The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1381  
Old 06-30-2019, 11:40 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 732
New article from the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-repair-delays
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1382  
Old 07-01-2019, 12:13 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,728


Surely something needs to be done to provide affordable housing for needy tenants. And the royal firm should take a leading role in advocating for cost-effective relief for renters and taxpayers.

However, I do not like the way the Sussexes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage is being cited as some kind of problem for taxpayers. Did these complaints and investigative reporting about royal finances occur when Apt 1A was renovated for the Cambridges at a higher cost than the renovation of Frogmore Cottage? I'm sure there was complaining in some quarters, but not to the extent we are seeing surrounding the Sussexes and Frogmore Cottage renovations.

The fact is: Harry and Meghan have spent their own money to furnish their living quarters. They do not own Frogmore Cottage. They benefit from the renovations, but the property itself belongs to the crown estate and the renovations will ultimately benefit not only the Sussexes, but the crown estate and future generations of royals.

The cost to taxpayers is minimal per taxpayer. The economic benefits of the royal family to Great Britain are substantial. The marriage of Meghan and Harry has brought millions in tourism dollars to Great Britain, and huge interest in British life and culture, and indeed in the Commonwealth and in charitable organizations supported by the Sussexes, which are benefiting from donations extended by Sussex fans across the world. The South Pacific locales where H&M toured have also benefited via worldwide exposure and increased tourism dollars.

Sentebale, The Invictus Games, and the Hubb Community Women's cookbook Together brought in the most money to the Royal Foundation last year (according to the recently released audit). In fact, the cookbook brought in 57% of all funds, yet somehow the Sussexes are being maligned for the Royal Foundation split and for the renovations needed to Frogmore Cottage?!

Furthermore, none of the royals are responsible for the management of the Crown Estate, especially not the Sussexes.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1383  
Old 07-01-2019, 01:12 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post


Surely something needs to be done to provide affordable housing for needy tenants. And the royal firm should take a leading role in advocating for cost-effective relief for renters and taxpayers.

However, I do not like the way the Sussexes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage is being cited as some kind of problem for taxpayers. Did these complaints and investigative reporting about royal finances occur when Apt 1A was renovated for the Cambridges at a higher cost than the renovation of Frogmore Cottage? I'm sure there was complaining in some quarters, but not to the extent we are seeing surrounding the Sussexes and Frogmore Cottage renovations.

The fact is: Harry and Meghan have spent their own money to furnish their living quarters. They do not own Frogmore Cottage. They benefit from the renovations, but the property itself belongs to the crown estate and the renovations will ultimately benefit not only the Sussexes, but the crown estate and future generations of royals.

The cost to taxpayers is minimal per taxpayer. The economic benefits of the royal family to Great Britain are substantial. The marriage of Meghan and Harry has brought millions in tourism dollars to Great Britain, and huge interest in British life and culture, and indeed in the Commonwealth and in charitable organizations supported by the Sussexes, which are benefiting from donations extended by Sussex fans across the world. The South Pacific locales where H&M toured have also benefited via worldwide exposure and increased tourism dollars.

Sentebale, The Invictus Games, and the Hubb Community Women's cookbook Together brought in the most money to the Royal Foundation last year (according to the recently released audit). In fact, the cookbook brought in 57% of all funds, yet somehow the Sussexes are being maligned for the Royal Foundation split and for the renovations needed to Frogmore Cottage?!

Furthermore, none of the royals are responsible for the management of the Crown Estate, especially not the Sussexes.
I agree that the journalist seemed to be jumping on the bandwagon by mentioning Frogmore Cottage. But other than that it is more balanced than most. The journalist makes clear that the Queen has no say in the running of the Crown Estate and he gives credit to Charles and William for raising the issue of affordable housing.

There were plenty of articles complaining about the cost of renovating both the Cambridge homes. I also doubt this article has been inspired by the recent furor about the costs of Frogmore. Investigative articles like this are usually worked on for weeks if not months before they see the light of day. The timing of its publication may be linked to the release of the Royal accounts but I doubt the investigation itself was.
Reply With Quote
  #1384  
Old 07-01-2019, 02:40 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,058
The Guardian is a republic leaning newspaper and some of our media owners are too (eg Murdoch) so we might expect them to scrutinise the monarchy & its income source. It seems like a fair article overall & I suppose it's obvious they'd mention the latest housing expenditure.

The Crown Estate provides the treasury & the monarchy with an income but the big problem with all of this is that many people don't see the benefit in their own lives. The last few years have seen public services cut to the bone & people on low wages and/or in insecure employment are on very tight budgets. It's easy to say that the monarchy brings revenue back into the UK but a lot of people will say that it doesn't filter down to them personally. They see the BRF living in multiple luxury homes while they struggle to pay rent & know they'll never own any home themselves. It's a huge, complex topic & I'll stop there before venturing into politics.
Reply With Quote
  #1385  
Old 07-01-2019, 04:32 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 500
I read that the Duke of Edinburgh still receives his £375,000(?) a year despite being retired. Is this true?
Reply With Quote
  #1386  
Old 07-01-2019, 04:40 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
I read that the Duke of Edinburgh still receives his £375,000(?) a year despite being retired. Is this true?


Where did you read it?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #1387  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:11 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,055
I read that also somewhere recently but can't remember where, but I take it with a pinch of salt as since the Sovereign Grant was started I have not read anywhere about parliamentary annuities, which were listed in previous financial reports.
Reply With Quote
  #1388  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:23 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,912
According to the government’s official website:

“A Parliamentary annuity for HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh will continue.”

“This allowance is to meet official expenses incurred in carrying out his public duties in support of The Queen.”
Reply With Quote
  #1389  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I read that also somewhere recently but can't remember where, but I take it with a pinch of salt as since the Sovereign Grant was started I have not read anywhere about parliamentary annuities, which were listed in previous financial reports.
Is the parliamentary annuity in addition to the Sovereign Grant then ?
Reply With Quote
  #1390  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:29 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,912
The Duke of Edinburgh’s annuity is in addition to the Sovereign Grant.
Reply With Quote
  #1391  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:44 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I read that also somewhere recently but can't remember where, but I take it with a pinch of salt as since the Sovereign Grant was started I have not read anywhere about parliamentary annuities, which were listed in previous financial reports.
It was reported in the articles about the recent annual financial review. Haven't read the review so I can't say it was in that but reporting on it mentioned the DofE continuing to receive an annuity.
Reply With Quote
  #1392  
Old 07-01-2019, 06:08 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,117
This is just my personal opinion but I honestly don't think there's enough money on this planet to compensate Philip for the unwavering support and the many, many things he's done and accomplished over the 67 years he's been the "strength and stay" of the monarch and service to Crown and Country.

In fact, I'd even suggest that the word used for his service is actually "priceless".
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #1393  
Old 07-12-2019, 01:54 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,912
Two royal weddings at Windsor, Louis’s birth, and Charles’s 70th birthday led to a boom in visitor numbers to royal residences and sales of memorabilia in 2018-19, the Royal Collection Trust’s annual report shows today.

The Queen's official residences attracted a record 3.3 million visitors over the past financial year, compared with 2.96 million the year before.


Via Kensington Richard Palmer Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #1394  
Old 05-26-2020, 08:43 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,592
As a follow-up to the discussion about the revenues from the Duchy of Cornwall in the case there is no duke of Cornwall (which would happen if the eldest living son of the monarch and heir apparent are not the same person), the Sovereign Grant Act of 2011 made a few changes.

Quote:
5. Duchy of Cornwall
The Duchy of Cornwall is a private landed estate created by Charter in 1337 when Edward III granted it to his son and heir, Prince Edward (the Black Prince) and all his subsequent heirs. It provides each Duke with an income from its assets. The current Duke is the Heir to the Throne, HRH Prince Charles.
The estate comprises primarily agricultural, commercial and residential property, in addition to which the Duchy has a portfolio of financial investments. The Duchy consists of around 52,971 hectares of land in 23 counties, mostly in the South West of England. For more details, please visit the official website for the Duchy of Cornwall.

Under the Sovereign Grant Act:
* a grant is to be paid to heirs to the throne who are not Dukes of Cornwall to put them in a similar financial position as if they were Dukes of Cornwall; this means that in future daughters of the monarch, as well as younger sons, could benefit
* if the heir is not the Duke of Cornwall and is over 18, the heir is to receive a grant based on Duchy revenues; the Monarch (who in these circumstances becomes the Duke) receives the Duchy revenues, and the Sovereign Grant is reduced by an equal amount (so in effect, the heir would receive the Duchy income)
* if the Duke of Cornwall is a minor, 90% of the revenues of the Duchy go to the monarch and the Sovereign Grant is reduced accordingly
Source: Sovereign Grant Act.
Reply With Quote
  #1395  
Old 05-26-2020, 09:10 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,546


Indeed, that is why many say the heir to the throne will receive the duchy revenues, since even if it is not the technical truth, that is the effective outcome under the Sovereign Grant Act.

Here is the Sovereign Grant Act of 2011; note that any heir to the throne will receive the revenues, whether or not he or she is a child of the reigning monarch, such that unless the law is changed, if Prince George is childless then the revenues will be directed to Princess Charlotte when her brother is king.
Reply With Quote
  #1396  
Old 05-26-2020, 10:54 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
The Duke of Edinburgh’s annuity is in addition to the Sovereign Grant.
Is that the last vestiges of The Civil List, the funds for HRH The Duke of Edinburgh? I remember something about this. IMHO, he has earned it many times over.
Reply With Quote
  #1397  
Old 05-27-2020, 01:34 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post


Here is the Sovereign Grant Act of 2011; note that any heir to the throne will receive the revenues, whether or not he or she is a child of the reigning monarch, such that unless the law is changed, if Prince George is childless then the revenues will be directed to Princess Charlotte when her brother is king.
Does it also mean that if George become king before he's married or has child(ren), Charlotte will receive the revenues until he has child(ren)? (A scenario similar to Edward VIII and Duke of York)
Reply With Quote
  #1398  
Old 05-27-2020, 01:46 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by yukari View Post
Does it also mean that if George become king before he's married or has child(ren), Charlotte will receive the revenues until he has child(ren)? (A scenario similar to Edward VIII and Duke of York)
That will depend on what the act looks like then. Currently the act specifically refers to 'Her Majesty' and so would have to be re-done when there is a King.

If an act is to refer to a monarch of either gender the act tends to use the term 'the monarch' while this act only refers to Her Majesty.

That presumably is because the Crown Estate still has to be signed over at the beginning of each new reign and so a new Sovereign Grant Act will need to be negotiated at that time (even if only in 'theory' while in practice the existing act simply rolls over.

It the terms of the current act do apply then Charlotte would receive the income as the heir, I think, but not directly as Charles does now. As Charlotte, or any female, wouldn't be The Duke of Cornwall, the income from the Duchy would be invested to the monarch, the Sovereign Grant reduced by the amount of the Duchy of Cornwall income and the treasury then pay the heir (note the treasury and not the Crown Estate). That would be interesting as they would never be able to say 'no taxpayers money' as they can now.
Reply With Quote
  #1399  
Old 05-27-2020, 04:50 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Currently the act specifically refers to 'Her Majesty' and so would have to be re-done when there is a King.
[...]
That presumably is because the Crown Estate still has to be signed over at the beginning of each new reign and so a new Sovereign Grant Act will need to be negotiated at that time (even if only in 'theory' while in practice the existing act simply rolls over.
Under that interpretation, the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 which reformed the laws of royal marriages and succession to the crown would also need to be re-done.

The official guidance posted by Somebody indicates that is not the interpretation of the legislators:

Quote:
Under the Sovereign Grant Act:
* a grant is to be paid to heirs to the throne who are not Dukes of Cornwall to put them in a similar financial position as if they were Dukes of Cornwall; this means that in future daughters of the monarch, as well as younger sons, could benefit

Quote:
Originally Posted by yukari View Post
Does it also mean that if George become king before he's married or has child(ren), Charlotte will receive the revenues until he has child(ren)? (A scenario similar to Edward VIII and Duke of York)
Correct, as the Act says "any person who is the heir to the throne" would receive the grant equal in amount to the revenues.
Reply With Quote
  #1400  
Old 05-27-2020, 09:02 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
the Crown Estate still has to be signed over at the beginning of each new reign and so a new Sovereign Grant Act will need to be negotiated at that time (even if only in 'theory' while in practice the existing act simply rolls over.
1 This is my understanding as well although I can see how a different interpretation can also be drawn from the wording of the official government guidance on the act.

2 I suspect that the wording will be changed to "heir apparent" at some point. Granting an heir presumptive 20 million a year for some unknowable period would be unprecedented. Such an individual could amass a very considerable fortune over a decade or more & then be replaced by an (infant) heir apparent.

3 On a separate but related issue - does the heir even need to have 20 million (15 net) a year? It is a huge amount of money.

4 How are other heirs apparent funded? Are they given such a large amount per year?

5 With regard to the thread on the Sussexes the point I was trying to make is that any part of the surplus of the Duchy of Cornwall should not be utilised to fund overseas relatives. I believe that this goes against the spirit of what the proceeds are supposed to be used for.

6 Since the duchy is crown land it belongs to the state (even if owned, but not in a personal capacity, by the present duke) & therefore the public have a legitimate interest in its affairs.

7 The structures, privileges & practises of the Duchy of Cornwall are not already without their critics. Any funding of the Sussexes from duchy resources could open a can of worms.

8 Much (most?) of the accumulated wealth (ie in the bank so to speak) of the Prince of Wales derives from having the income from the duchy minus

Official expenses
Tax at either 25 or 50 % (dependent on marital status) on the remainder


He has been in receipt of these amounts annually since 1968. What happened to the duchy income before then who knows? Maybe it was put aside for Charles to inherit at 21 but that is unclear.

It’s therefore not unreasonable for there to be a public interest in how this accumulated “private” wealth is used. It’s a grey area best left unexamined if you’re the Prince of Wales.

This is not conjecture - It is well known that the former Prince of Wales built up a sizeable fortune out of the duchy.

10 Both Lancaster & Cornwall are crown lands. Crown lands belong to the state. They are not personal property. The proof of this is very simple: in a republic of Britain they would not be owned by the former royal house.

Here's the latest accounts. Obviously you may not find everything you're after.

https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/w...d-Accounts.pdf
https://duchyofcornwall.org/assets/p...allIAR2019.pdf
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, civil list, finances


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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 446 11-03-2019 05:42 PM
Costs and Finances of the Belgian Royal Family Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 118 07-16-2019 03:30 PM
Wealth and Finances of the Spanish Royal Family hrhcp Royal Family of Spain 156 04-06-2018 07:21 PM
Wealth of The German Royal/Princely Houses kcc Royal Families of Austria and Germany 12 12-30-2007 03:35 AM




Popular Tags
anastasia 2020 armstrong-jones belgian royal family belgium canada castles chittagong coronavirus cover-up crown princess victoria danish royalty dna dutch royal family dutch royals family tree foundation future haakon vii hill history house of bourbon house of glucksburg interesting introduction israel italian royal family japan jumma kent king salman list of rulers lithuanian palaces mailing mary: crown princess of denmark memoir monaco history monogram mountbatten netflix nobel 2019 norwegian royal family prince charles prince dimitri princess elizabeth princess margaret pronunciation queen mathilde queen maud rown royal balls royal events royal family royal spouse royalty royal wedding russian imperial family saudi arabia serbian royal family spain spanish history startling new evidence stuart sweden swedish royalty thai royal family tracts united states of america videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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