The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1421  
Old 07-02-2020, 06:24 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
I dunno I just see him as Alex Jennings in season 15 of The Crown being disparaging of Prince George when he is crowned because he wasn't invited and he refused to give him money.
I dont know anyting about the Crown but I think its unlikely that Harry woudl not be invited to a coronation.. unless he really really burnt bridges with his family. And George's coronation is a long way in the future...
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1422  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:32 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
My understanding was that Charles gave about £5M to the 2 sons for living expenses so that would be roughly £2.5 M each per year. We don't know what the queen mother left him or what the queen may leave him but its not likely to supply him with the sort of income he needs/wants. We do have rough idea of what he has inherited.. an
If you look at Charles' annual statements, you'll notice that the expenditures are split into two categories. "Work related" (for lack of a better term and "Personal". The monies that Charles uses to provide for his sons and their families that can be categorized as "work", I believe is tax deductible. Financing his family's working wardrobe, staff, expenditures all can be considered business expenses. On the personal side, the amount expended is listed but not itemized. This is the income Charles pays annual tax on. So, paying for Harry's office staff is "work" related. Buying Meghan a beautiful, new and sparkly bracelet as a gift wouldn't be. Same with Camilla's work expenses and what she privately spends money on or gifts Charles buys her.

To me it looks very much like filing income tax here in the US. Itemizing all legal "business' expenses and then basing the tax paid on "personal" expenditures. The 2 million paid out to Harry and William are documented as "work expenses". Whatever monies he gives them "just because" goes into the personal column and the amount isn't itemized. Any monies that Charles would now be assisting Harry and Meghan with could not be deducted in the work expense itemization any longer as they're not "working".

This is how I see it anyways.
__________________

__________________
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
  #1423  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:40 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
If you look at Charles' annual statements, you'll notice that the expenditures are split into two categories. "Work related" (for lack of a better term and "Personal". The monies that Charles uses to provide for his sons and their families that can be categorized as "work", I believe is tax deductible. Financing his family's working wardrobe, staff, expenditures all can be considered business expenses. On the personal side, the amount expended is listed but not itemized. This is the income Charles pays annual tax on. So, paying for Harry's office staff is "work" related. Buying Meghan a beautiful, new and sparkly bracelet as a gift wouldn't be. Same with Camilla's work expenses and what she privately spends money on or gifts Charles buys her.

To me it looks very much like filing income tax here in the US. Itemizing all legal "business' expenses and then basing the tax paid on "personal" expenditures. The 2 million paid out to Harry and William are documented as "work expenses". Whatever monies he gives them "just because" goes into the personal column and the amount isn't itemized. Any monies that Charles would now be assisting Harry and Meghan with could not be deducted in the work expense itemization any longer as they're not "working".

This is how I see it anyways.
sorry but Im not sure what the point is. We know that he gives them a large sum..
Reply With Quote
  #1424  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:42 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
They had money.. and even if they did not have enormous amounts to spare, the odds are that he left something to his grandson. He would probably leave a bit more to Harry than Will, because he is a younger son...

I think the bulk of his "fortune" went to his son who inherited the title and the estate as that is the English way (as opposed to the civil law tradition in continental Europe). After that, John would have to look after his other daughters too. Diana, having married into the Royal House, would be probably less of a priority in his will as her sons would probaly be covered for life. So I don't see them getting much from the Spencers other than the already considerable amount they inherited from Diana properly. Just my two cents.
Reply With Quote
  #1425  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:45 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
sorry but Im not sure what the point is. We know that he gives them a large sum..
If you're referring to financing after March 31st, is there anywhere that its credibly stated that he's giving them large sums of money? My point was to illustrate that the monies he was funding Harry and William (and families) were perfectly legal and above board and expected of the Duke of Cornwall to do with his personal income from the duchy. After March 31st, whatever monies he's giving or not giving to H&M are his own personal expenditures and not made public.
__________________
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
  #1426  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:46 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I think the bulk of his "fortune" went to his son who inherited the title and the estate as that is the English way (as opposed to the civil law tradition in continental Europe). After that, John would have to look after his other daughters too. Diana, having married into the Royal House, would be probably less of a priority in his will as her sons would probaly be covered for life. So I don't see them getting much from the Spencers other than the already considerable amount they inherited from Diana properly. Just my two cents.
I seem to remember Johnny Spencer saying when Harry was a kid that he was putting aside money for Harry as he was a younger son. Obviously the estate and the bulk of fortune would have gone to Charles.. but the family are rich and Im sure all his grandchildren including W and Harry got legacies.
Reply With Quote
  #1427  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:47 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
If you're referring to financing after March 31st, is there anywhere that its credibly stated that he's giving them large sums of money? My point was to illustrate that the monies he was funding Harry and William (and families) were perfectly legal and above board and expected of the Duke of Cornwall to do with his personal income from the duchy. After March 31st, whatever monies he's giving or not giving to H&M are his own personal expenditures and not made public.
If he was giving them £2M before the end of their wroking royal life, Im sure he is not giving them much less now. They have a lot of expenses, in their new life, including the fact that now theyll have to pay for security...
Reply With Quote
  #1428  
Old 07-02-2020, 07:55 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
It goes along the same lines as their supporters claiming the HMTQM ignored all of her other great-grandchildren and left countless millions to Harry to compensate for him not being the heir
Also doubtful, imo.

Diana once said she and Charles worked very hard to see their sons were treated equally, but some members of the family insisted on treating William as special.

One of the chief offenders was said to be QM.
Reply With Quote
  #1429  
Old 07-02-2020, 08:01 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
If he was giving them £2M before the end of their wroking royal life, Im sure he is not giving them much less now. They have a lot of expenses, in their new life, including the fact that now theyll have to pay for security...
We don't know. Whatever Charles does deem to spend on his youngest son now though moves to another "department" and along with giving them the money, Charles would also pay income tax on that amount.
__________________
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
  #1430  
Old 07-02-2020, 08:35 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
If you're referring to financing after March 31st, is there anywhere that its credibly stated that he's giving them large sums of money? My point was to illustrate that the monies he was funding Harry and William (and families) were perfectly legal and above board and expected of the Duke of Cornwall to do with his personal income from the duchy. After March 31st, whatever monies he's giving or not giving to H&M are his own personal expenditures and not made public.
I have no reason to believe that the income from the Duchy cannot be used to finance Harry's lifestyle, if that is how the Prince of Wales so chooses to dispose off it. The Duchy provides the PoW with a private income, and as I understand it, it does not place any restrictions on the use of the funds.
Reply With Quote
  #1431  
Old 07-02-2020, 08:45 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
I have no reason to believe that the income from the Duchy cannot be used to finance Harry's lifestyle, if that is how the Prince of Wales so chooses to dispose off it. The Duchy provides the PoW with a private income, and as I understand it, it does not place any restrictions on the use of the funds.
Exactly. This is the precise reason the Duchy of Cornwall was established in the first place and has remained so ever since. There are no set rules of how the Duke of Cornwall uses his personal income. With Charles, he's voluntarily has agreed to pay income tax. Along with funding Harry however he sees fit, he could also invest heavily in establishing a colony on Mars if he chose to.

"The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established by Edward III in 1337 to provide an income for the heir to the throne."

https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/fea...duchy-cornwall
__________________
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
  #1432  
Old 07-02-2020, 09:20 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Also doubtful, imo.

Diana once said she and Charles worked very hard to see their sons were treated equally, but some members of the family insisted on treating William as special.

One of the chief offenders was said to be QM.



All European royal families and, indeed, also families of peers or equivalent titled noblemen in the continent have to deal with this issue as it is inherently associated with the rule of succession by primogeniture. My personal impression, having seen how different RFs have handled it over the years, is that they try as much as possible to make no differentiation between the children in their private family life, especially when they are young and out of public life so to speak. As they grow up and start to be involved in official engagements and other public events, then it is inevitable that the heir will be treated differently and have a different status.



In some monarchies, that process starts quite early (think for example of Felipe when he was a teen and now his daughter Leonor). In the UK, and in the case of Diana's children in particular, it actually took too long to start as William didn't really get a special public status until he was in his 30s really (at least in my opinion). That may have caused Harry to have wrong expectations about his future role, which was in fact counterproductive. What do you think ?
Reply With Quote
  #1433  
Old 07-02-2020, 10:32 AM
acdc1's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: somewhere in, United States
Posts: 2,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
All European royal families and, indeed, also families of peers or equivalent titled noblemen in the continent have to deal with this issue as it is inherently associated with the rule of succession by primogeniture. My personal impression, having seen how different RFs have handled it over the years, is that they try as much as possible to make no differentiation between the children in their private family life, especially when they are young and out of public life so to speak. As they grow up and start to be involved in official engagements and other public events, then it is inevitable that the heir will be treated differently and have a different status.



In some monarchies, that process starts quite early (think for example of Felipe when he was a teen and now his daughter Leonor). In the UK, and in the case of Diana's children in particular, it actually took too long to start as William didn't really get a special public status until he was in his 30s really (at least in my opinion). That may have caused Harry to have wrong expectations about his future role, which was in fact counterproductive. What do you think ?
I think that you’re spot-on about public status. William and Harry both didn’t start their full-time role as working royals until they were in their 30s. When they were younger and they had their army careers, I feel like their public Royal roles were on a very similar standing, and many things that they worked on were joint projects. I think things began to change when William and Kate got married, but since they were both in the military full time it wasn’t quite as stark, and they still had plenty of joint projects (Heads Together comes to mind). Harry happened to get married right at the time when both of them had transitioned out of the military and were coming into full-time working royal status, and I think that’s when it became apparent about the different ways the brothers were going to be treated in terms of public life and in the life of the royal family (I’m meaning “royal family” in the public, traditional sense of the family and not their private life and relationships). It’s very hierarchical and William and his wife were always going to be higher in the hierarchy than Harry and his.
Reply With Quote
  #1434  
Old 07-02-2020, 10:32 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Exactly. This is the precise reason the Duchy of Cornwall was established in the first place and has remained so ever since. There are no set rules of how the Duke of Cornwall uses his personal income. With Charles, he's voluntarily has agreed to pay income tax. Along with funding Harry however he sees fit, he could also invest heavily in establishing a colony on Mars if he chose to.

"The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established by Edward III in 1337 to provide an income for the heir to the throne."

https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/fea...duchy-cornwall
However the point is, that Harry has been getting money from Charles, so his income is clearly not equal to the demands of his lifestyle. He has I am sure been continuing to get money from his father, whether frorm his personal funds or from the Duchy, and this is because again, in his new life, his income though pretty generous by any standards, is not enough to pay for the sort of lifestyle he is living... and he is not making any money himself. People frequently say that Harry has enough to live on etc. but he clearly does not. Otherwise he and Meg would hardly have made such a point of trying to make a professional income.
Reply With Quote
  #1435  
Old 07-02-2020, 10:41 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
However the point is, that Harry has been getting money from Charles, so his income is clearly not equal to the demands of his lifestyle. He has I am sure been continuing to get money from his father, whether frorm his personal funds or from the Duchy, and this is because again, in his new life, his income though pretty generous by any standards, is not enough to pay for the sort of lifestyle he is living... and he is not making any money himself. People frequently say that Harry has enough to live on etc. but he clearly does not. Otherwise he and Meg would hardly have made such a point of trying to make a professional income.

When was it confirmed that Harry was getting his personal living expenses money from Charles? Yes Charles funded their working Royal life ...but if it has ever been confirmed Charles was or is funding either son's personal life I don't recall seeing it.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #1436  
Old 07-02-2020, 10:49 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
When was it confirmed that Harry was getting his personal living expenses money from Charles? Yes Charles funded their working Royal life ...but if it has ever been confirmed Charles was or is funding either son's personal life I don't recall seeing it.


LaRae
I've never seen anything of the sort either. People are just *assuming* that Charles is still floating their boat.
__________________
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
  #1437  
Old 07-02-2020, 10:57 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I've never seen anything of the sort either. People are just *assuming* that Charles is still floating their boat.
You are correct with that Osipi, we are assuming, I just made a comment on another thread re not biting the hand that feeds you, when M & H put out the statement/ website in January they only spoke about dropping the Sovereign grant.

A lot of us then assumed they were still taking the money from Charles.

Who knows... not us
Reply With Quote
  #1438  
Old 07-02-2020, 11:14 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
You are correct with that Osipi, we are assuming, I just made a comment on another thread re not biting the hand that feeds you, when M & H put out the statement/ website in January they only spoke about dropping the Sovereign grant.

A lot of us then assumed they were still taking the money from Charles.

Who knows... not us
We dont know for certain but now, in LA they are going ot have to pay for things that they didn't have to pay for, when they were in the UK.... So it is reasonable to assume that Charles is continuing to help them.
Reply With Quote
  #1439  
Old 07-02-2020, 11:25 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
We dont know for certain but now, in LA they are going ot have to pay for things that they didn't have to pay for, when they were in the UK.... So it is reasonable to assume that Charles is continuing to help them.
Its also possible that without Charles' knowledge, one of the Jack Russells that Camilla has did a covert sneak job into the Charles' office and being very intelligent dogs, were able to direct funds from Charles' personal accounts to Harry and Meghan overseas.

We don't know what they have to pay for and the amount required to do so at this time. For all we know, the security forces they now have is provided from Universal Studios as training to be 'big burly rough guys" in future movies.

We can assume whatever we like and anything we can invent can be possible but it doesn't make it so. Its called speculation and not fact.
__________________
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
  #1440  
Old 07-02-2020, 11:28 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Its also possible that without Charles' knowledge, one of the Jack Russells that Camilla has did a covert sneak job into the Charles' office and being very intelligent dogs, were able to direct funds from Charles' personal accounts to Harry and Meghan overseas.

We don't know what they have to pay for and the amount required to do so at this time. For all we know, the security forces they now have is provided from Universal Studios as training to be 'big burly rough guys" in future movies.

We can assume whatever we like and anything we can invent can be possible but it doesn't make it so. Its called speculation and not fact.
It is speculation based on the facts that we know... Ie that Harry has a certain amount of money but that he was getting more from his father, and that he and Meg dont believe they have enough money.. or they wouldn't have been talking about making more. And they have security. Those people have to be paid...
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 33 (7 members and 26 guests)
andrew, carlota, Lilyflo, muriel, RandyDrx, sweetness
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
General News about the Sussex Family, Part One: May 2019 - March 2020 JuliannaVictoria Current Events Archive 2199 04-07-2020 10:18 PM




Popular Tags
ancestry armstrong-jones belgian royal belgian royal family belgium chittagong cover-up crown princess victoria danish royalty dna dubai dutch royal family dutch royals family tree foundation future games haakon vii hill history house of glucksburg interesting introduction israel italian royal family jumma kids movie king salman list of rulers lithuanian palaces mailing mary: crown princess of denmark memoir monaco history monogram mountbatten nepal netflix norwegian royal family prince charles prince dimitri princess elizabeth princess margaret pronunciation queen mathilde queen maud rown royal balls royal court royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding saudi arabia serbian royal family spain spanish history startling new evidence stuart sweden swedish royalty thailand tracts united states of america unsubscribe videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:06 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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