Royal Wealth and Finances 1: Ending 2022

[ysbel]

My concern with holding the Royal Family accountable like a business or government office is that pretty soon the people only think of it as a business or a tax expense making it easier to do away with the Royals.

The Royal Family has got to provide more value than just bringing in the tourists. Once the RF family's value can be put on a bottom line of a balance sheet, I'm afraid its too easy to find cheaper alternatives and then a thousand year tradition is gone out the door. That's what happens to products that are for sale on cost savings alone.

Yes I know there has to be some accountability but the way it is being handled in the press leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[ysbel]

I found this old article about the tax HM pays, you might be interested to know that no tax is paid on the income from the Duchy of Lancaster

I think no taxes are paid on the Duchy of Cornwall either.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I think no taxes are paid on the Duchy of Cornwall either.

Charles has paid taxes on the Duchy of Cornwall income voluntarily throughout his life.

I believe it was 50% of the income until he married Diana and then it was dropped to 25% and that is where it remains today but I could be mistaken.

 

[Avalon]

I think no taxes are paid on the Duchy of Cornwall either.

The Prince of Wales pays income tax at the 40% rate on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall, after his business-related costs are deducted. Last year, the Prince paid £3.3 million in tax.

Prince Charles also pays Capital Gains Tax on all capital gains that he receives. He does not, however, receive any capital proceeds or gains from the Duchy, because he is not entitled to them.

 

[Skydragon]

Wasn't Charles's contribution limited to paying for restoration of the private areas of Clarence House, not to the rooms that were being opened to the public?

I would think that was the case as Charles' contribution to the restoration was 1.5 million.

According to this and similar articles that I read at the weekend, because of some very clever tax breaks, Charles is in effect only paying the same as a lower paid worker, which is around 22%.

Prince Charles pays 'basic rate tax' - Finance and Accounting jobs UK

The only difference to his tax after marrying Diana, would have been that he was entitled to the married mans allowance.

 

[Saphire]

This is more of a question then a reply, but does anybody know how much money do Fred/Mary, Felipe/Letizia, WA/Maxima and all the other Crown couples get to support their households? And the money that they receive, is it supposed to cover palace maintenance, servants, etc. or is it for their personal (i.e. clothes, entertainment, vacations, etc.) use?

 

[norwegianne]

In 2006 Frederik received what would amount to £ 1.4 milions (converted from Danish Crowns) from the state. Out of this he is paying for staff, his court, administrative expenses, the inside of his residences. The Crown Prince and Crown Princess had approx. £ 281,545 for their personal expenses. It is said that the Crown Princess, who receives no money of her own, is meant to get 10% of this for her expenses.

In 2007 Haakon and Mette-Marit will receive £501,304 for personal expenses. They get £1,070,582 for their staff. They also get quite a bit of subisidies from the state, to continue farming, as the farm, Skaugum, they're living on is producing various things. (The latter is available to all farmers in Norway- and Haakon and Mette-Marit are not receiving special treatment here. Prince Joachim in Denmark is also receiving farming subsidies, for his farm, in addition to money from the state for his work as a prince.)

 

[Next Star]

If the British people chooses to continue to have a monarchy then they should realize that their going to pay for the living conditions of the royal family and the upkeeping of all the royal estates/properties except Balamoral and Sanddotting palaces excuse my spelling on the last palace I tried to spell it the best way I could.

 

[Aberdeen student]

Royals carrying cash

Is it true that royalty do not carry cash?
If so, first of all why; and how do they buy things otherwise?

 

[Aurora810]

I am certainly no expert especially on the British RF. I'm not really sure why they would not carry cash. Because being robbed is not a likely thing when they would have bodyguards nearby. I'm not sure exactly which members of the BRF have bodyguards but I would think many of them must. If they choose not to carry cash then they can just use a credit card or debit card. I actually carry very little cash with me and choose to use mostly debit or credit. I would not really put too much value in this report, just my opinion.

Also just an interesting note: Back when Princess Martha Louise of Norway got married it was reported weeks after her honeymoon that her and her husband chose to use only cash on their honeymoon so that their credit cards would not be tracked in any way. Which would ensure their privacy.

 

[contessa]

I heard one time if I remember correctly Charles did not have any cash and a body guard came up with some for him.

 

[ashelen]

i listen too that they do not pay for anything there under their name, they have people for them or the bill it is send it to them and after they pay, i really i do not know how it works, i am sure if the pay with credit card , they could not pass unnotice . and for example i am thinking about Princess Maxima in Argentina, I am sure she piad cash not to be recognize!
anyone knows how they pay when the go shopping?????

 

[ChanelWindsor]

I remember there being pictures of Princess Maxima in Argentina at an ATM machine.

 

[Skydragon]

I think Charles (now) and Camilla carry cash, when they stopped at the side of the road on the way back from Caithness, for the 'bra line', they donated £10 and didn't Camilla pay for her snacks at one of the hospitals she visited? There are many places, especially in the Highlands, that do not take credit cards and with the unreliable signal for mobile phones, it is always wise to have some money in your pocket.

Most stores are more than happy to supply and then invoice them in hope of receiving a Royal Warrant or just to be able to say 'we supply' so and so.

 

[Madame Royale]

It probably varies from house to house, but I'd imagine most do nowadays. How much or how little is anybody's guess really.

 

[ysbel]

I think in the past it was more customary for royals to always have ladies-in-waiting or valets accompanying them so that the lady in waiting or valet would carry the cash or credit card and quietly pay for things that need to get paid. If they always had a servant around and handy to carry the cash and pay for things as needed, there probably was no need to carry cash themselves.

But interestingly enough, as far back as the reign of Edward VI, son of Henry VIII, it was mentioned that the young King was often embarassed in outings with his young playmates that he never had any coins to treat them to a snack or other small trifle. So his uncle, Sir Thomas Seymour, often slipped the young King a few farthings so that he would always have a little change in his pockets.

But being the King of the wealthiest country in Europe didn't necessarily mean that Edward naturally had cash at his disposal when he wanted it.

 

[sirhon11234]

I believe Diana, William and Harry carried cash whenever they went shopping.

 

[mpwong]

Royal Wealth

Hello everyone. This is my first message. I am a student from Hong Kong and am now working on my final year project which is about the British Royal family. I find it difficult to find the estamated personal wealth of the monarch or the civil list from late 19th century on. I would be deeply grateful if any dear member can let me know or give me any hint where i can find the information. Thank you very much.

 

[Elspeth]

Welcome to TRF, mpwong!



There's some information on the royal family's official website here:

The Monarchy Today > Royal finances

 

[mpwong]

Thanks very much for your reply and information. I've visited them and they are useful. But while the Forbes estimated the Queen's personal wealth is around 280million GBP in 2006, anyone knows how much Queen Vicotoria, or Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII, George VI had? I am trying to plot a graph, which is about the royal wealth and the UK's GDP and trying to see if the royal wealth, like the power of the royal family, is falling or not.

 

[KathyMoore]

Why does the Queen need to carry cash?

She's got her own money. (literally!)

 

[Kezza]

Are the British Royal family scapegoats.....

When the public go on about people who the public deem as wasting taxpayers money?

I actually believe the British Royal family get very little amount of the money that the governmet gets from tax revenue.

When you consider the fact that the British Royal family probably help to generate millions of pounds into tourism for the country of Great Britain. The money that tourist spend in Great Britian more than likely goes to the government as tax revenue. Plus if you add the millions if not billions of pounds the British government probably make in tax revenue on such things as pokie or gaming machines, Alcohol and cigerettes each year.

I actually think the British Royal family actually use very little of the money that does go into tax revenue each year, and the Queen actually gives some of it back.

If they do at times look they are wasting tax payers money, then they are not the only ones. Because I know that people who are suppose to represent the local council, and get tax payer money to fix up the local roads. Waste the money for the purpose of fixing the roads on a overseas trip with their family.

What does anyone else think on the matter?

 

[tinkerbell1948]

I tend to agree with you the tourism $$$ ( or pounds LOL don't know where that symbol is on this keyboard although my daughter found the $ one on an English keyboard she is very unimpressed with the exchange rate) would be huge, I have a son and a daughter over there now ..........hubby is British they are visiting rellies but no doubt will do the tourist thing as well. Young Aussies go there in droves

We were there in 1982, I met my m-in-l for the first time at Heathrow after a 24 hour flight from Australia

I understand the Queen now pays income tax is that correct? Do all the RF?

Charles income comes from the Duchy of Cornwall doesn't it? And he has his Charitable Trusts

 

[Marengo]

I usually find the tourism-factor rather overrated. Do you think that tourists stop coming to London if there would be President Windsor living in Buckingham Palace rather than Queen Elizabeth II? Even if the UK would be a republic they will probably leave most of the changing the guards and such in tact. You only have to look across the channel to see that a republic can be as pompous as a monarchy (and I mean that in the very best meaning of the word ).

People just like to nag about others who earn more than them. If there would be a president in Buckingham palace they would probably nag about his salary, his expenditure (as some do in France for Sarko) etc. Of course these people forget that they have no reason to nag at the costs of a monarchy as republics usually cost more than a monarhy does (a recent study proved that; the Italian republic being the most expensive in relative terms), but that is another matter.

I don't think the benifits of monarchy has to be sought in terms of financial value btw, the main advantage that a monarch has over a president is that a monarch is a neutral head-of-state, above the parties and thus can be a symbol of the national identity and unity. A president usually only has the support of half of the country and are generally less known abroad too (most people in my country know who the King of the Belgians is for example, but they don't have a clue who the German president is).

 

[tinkerbell1948]

You make a very good point actually when we were over there we went to France even though their Kings and Queens are long gone although rather a bloody way to get rid of a monarchy.

I wonder what the cost would be of establishing a Republic then people would moan about the cost of upkeep of the President especially if he was installed in Buckingham Palace then what to do with the Royal Houses if a republic doesn't use them so people would moan if they were upkept with public money it would be never-ending

Given that Italy have an election every other week or so it seems I'm not surprised at the cost there

 

[GlitteringTiaras]

I usually find the tourism-factor rather overrated. Do you think that tourists stop coming to London if there would be President Windsor living in Buckingham Palace rather than Queen Elizabeth II?

For a majority of Americans the answer is simple: Yes.

Most people are drawn to and use their emotional senses when it comes to living public history. There is a strong connection knowing that "it" is still real.. alive...functioning. "It" connects with people. So if the monarchy ended, knowing that living piece of history is no longer there, many lose interest and cannot connect. Furthermore, there is that underlying British American connection... everyone knows the story by now.

Simply put: The monarchy is public history... which is different and difficult to explain at 1am.

 

[Kezza]

Nope no symbol on my computer for UK pounds.
According to wikipedia the Queen pays back the money from her Duchy funds.

 

[Kezza]

You make a very good point actually when we were over there we went to France even though their Kings and Queens are long gone although rather a bloody way to get rid of a monarchy.

I wonder what the cost would be of establishing a Republic then people would moan about the cost of upkeep of the President especially if he was installed in Buckingham Palace then what to do with the Royal Houses if a republic doesn't use them so people would moan if they were upkept with public money it would be never-ending

Given that Italy have an election every other week or so it seems I'm not surprised at the cost there

So maybe Australia shouldn't become a republic then.

 

[Skydragon]

I can't find it at the moment but, a survey was done of tourists in London and over 80% said they would still have come here without the royal family and the Chinese were the only ones who said they were keen to see the Queen. If I get time, I will try to find the article.

So I think, not that not only are some of them overpaid but some are becoming seen as over privileged wasters by many more people, (then again so are politicians).

 

[serenissima]

I usually find the tourism-factor rather overrated.

Well, this topic has been on TV on and off but every time when the surveys and the statistics come about, this "royal" tourism is not really a great factor in the British tourism, so they report. I was told by a vicar of a parish in a very small non-tourist town that he was receiving quite few tourists from America who were tracing their ancestors back etc., wanting to see their parish registry for the baptism etc.

I do understand that our royal family is one of the most costly houses in the world to run (as in the Western sense) when we compare with the Spanish royal family, and the Swedish or the Japanese one. However, the Queen now pays her tax for her private incomes and she paid for the rent of the apartments at the Kensignton Palace that are occupied by the Prince and Princess Michael (as a part of the Grace and Favour) and also the Prince & Princess sold their lovely country house in Gloucestershire to keep up with their mounting cost etc. I think that the Queen is trying as much as she can within her ability to minimise the cost within her own family. However, even people who are not on the civil list have their life styles pretty much secured by the State indirectly because of the Queen whereas others inc. people who are titled and still living in their stately homes have to earn their money to keep all the buildings etc (as in the case of those beautiful houses such as the Woburn Abbey, the Chatsworth House, the Ragley Hall etc), many people feel that our younger royals are not so desirable etc. How come those Norwegain, Belgian prince or whatever can have such a quieter life like our queen does but just get on with his or her "public" roles etc, they tell to the media that they are only "humans" etc when they themselves have their lives so protected by the state etc etc.

I do so wish to preserve our Crown (though if anybody asks me if the crown which I wish to preserve has to be sat on by the House of Windsor or not is a question) that I do truly hope that all the members of the Royal Family become more aware of their roles and positions so that any republican sort of ideology won't affect our country.