The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1101  
Old 11-06-2017, 04:42 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,151
I question the media so splashing out while citizens or organizations use perfectly legal instruments to manage their wealth. Either something is against the law or not. I find all this pretty questionable. Are this the same media raising their voices about protection of privacy?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1102  
Old 11-06-2017, 05:02 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 621


Isn't it about time that someone or some company start investigating the heads, CEO's and such of the media for all the laws that they break? How can this be that the media thinks it has the right to print whatever they want, the lies, the assumptions, the innuendos, the gossip that they make up for whatever reason, the lies, the rumors with out any proven facts here........what is wrong with this picture? Are people so afraid of the media that they continue to let them do as they please? Why isn't there someone very wealthy person out there not afraid to take these id..ots on and give them a dose of their own medicine and investigate them and their reporters for a change. Isn't it time to turn the tables so to speak and let the media fall on their own papers for a change........what am I missing that this cr*p keeps happening again and again year after year?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1103  
Old 11-06-2017, 08:32 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk/Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 5,799
The financial arrangements of the rich and famous are of little interest to me - it's all far too complicated to be fully understood and believe me, in any event the average person rich or poor will be trying to find some way or another to avoid paying fully for something, somewhere, somehow - whether that's tax, getting something cheaper than it's worth or buying a product made overseas instead of at home - believe me we're very good indeed about that!

As regards the Queen's investments, it's up to the Government to ensure that laws are in place to protect the country's assets gained from Tax.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #1104  
Old 11-06-2017, 09:15 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 621

I most certainly do agree with your comment and understand it yet is it okay and right for the media to print lies and try to stir up trouble for the monarchy? IIMHO this is not just about money being somewhere regardless of who has control of it, this is IMHO about wanting to bring chaos to the monarchy and try to bring it down. Not only that but this is *insulting* and very *disrespectful* to HM in making it seem like she is a thief in hiding money. We know the public are plain stupid and dumb most of the times, they believe anything and everything in print, few ever take the time to really look at any issue even when voting for crooked politicians. Just because there is *freedom of the press/speech* does not make it right or lawful to print something to cause trouble that could promote crowds who can and will most likely become violent. Isn't there something about being responsible even for the media and laws that they also have to follow? I think this issue of money is just the beginning. Am I getting off topic here?
Reply With Quote
  #1105  
Old 11-06-2017, 12:14 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post
The financial arrangements of the rich and famous are of little interest to me - it's all far too complicated to be fully understood and believe me, in any event the average person rich or poor will be trying to find some way or another to avoid paying fully for something, somewhere, somehow - whether that's tax, getting something cheaper than it's worth or buying a product made overseas instead of at home - believe me we're very good indeed about that!

As regards the Queen's investments, it's up to the Government to ensure that laws are in place to protect the country's assets gained from Tax.
1. Again, it is not the Queen's investments.

2. Read my 3 previous posts.

And now back to what the newspapers writes:

As one can see in the below Telegraph article, the headlines now says that Jeremy Corbyn has asked the Queen to Apologise.

The Queen should say sorry for her offshore investments, says Jeremy Corbyn

But did he said that? No, he didn't.

He said:
Quote:
The Labour leader was asked by The Telegraph at the CBI conference "Should the Queen apologise for her private estate making offshore investments as revealed in the Paradise Papers".

Mr Corbyn told business leaders: "Anyone that is putting money into tax havens in order to avoid taxation in Britain, and obviously investigations have to take place, should do two things - not just apologise for it but also recognise what it does to our society.

"If a very wealthy person wants to avoid taxation in Britain, and therefore put money into a tax haven somewhere, who loses? Schools, hospitals, housing, all those public services lose and the rest of the population has to pay to cover up the deficit created by that.

"We simply have to challenge the culture that there is something clever about avoiding taxation. Taxation is what gives us ambulances...

"We all have the responsibility to pay for it. It undermines everyone of us here, who pay our taxes properly and diligently, we are undermined by this kind of evasion. It must stop."
Then his advisers saw the headlines and said:
Quote:
A spokesman for Mr Corbyn later tried to say Mr Corbyn had not called for the Queen to apologise.

He said: "Jeremy did not call for the Queen to apologise but said anyone who puts money into a tax haven to avoid paying tax should, and that they should recognise the damage done by avoidance to society. Labour is calling for a public inquiry into tax avoidance."
And as I and others ask ourselves: What the heck is the Queen going to apologizing for?

1. 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.

2. 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.

And then we have some very ignorant politicians (on both sides), who don't know the facts:
The Queen's £10m tax haven scandal shows One's cash is orfshore (and in Threshers and BrightHouse) - Mirror Online
Quote:
But some said questions will asked about whether the monarch should be investing in offshore finance. Labour MP Grahame Morris said: “This is shameful. I’m appalled by these revelations.

“Even if it was the Duchy of Lancaster investing the money in the Cayman Islands, it is ultimately the Queen’s responsibility to ensure her investments are carried out responsibly. I don’t think the British public will be impressed.”
1. If you are appalled, then do some research and blame the people that needs to be blamed, the government and the Duchy Council.

2. It's not the Queen's personal money/fortune, so it's not her responsibility at all.

3. No, thanks to the (deliberly) ignorant press and people like you, the British public won't be impressed.

What do I think?

That this is becoming more and more ridiculous.

And read my 3 other posts where I go into detail about the Queen's official/private finances.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1106  
Old 11-06-2017, 03:44 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
This has nothing to do with HM specifically but is part of a much larger expose of the very rich and who has money in tax havens rather than pay tax in their countries along with the fact that some of the companies used have actually ripped off a number of people.

The Queen has come up simply because she is one of the very rich who is putting money in these places but she is not the target at all.

Here in Australia, this morning, there is more on Michael Hutchence's estate - he died 20 years ago - but the manager of his estate and records etc has also been named as someone who was doing this same thing with Hutchence's money.

This is from the Paradise Papers which followed on from the Panama Papers which were released last year.

There are people around Trump also mentioned along with Apple as a company and Bono etc

No one named has denied the reports. We know the Queen won't but no one else has which leads to the belief that these papers are in fact the truth of the situation - as was shown with the Panama Papers last year when again no one claimed they were false.

These sorts of exposes all started with Wikileaks of course - people believing that the general public have a right to know what the rich and powerful are doing with their money, other people's money and the decisions they are making about all sorts of things.
Reply With Quote
  #1107  
Old 11-06-2017, 03:53 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 401
To those who argue that the queen is not at all to blame; do you really think that the council would not listen to her if she had specifically asked not to invest the Duchy's money in tax havens?
Reply With Quote
  #1108  
Old 11-06-2017, 04:23 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,561
TBH i don't think this fuss will last long, already the media are starting to focus on the fact Lewis Hamilton used legal loopholes to avoid paying taxes on a private jet. I suspect in a few days more revelations will have come out and will be the focus of the media's attention.
Reply With Quote
  #1109  
Old 11-06-2017, 04:43 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
This has nothing to do with HM specifically but is part of a much larger expose of the very rich and who has money in tax havens rather than pay tax in their countries along with the fact that some of the companies used have actually ripped off a number of people.
Agree that this has nothing to do with the Queen. I (in my 4 posts) and some people on Twitter have tried to explain this more than once today.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The Queen has come up simply because she is one of the very rich who is putting money in these places but she is not the target at all.
1. The Queen has come up because the media are trying to drag her into it.

2. And again, she hasn't anything to do with those money that was being invested.

3. Read my posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
To those who argue that the queen is not at all to blame; do you really think that the council would not listen to her if she had specifically asked not to invest the Duchy's money in tax havens?
It's not her decision. The Queen is a constitutional monarch and the Duchy (who provides HM with her private income) is administered by it's Chancellor (chosen by the PM) and the Duchy Council (chosen by the Chancellor), not HM or the courtiers. How many times do I have to say this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
TBH i don't think this fuss will last long, already the media are starting to focus on the fact Lewis Hamilton used legal loopholes to avoid paying taxes on a private jet. I suspect in a few days more revelations will have come out and will be the focus of the media's attention.
Let's hope you're right!


More from the politicians:

Charlie Proctor‏ @MonarchyUK
BREAKING: Shadow Chancellor @johnmcdonnellMP asks if the Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster will apologise to The Queen over #ParadisePapers

As someone pointed out on twitter, it was in fact Labour who had the Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster when this investment was made in 2005, so I think that MPs on both sides should be a bit careful with what they are saying right now.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1110  
Old 11-06-2017, 04:57 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY View Post
It's not her decision. The Queen is a constitutional monarch and the Duchy (who provides HM with her private income) is administered by it's Chancellor (chosen by the PM) and the Duchy Council (chosen by the Chancellor), not HM or the courtiers. How many times do I have to say this.
Your message is loud and clear. However, there are multiple angles to this. For now, I take it as that you think that the council would completely ignore anything that the queen might suggest... as she formally has no control.

I beg to differ, while the queen is not in charge, I do think that if she would suggest certain things (such as: please do not invest in weapons or try to avoid investing in companies that seriously damage the environment) they would heat her advice. Whether the queen has ever suggested anything like that, I don't know but I do think it would be a possibility...

The world is not as black and white as you seem to suggest: there is formal authority and informal influence - and the queen has a lot of the last. I am not blaming HM as it could very well be that she was not aware of the use of tax havens by the Duchy of Lancaster but I do think that she has her ways to address this now she is aware.
Reply With Quote
  #1111  
Old 11-06-2017, 05:21 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052


1. The Queen is not a type of person that will tell a government chosen Chancellor/Council to do or don't do something.

2. And it's in fact as black and white as that, and most experts/commentators agrees.

3. And most articles says the same: The Queen does not manage the Duchy of Lancaster's investments, which are decided by a council, and pays tax voluntarily on any income.

4. And as Roya Nikkhah said (the same as me and others) on Sky News yesterday: ''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.''

5. So as you can read: The Queen is not involved in the Duchy's investments, and almost every article says that she wouldn't have known anything about it.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1112  
Old 11-06-2017, 05:40 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 401
1. 'Tell' and 'suggest' are two different things
2. Minority opinions are allowed
3. Nobody is contesting that
4. Again nobody contests that but formal and informal influence are two different things; you underestimate the queen
5. Repeating doesn't make it more true - and I even agreed that she most likely would not have known about it (she could have asked for the information and I am sure they would have happily provided it - I could very well imagine King Charles taking a stronger interest in these issues)
Reply With Quote
  #1113  
Old 11-06-2017, 05:56 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,530
Talking

If ones face is on the currency....
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #1114  
Old 11-06-2017, 07:34 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,429
Just a bit of a slant on the media and how they handle things. They are masters of the "twist me and turn me and show me the money". They are masters of turning a statement of truth into a leading statement that doesn't quite allude to a truth but is more like bait on a hook.

We've seen it often. Blaring headlines that state earth shattering news such as "The Queen refuses top chef's recipe at the Palace". This alludes to the fact that the Queen is in fact Mrs. McNasty at heart and insults a chef. Then, somewhere down the line in the article, the truth comes out. HM, The Queen refuses to eat garlic. She hates the taste and the smell of it. The top chef's recipe contained roasted garlic. The powers that be that surround the Queen know her well enough that she would never embrace something that contained garlic served at her table. So here we see a non-story draw people in mainly because the word "Queen" grabs attention.

This is basically what happened with the Queen and stories of the tax havens offshore. It wasn't too long ago that Sarah Ferguson made headlines with having financial woes along with other rich and famous people with these offshore financial investments.

Panama Papers: Sarah Ferguson, Simon Cowell and Heather Mills among celebrities named in leak
__________________
“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
  #1115  
Old 11-06-2017, 07:49 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
1. 'Tell' and 'suggest' are two different things
2. Minority opinions are allowed
3. Nobody is contesting that
4. Again nobody contests that but formal and informal influence are two different things; you underestimate the queen
5. Repeating doesn't make it more true - and I even agreed that she most likely would not have known about it (she could have asked for the information and I am sure they would have happily provided it - I could very well imagine King Charles taking a stronger interest in these issues)
1. Agree, but not her way of doing things (and thank god for that).

2. Of course they are, but those who say that she's done something wrong, don't know the facts. They (thanks to the British media) 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).

3. No, not here on TRF

4. But she hasn't any formal/informal influence of the investments. And that's not anything I'm saying, it's just the facts.

5. HM and Charles is very different, but Prince Charles being hands on with the Duchy of Cornwall is another thing than King Charles (apolitical head of state) being hands on with the Duchy of Lancaster. A hands on Duke of Lancaster is going to face much criticism, so I think he will keep a distance to the Duchy as monarch.

BTW, It's been interesting discussing with you!

The front pages are in - most of them have gone with somthing else:
Express:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...13_express.JPG

Metro:
https://d2kmm3vx031a1h.cloudfront.ne...oSPh_metro.JPG

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

See mondays front pages in post 1094:

DF article: Paradise Papers: Queen dragged into £10m offshore tax row | Daily Mail Online
Quote:
Dickie Arbiter, the Queen's former press secretary, told MailOnline: 'The Queen’s done nothing wrong and she’s got nothing to apologise for.

'The Queen is being knocked to take the heat of others.

He added: 'The money has been invested by the Duchy of Lancaster – not her – and the money doesn’t go in her pocket’ and would be used for the upkeep of palaces and pensions for retired staff.

Mr Arbiter said her tax affairs being front page wouldn't be ‘uncomfortable’ for the Queen because ‘anyone with an ounce of financial nous knows profits coming into the UK from offshore is taxed at the full whack’.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1116  
Old 11-06-2017, 07:58 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,018
the management of both Lancaster and Cornwall run on similar lines. The only control HMQ and Charles have is how they spend the income derived from it. No involvement in the capital.

HMQ uses part of the the income to support Anne, Andrew, Edward, DKent, DGlos and PAlex. Charles supports his children and last yr donated £11m (from memory) to his charities.

Both pay taxes
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #1117  
Old 11-06-2017, 08:12 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052

1. Yes, I know cepe. I wrote about it in posts 1094/1098/1100 where I go into detail about the Queen's official/private finances.

2. What I meant is that Charles is a bit more hands on (interested) when it comes to the Duchy of Cornwall than what HM is with the Duchy Lancaster.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #1118  
Old 11-06-2017, 08:23 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,098
Charles definitely has more control of the Duchy of Cornwall than the Queen has with the Duchy of Lancaster. The Poundbury development has Charles’s fingers all over it. Charles picked out Highgrove and then got the Duchy to pay for it.
Reply With Quote
  #1119  
Old 11-06-2017, 08:34 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,429
There is a huge difference between Charles and his mother. Charles, himself, is an astute businessman and when suggesting purchases to the Duchy of Cornwall, he knows what he's talking about and most likely has come up with a business plan to back it up.

On the other hand, should Charles attempt to dip his fingers into horse breeding, training and such, his mother could run circles around him and make him look like the amateur he is in that milieu.

Its all in what a person has a specific interest and talent in. With the Queen, she can't feed anything apples or pet and groom a living animal in the world of high finance so it doesn't interest her overly much and she leaves finances to those that have been recommended to her to manage it.
__________________
“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
  #1120  
Old 11-07-2017, 01:53 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 3,052
Charles is (as I wrote in post 1115) more hands on with the Duchy of Cornwall than what the Queen (an apolitical constitutional monarch and a very different person) is with the Duchy of Lancaster.

But I don't think he will try to be a hands on Duke of Lancaster because then he's going to face heavy criticism from the media/politicians.

And since the Duchy is administered by it's government-chosen Council and not by the monarch/courtiers (with the expeption of the Keeper of the Privy Purse who is a member of the Council), King Charles woldn't have much to say anyway.

Read about the Duchies here:

Lancaster
https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/

Cornwall
Home | The Duchy of Cornwall
__________________

__________________
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
best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events cymry denmark duchess of cornwall earl of snowdon general news grand duchess maria teresa hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy news picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess eugenie princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary current events princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania daytime fashion queen silvia sofia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:34 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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