The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 09-17-2019, 06:36 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Burke, United States
Posts: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The Queen uses her part of the functional costs for an example for her garderobe, her beautician, but also to reimburse the costs her Hofdames (Ladies-in-Waiting) make when they have an engagement on behalf of, or with, the Queen. The Act Financial Statute Royal House states that functional costs are paid for by law. (Like no any Dutchman, neither a hospital doctor nor a dustbin-man, has to pay for functional costs like an uniform, a service car, safety shoes or a mobile phone.)
Obviously we have different opinions.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 09-17-2019, 07:36 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitty1224 View Post
Obviously we have different opinions.
Indeed. You seem to think that the Queen has to pay her functional costs from her private income. The equivalent of a First Lady paying for the annual White House Christmas decoration or the reception of US sports heroes from her own private money, to name something.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 09-19-2019, 09:59 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,369
After the King's Speech, the Second Chamber started a two-day debate about it. Yesterday the opinions and questions from the side of the Chamber. Today the answers from the Government. For so far there were no remarks or questions about the incomes and the Budget 2020 for The King. That there are no questions is not so strange as the incomes and the Budget are vested in the Constitution and in the Act on the financial statute of the Royal House 1974 (reviewed 2002). As long as all remains in that framework there is little to ask about.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:29 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Indeed. You seem to think that the Queen has to pay her functional costs from her private income. The equivalent of a First Lady paying for the annual White House Christmas decoration or the reception of US sports heroes from her own private money, to name something.



Does the US First Lady use "functional funds" to pay for her personal wardrobe or jewellery ? I guess you could count clothing and accessories under functional costs given the nature of her "job", but, if that is already factored in the functional budget, it should be deduced from her private income.


I am sorry, but it is hard for an outside observer (for example, for us, commenting from the other side of the Atlantic) not to conclude that the Oranges in particular abuse public money, which is even more shocking when you consider that they are privately very wealthy and have historically used public funds to boost and grow their private fortune.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 09-19-2019, 11:56 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Does the US First Lady use "functional funds" to pay for her personal wardrobe or jewellery ? I guess you could count clothing and accessories under functional costs given the nature of her "job", but, if that is already factored in the functional budget, it should be deduced from her private income.


I am sorry, but it is hard for an outside observer (for example, for us, commenting from the other side of the Atlantic) not to conclude that the Oranges in particular abuse public money, which is even more shocking when you consider that they are privately very wealthy and have historically used public funds to boost and grow their private fortune.
Article 41 of the Constitution says that the King organizes his House. The reimbursement of functional costs for the three members of the Royal House who receive a personal income are given in that framework. For an example to appoint a Thesauriër van de Koning (the King's Treasurer) not only working for the Royal House Organisation (which directly employs some 380 staff) but also for the royal family in private because the members of the Royal House are at the same time private persons with private interests as well.

Seen article 41, the King himself appoints a self-chosen trusted Thesauriër, rather than getting some official directed by the Ministry of Finances or so. That situation would be conflicting with the constitutional right of the King to organise his House. The functional costs are largely destined to appoint self-chosen staff like the Thesauriër, the Particulier Secretaris, the Private Assistant, the Director of the Royal House Archives, the reimbursement of the Grand-Mastress, the Hofdames, and that sort of officials.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 09-24-2019, 04:27 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 21,763
Next week the Queen is working for 10 years for the UNSGSA. The NOS asked the government how much these visits for the UN cost the Dutch taxpayer. According to the department of Foreign Affairs they cost 150.000 Euros per year. The costs mainly consist of travel- and stay expenses for the Queen and the employee of the Dienst Koninklijk Huis that accompanies her.

The costs are paid from the 17 million Euro budget for 'Special Multilateral Affairs' of the department of Development Aid and Foreign Affairs.

https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/regerin...xima~aaca75bb/
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 12-28-2019, 08:52 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,369
Last week the newspaper NRC Handelsblad and Zembla (a current affairs program on Dutch public TV) tried to stir some upheaval about the private inheritance of the late Queen Juliana (1909-2004).

While her eldest daughter Beatrix, as Queen, was exempted from inheritance taxes, her three other daughters (Princess Irene, Princess Margriet and Princess Christina) had to pay inheritance taxes, like all Dutch.

Since the 1950's the Dutch State has an arrangement: heirs can pay their inheritance taxes in natura. That means: handing over exceptional paintings, statues, artworks, books, cars, domains, estates, etc. The tax revenue service then adds 20% to the estimated value. For an example: a painting is estimated 100.000 Euro. Handing over this painting to the State then counts for 120.000 Euro of paid succession taxes. A profit of 20.000 Euro for the heirs.

This arrangement is for ALL Dutch citizens, not only for the royal family. As none of the three youngest daughters of Queen Juliana do live in a palace or a castle, what can they do with 19th C Russian malachite furniture? Or a royalblue Minerva Limousine State Landaulette from 1925?

So the three youngest daughters handed over properties worth 8,8 million Euro to the State as a partial payment of their inheritance taxes over Queen Juliana's private assets.

What was now the "scandal"? By the true meaning of this arrangement, properties handed over to the State should be accessible in museums. For some properties however the ministers decided differently: a set of malachite furniture made for a salon in Soestdijk Palace was not in a museum but is now in Noordeinde Palace, which functions as office of the King. A painting by Willem van de Velde which always hung at the Royal Palace in Amsterdam, changed ownership: from one of the three youngest daughters to the State. However: the painting is still at the same place in the Royal Palace Amsterdam, decorating the King's study. So the stamp "privébezit" (private ownership) has changed into "Rijksbezit" (state ownership) but for the rest the King still enjoys the malachite furniture or this painting.

The State Information Service has informed that the named properties have become into "Rijksbezit" (state ownership) indeed and are used in other "Rijksbezit" which is given in use to the King: the State-owned royal palaces.

The attempt of NRC Handelsblad and Zembla to stir a controverse was not successful. After all it were not the three youngest daughters to decide what the State does with 8,8 million worth of private properties they handed over. That the State decided some exceptional furniture or artworks are best kept in palaces was not their decision.

And: had the three youngest daughters NOT used this arrangement to hand over properties to the State but to auction it for commercial value at Christie's or Sotheby's, then there would have been critics as well. See the sale of a Rubens' study by the late Princess Christina, earlier this year.

Besides the hand-over of properties to the State, the daughters were "left" with thousands of items, assembled in 1500 "lots", from porcelainware to damast, from guest room ameublements to palace dustbins, from bureaux to commodes, from chandeliers to candelabras, which were auctioned for charities. These 1500 lots, with no great artistic value, nevertheless resulted in 5 million Euro for charities.

But even this was criticized by NRC Handelsblad and Zembla: the amount given to charities is deductible from taxes. So the three daughters also "profited" from their emptied atticks. But this arrangement counts for ALL Dutch taxpayers. When one donates 2.500 euro to Animal Welfare, this is deductible for taxes.

All by all the controverse did not really cause upheaval, despite the "news low" Christmas period. While the most important items were placed into foundations, Queen Juliana still had lots of private items. Queen Beatrix will have "parked" the most valuable private items in her tax-free part, anyone can see: what could Irene, Margriet and Christina do with these sumptuous palace inventories? Their handing-over in fact kept these private properties in use for the Royal House, otherwise it was now auctioned to someone in China... And most likely ministers thought historical items are better in a palace which is in use than in a museal depôt, gathering dust.

It is not known what the three daughters paid in succession taxes. Only the partial payment in natura, a value of 8,8 million worth of palace items, is now known.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 12-28-2019, 02:49 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 21,763
I thought it was a rather elegant arrangement. It is not uncommon for noble families in the UK and perhaps elsewhere. From the memoires of the late Duchess of Devonshire I remember how the family handed over some houses to the National Trust to settle death duties.

The other option would have been to see more pieces of art of the royal collection ending up at auctions. And we have seen recently that that is a problem for many people in parliament as well.
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 05-16-2020, 06:11 AM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 21,763
The current affairs television program Zembla of BNN-VARA is trying to stir some more upheaval about the finances of the RF.

This time they spoke to two legal experts who claim that the King is receiving unlawful 'nature' subsidies for the Crown Domain Het Loo. The amount is 4,7 million Euros. The foundation Faunabescherming apparently started a procedure of appeal.

The experts say that the money can only be given if the domain is open to the public for 358 days a year, which is not the case. The expert makes a big jump and claims the only reason he can think of is that the King wants to be able to hunt unhampered for the rest of the year.

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2020/05/13...t-loo-a3999697

https://www.destentor.nl/apeldoorn/p...ww.google.com/
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 05-16-2020, 06:22 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 13,563
Things must be quiet in the Netherlands these days...
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 05-16-2020, 07:32 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marengo View Post
The current affairs television program Zembla of BNN-VARA is trying to stir some more upheaval about the finances of the RF.

This time they spoke to two legal experts who claim that the King is receiving unlawful 'nature' subsidies for the Crown Domain Het Loo. The amount is 4,7 million Euros. The foundation Faunabescherming apparently started a procedure of appeal.

The experts say that the money can only be given if the domain is open to the public for 358 days a year, which is not the case. The expert makes a big jump and claims the only reason he can think of is that the King wants to be able to hunt unhampered for the rest of the year.

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2020/05/13...t-loo-a3999697

https://www.destentor.nl/apeldoorn/p...ww.google.com/

I have seen the program and it was one long attempt to find anything. Especially letting people from the Party for Animals and of Fauna Protection and of known members of the Republican Society ventilate their opinion was quite showing the intention of Zembla.

In a nutshell the problem is that in 1959 Princess Wilhelmina donated the Crown Domains to the State (the program: "to all of us") but there was a condition: the Bearer of the Crown kept all the owner's rights. Purpose was to keep these vast forestst and moorlands together and in usufruct of the Bearer of the Crown. Princess Wilhelmina even had a remainder attached to the Act of Donation: in case of an end of the monarchy, the last Bearer of the Crown gets the Crown Domains returned (or is compensated for the value of it).

So the problem is: "it is ours, we want to walk and forbid hunting" vs "the Bearer of the Crown holds the ownership rights and decides on the matter" (in reality: the rentmeester (Steward) whom manages the Crown Domains on behalf of the King).

The stick to hit the King is an annual forestry management subsidy, which is open for all landowners. In return the domains are open except one month a year. But the King closes down for three months a year. He has legal permission to do so: "for the protection of the private lifesphere". Legal activists argue that this argument is nonsense. Other will say that as no any other especially the King is different and indeed needs protection of the private lifesphere.

It is a long lasting discussion which flares up every two-three years. What the activists fail to see, was it not for the iron protection of the Crown Domains thanks to Princess Wilhelmina's conditions, the Netherlands would not have a big undisturbed nature reserve. It would have been eaten by roads, railways, growing suburbia.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
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
Royal Dutch Calendar purple_platinum Dutch Royals 168 02-28-2020 06:24 AM
Retrospective of the Dutch Royal Family Tina Dutch Royal History 79 01-08-2009 04:20 AM
The Royal Family of The Netherlands, Current Events 1 (June 2003 - May 2006) Alexandria Current Events Archive 213 05-05-2006 09:31 AM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication abu dhabi althorp anastasia anastasia once upon a time bangladesh belgian royal family chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon danish history diana princess of wales dna dutch history dutch royal family edo emperor facts family tree genealogy habsburg henry v hill historical drama house of bernadotte house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau intro jacobite jewellery jewelry jumma languages list of rulers lithuania mail maxima mbs netherlands nobel prize northern ireland norway norway history palestine popularity princely family of monaco princess dita queen paola random facts royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown russian court dress shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal spencer family swedish history thailand tracts uae customs visit from sweden wittelsbach working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×