 18,747
The financial arguments always make me sigh. A republic -with a ceremonial president as in Italy, Germany etc. - will cost roughly the same: palaces will need to be maintained by the state, state visits will be hosted, cars, airplanes, staff etc. etc. The SNP knows very well that the 78 million will not go to the private bank account of the queen.
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #1085  
Old 10-10-2017, 02:32 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
And for those who don't have a subscription to the Telegraph article in my above post - read here:
SNP votes to stop public funding the Royal Family | Politics | News | Express.co.uk

And remember: The vote has no impact on Scotland’s funding for the royal family as the issue is reserved to Westminster.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1086  
Old 10-10-2017, 02:54 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
Well geeeze. I wonder who would really come out ahead if the SNP got their wish and a deal was struck that they'd do away with the Sovereign Grant, let the BRF live as they choose to without any obligation to the public and oh wait... there's more... return the Crown Estates and the Royal Collection and the Royal Archives and everything representing the British Royal Family back into their own private bank accounts.

I don't see *that* idea going over too well at all.

ETA: Almost forgot the best part. The government would still have to pay for the politicians to do all the tours and the engagements and all the good stuffs Royal Norway mentioned.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1087  
Old 10-10-2017, 05:36 PM
padams2359's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 599
Royal Wealth and Finances

Lady Byrd Johnson had Secret Service protection for 60 years. What do you think that cost the US tax payers. My cousin worked in a restaurant in Austin that she frequented. It was a small tactical army in bump f*(# West Texas for a woman who’s dead husband had not been in office in 40 years. Think “Guarding Tess” with a nicer Tess.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1088  
Old 10-26-2017, 08:18 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Burke, United States
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
Also don't forget that whatever the royal ladies wear I personally doubt they regularly pay full price for their clothes. It wouldn't surprise me if some are borrowed and the rest discounted to some degree - you only have to look at Jane Taylor milliner's website to see how much it makes of the coverage of Sophie wearing their designs - even stating - "Indeed, the Countess of Wessex has exclusively worn Jane Taylor’s designs since 2009, at such occasions as the Royal Wedding of Kate and William, Ascot, when representing the Queen in Scotland and at many other Royal events and engagements." I am sure some sort of deal has been done that gives Sophie a discount at least. What they wear is not a sign of their wealth but their status and connections as royalty. Also remember this - Sophie probably gets a similar if not same deal as Anne in terms of expenses etc - Anne does not wear high fashion with regular new outfits, Sophie does. Its not a criticism but I think if you compared them just on wardrobes it would appear Sophie was wealthier than Anne which I highly doubt is true.

Beatrice and Eugenie are clearly well provided for financially but they also benefit from being the granddaughters of a Queen and the daughters of a Prince. They, and I have to say IMO Beatrice especially noticeably, use these connections to enjoy holidays on yachts, private islands etc, living a millionaire lifestyle without necessarily needing to be millionaires themselves.
I read royals aren't allowed to accept discounts.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1089  
Old 11-05-2017, 04:57 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,476
Paradise Papers: Tax haven secrets of super-rich including the Queen exposed | The Independent
Quote:
Millions of pounds of the Queen’s private money is invested in offshore funds in Caribbean tax havens, a huge leak of financial documents referred to as the “Paradise Papers” has revealed.

The documents show that the Duchy of Lancaster, which manages investments for the Queen’s £520m private estate, invested around £10m in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda-based funds.
I wonder who decided to do away with the British protected offshores.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #1090  
Old 11-05-2017, 05:13 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 18,555
From the Guardian: The offshore Queen

__________________
20th of December,1963-Birth of HRH The Infanta Elena, Duchess of Lugo
Reply With Quote
  #1091  
Old 11-05-2017, 06:24 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 13,465
Well, this don’t sound good-
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/queen...avens-11115644
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #1092  
Old 11-05-2017, 07:00 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 18,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
No it doesn't and there are more revelations to come as per the BBC News.

Paradise Papers: Tax haven secrets of ultra-rich exposed - BBC News
__________________
20th of December,1963-Birth of HRH The Infanta Elena, Duchess of Lugo
Reply With Quote
  #1093  
Old 11-05-2017, 08:00 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,062
Its may be embarrassing but it is also entirely legal. It happened some time ago and it is a v small amount.

She also voluntarily pays tax on her income.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #1094  
Old 11-06-2017, 12:47 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
The media:
1. Almost all British news-websites is (of course) covering this, and many of them goes tabloid.

2. Even the Telegraph site: ''Paradise Papers: Queen and Bono kept money in offshore funds, leaked files reveal''.

3. And Royal Central, which has become more and more anti-monarchy after Charlie Proctor took full control of the site, asks on twitter: ''Is The Queen Really Above The Law?''

4. And here's some of the front pages:

The Telegraph:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...0Telegraph.JPG

The Times:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...he%20Times.JPG

The Daily Fail:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...ily%20Mail.JPG

The Express:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...%20Express.JPG

The Mirror:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...y%20Mirror.JPG

The i paper:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...V7WkdosA_i.JPG

Metro:
https://storify.com/services/proxy/2...CZRA_Metro.JPG

Some facts:
1. This has nothing to do with the Queen.

2. She or the courtiers don't run the Duchy.

3. The Duchy of Lancaster is administered by it's Chancellor and the Duchy Council.

4. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (MP and Chairman of the Conservative Party Patrick McLoughlin) is appointed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister (in reality, that's means that the Chancellor is appointed by the PM).

Read here: http://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/ab...-of-lancaster/

5. The members of the Duchy Council (those who really runs the show) is appointed by The Queen on the recommendation of the Chancellor (in reality, that's means they are appointed by the Chancellor).

Read here: http://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/ab...duchy-council/

6. As the Duchy is an inalienable asset of the Crown held in trust for future monarchs, the present monarch is not entitled to the portfolio's capital or capital profits.

7. The Duchy is not subject to tax.

8. The net income of the Duchy is paid to the Privy Purse, the private income of the reigning monarch (the Duke of Lancaster). She has voluntarily paid both income/capital gains tax since 1993 (when she in reality was forced by a then anti-monarchy press to do so).

9. If you reads some of the headlines, then it looks like some of the money that the Queen receives was invested offshore and that a small amount of it ended up in the company behind BrightHouse, a chain accused of irresponsible lending, and Threshers, which went bust owing £17.5m in UK tax.

But that's wrong.

About £10 m of the Duchy's money was invested offshore, not the money given to HM.

10. But thanks to the British media, people now thinks that the Queen personally invested some money from her private fortune (she did not) or that she personally invested some of her income from the Duchy (she did not) or that she personally manages the Duchy of Lancaster (she does not).

What the more serious royal experts/commentators says:
1. They are defending the Queen and says that this has nothing to do with her.

2. Roya Nikkhah said (the same as me and others) on Sky News this evening. She said: ''The Duchy of Lancaster provides the Queen with a private income, but she doesn't manage it, she dosen't personally invest in a portfolio. It's run by Duchy Council and those Councils is appointed by the government.''

What do I think about this?
1. I've never been more pissed off with the media than right now.

2. And as a royal commentator on twitter wrote it:

Bradley‏ @LoopyCrown3
Misinformed People are using this confidential information out of context to smear the Queen’s good name.

3. And as another person on twitter said, this is a complete non story when it comes to the Queen.

4. But the republicans (including David McClure, the guy who wrote the ''Royal Legacy on the wealth of the House of Windsor'' book) and some ignorant people are now turning on her as never before.

5. She was barely touched by the media during the 50s 60s 70s and 80s (other times, yes I know), she was touched twice in the 90s, but not in the 2000s when she was praised by the press as now other for her 80th birthday.

6. The media's praise for her was even greater for her Diamond Jubilee in 2012, the longest reigning monarch thing in 2015 and her 90th birthday last year. I've never seen so much praise for a head of states or other persons before, and she deserved it.

7. But they've also shown that they are not afraid to go against her anymore. They tried to drag her into the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 and the Brexit thing last year, and they treeted her like crap with that nazy salute thing in 2015.

8. Will this affect her personal popularity? I don't know, but this must be awful for her, and as Roya Nikkhah said on Sky News: ''I think the Queen (quite rightly) will be pretty furious seeing this headlines across all the papers on monday morning.''

9. And as others have pointed out, she is 91-years-old.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1095  
Old 11-06-2017, 01:24 AM
JSH JSH is offline
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Las Vegas, United States
Posts: 35
I agree with you. Most articles are calling the Duchy of Lancaster the Queen's 'private estate'. I wouldn't call it that. That implies that she personally owns it (similar to Sandringham) which she does not. It belongs to her solely as monarch and, as you say, what she can do with it is limited.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1096  
Old 11-06-2017, 01:32 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,112
10 million pounds is a 'small amount'.

I think most people would regard that as a great deal of money.

I also think it is horrendous that she had to be forced to even voluntarily pay income tax. Until her father negotiated that little scheme the monarch's entire income was taxed the same as everyone else but George VI negotiated a deal whereby he didn't have to pay income tax so he could have the money to pay Edward VIII for Balmoral and Sandringham. The Queen then simply carried on - crying poor all the time as well.

I am pleased that we are finally seeing some of the things she has been doing with her money - moving it offshore to avoid paying tax on it - and it isn't even hers but the Duchy of Lancaster's which surely should be invested in the UK for the benefit of UK citizens.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1097  
Old 11-06-2017, 01:41 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,554
For the average person yes it’s a lot of money but for the Queen it’s not that much at all. We need Harry’s engagement so the press have something to write about instead of our Queen
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1098  
Old 11-06-2017, 01:59 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Iluvbertie, what are you talking about!

1. Read my above post!

2. The Duchy is administered by it's Chancellor (chosen by the PM) and the Duchy Council (chosen by the Chancellor), not HM or the courtiers.

3. The net income of the Duchy is paid to the Privy Purse, the private income of the reigning monarch (the Duke of Lancaster). She has voluntarily paid both income/capital gains tax since 1993 (when she in reality was forced by a then anti-monarchy press to do so). And most importantly it's not those money who was invested offshore, so this has nothing to do with the Queen at all. Blame the PM/government and those who run it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
For the average person yes it’s a lot of money but for the Queen it’s not that much at all. We need Harry’s engagement so the press have something to write about instead of our Queen
1. Again, it's not the Queen's money that was invested!

2. Read my above post (where I go into detail).
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1099  
Old 11-06-2017, 03:22 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,373
I agree that this isn't necessarily much to do with the Queen personally, but I don't think the decades of obfuscation by the palace regarding the nature of the official and private finances are going to help one bit. This has always been one of the dangers of relying on these byzantine, antiquated revenue sources. If nobody understands how they work in good times, they're certainly not going to understand in bad times either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1100  
Old 11-06-2017, 04:19 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSH View Post
I agree with you. Most articles are calling the Duchy of Lancaster the Queen's 'private estate'. I wouldn't call it that. That implies that she personally owns it (similar to Sandringham) which she does not. It belongs to her solely as monarch and, as you say, what she can do with it is limited.
1. In the headlines? Yes.

2. Inside the articles? No.

3. Most articles says something like this: ''The Queen does not manage the Duchy of Lancaster's investments, which are decided by a council, and pays tax voluntarily on any income.'' (From the Telegraph article.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson View Post
I agree that this isn't necessarily much to do with the Queen personally, but I don't think the decades of obfuscation by the palace regarding the nature of the official and private finances are going to help one bit. This has always been one of the dangers of relying on these byzantine, antiquated revenue sources. If nobody understands how they work in good times, they're certainly not going to understand in bad times either.
I don't agree!

1. The Sovereign Grant is given to the Queen (in reality to the Royal Household) to run/fund the monarchy/Royal Household.

Not confusing at all, but the press (deliberly) constantly describe it as the Queen's private money.

2. The income she receives from the Duchy of Lancaster goes to the Privy Purse (the monarchs private income), most of those money is used to fund official/private expenses of other Royal Family members.

Not confusing at all, but some in the media (deliberly) describe the Duchy as the Queen's private fortune.

And (again) thanks to all those who used the thanks button on my two previous posts!
__________________

__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, civil list, finances


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royals & Nobles and Wealth, Costs and Finances kcc Royal Life and Lifestyle 413 04-17-2017 06:46 PM
Costs and Finances of the Belgian Royal Family Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 84 09-18-2016 04:24 AM
Wealth and Finances of the Spanish Royal Family hrhcp Royal Family of Spain 122 04-20-2016 04:34 AM
Wealth of The German Royal/Princely Houses kcc Royal Families of Austria and Germany 12 12-30-2007 04:35 AM




Popular Tags
antony armstrong-jones birthday books carl gustaf chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess elisabeth crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duke of cambridge duke of edinburgh earl of snowdon europe family general news grand duke jean guillaume hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume historical infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín james bond king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein margherita monarchy news prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince emmanuel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen margerthe queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia queen sofia shaikh zayed bin hamdan bin zayed al nahyan state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family tiara victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises