To say Balmoral could/should be National Trus

[Happyhapoydog]

for
Scotland or similar. Is Charlie going to want it? Don’t they all have their own estates?
I said this to a colleague who got really ANGRY as it’s ‘disrespectful’ after claiming only the Royals would have the money to upkeep the place. I said - turn it over to NTS or similar and give it back to the public.
she’s now not talking to me!

It's a private house. It does not belong to the monarchy but to the individual. Windsor and Buckingham Palace are houses of the monarchy. Balmoral and Sandringham are privately owned, bought privately by previous monarchs- Queen Victoria and George V and left to their eldest child by them. HM The Queen can leave Balmoral and Sandringham to whoever she chose to leave them to- although most likely Charles.

Most sources count the entirety of the U.K., and everywhere she was head of state (ie Canada, Australia). It’s stupid because the monarch doesn’t actually own all that land.

but if he had to give up much of his private wealth to become monarch, how would he pay inheritance tax? Are you saying he should be allowed to keep all this private wealth on becoming monarch

Ok for the millionth time I KNOW it’s privately owned. I also know they own a LOT of other Estes, land and houses.
make him pay inheritance tax. like the rest of us have to.
lots of estates and houses that were once privately owned are now in public hands for many people to enjoy, rather than a few.

No, it’s private land isn’t it? Here’s a run down:

people.com/royals/all-of-king-charless-sprawling-estates-across-the-uk/

And the Dutchy estate covers a lot of land, not sure if that counts as private or not.

‘but if he had to give up much of his private wealth to become monarch, how would he pay inheritance tax?’

he hasn’t given up anything. He’s inherited more.

I don’t think the NT wants more houses to run - it’s very hard to get them to take one on these days.

Balmoral is privately owned.

I think it’s quite likely KC will open more of the crown owned places - Buckingham Palace and Windsor - to the public, but Balmoral is the family holiday home, so I doubt it.

I know this will have steam coming out of your ears but when I inherited my Scottish farm from my father I did not pay inheritance tax because agricultural land is exempt.

The private wealth of the Royal family is not public money. Much of it comes from investments made many years ago by grand and great grand parents. HM The Queen has inherited money that came to her mother from The Queen Mother's grand-parents and great-grandparents- who were not Royal, as have the Queen's children.
Money has been invested in trust funds every time a child has been born- as it is in many wealthy families. They are managed for decades to ensure they perform when the child comes of age.
That may have included investments in land, natural assets like minerals, precious metals, companies, property. It's no different to other rich families. I'm not sure why you think it appropriate that it should be taken from them.
Many ordinary families do similar things on a smaller scale. My grandma put money away for me every month until I was 21 into a savings account and then the account was mine. It wasn't much, a few thousand pounds but I was very surprised and grateful. My parents did the same.
DH's parents are doing the same for our DC and so are we. They won't get a fortune each but they'll get an amount that will help them.
That's what lots of families do. Surely you are not suggesting that should be taken by the government?

That’s not even remotely the same thing though. Unless you’re also living an incredibly privileged life funded by the general public due to accident of birth.

It's private property. It could be donated of course, or sold, or subdivided or closed to public or ...etc... The owners decide.

Hmm. All depends on whether you count the Crown Estates as King Charles IIIs land as if it were his private land.

#1 Forestry Commission with 2,200,000 acres
#2 Ministry of Defence with 1,101,851 acres
#3 Crown Estate with 678,420 acres
(Which while owned by King Charles as monarch, it isn’t privately owned by him and he only gets 25% of the profits from its revenues, the rest of the profits go to HMRC Treasury)
#4 National Trust and National Trust for Scotland with 589,748 acres
#5 RSPB with 332,000 acres

Finally, our first private owners start appearing….
#6 RICHARD SCOTT, DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH & QUEENSBERRY 280,000 acres
#7 ANDERS HOLCH POVLSEN (Danish billionaire ) 218,364 acres

#8 THE DUKE OF ATHOLL’S TRUSTS 145,000 acres
#9 UNITED UTILITIES (dam energy companies) 140,124 acres
#10 HUGH GROSVENOR, 7TH DUKE OF WESTMINSTER 140,000 acres
#11 DUCHY OF CORNWALL, 135,000 acres
(similar to Crown Estate, not privately owned by the heir to the Crown)
—— lots of other people —
#35 QUEEN ELIZABETH II, 20,000 acres

abcfinance.co.uk/blog/who-owns-the-uk/

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/14/queen-immunity-british-laws-private-property

Balmoral benefits from these wheezes. The whole lot are crooked.

I was funded by the general public all my working life.

Remember it's not NT in Scotland. NT doesn't operate in Scotland.

NTS does - an entirely separate charity. The OP mentioned NTS but many of the PPs only mentioned NT.

The Duchy of Cornwall isn’t private. It functions similar to the Crown Estate.
Queen Elizabeth II privately owned 20,000 acres, putting her at #35 in the UK.

So even if Charles III inherits the lot and you add in his collection of stately homes he already has, he might bump up say, 5,000 acres and be at #28 or so on par with Count Vighognolo’s U.K. property portfolio.

lots of estates and houses that were once privately owned are now in public hands for many people to enjoy, rather than a few

National Trust membership is expensive. Even just ad hoc entry to their places is expensive

So giving it to the NT would (1) burden the NT with the cost of upkeep, meaning they have to increase their already expensive ticket prices and (2) open the house to what? A bunch of middle class families to visit on the odd weekend?

Come on.

And Balmoral isn't just the house. It has ridiculously extensive land with it which simply couldn't be appreciated on a day visit.

There is little to no money in public maintenance budgets. Beautiful buildings go to wrack & ruin unless they have a significant income stream.

But presumably OP only has one house. If OP has multiple palaces and mansions, then I agree.

Were you incredibly privileged? Take the last public-owned crown you wore, how much was it worth?

@Happyhapoydog you are missing the point though, even if it was inherited by a normal person the IHT liability probably wouldn’t be that big.

Any land farmed privately would be 0% IHT liability, anything farmed on a tenancy would be 50% IHT, the house, historic buildings and parkland would be 0% IHT because they are opened to the public, any works of art would probably be 0% as they are available to the public. There would be BPR on a lot of the other assets. It’s very easy to reduce your liability down with the right knowledge and succession planning.

The Queen has not been buried yet

😆😆😆

Crikey the royal stasi are out in force 🙄
Why should Op sign over her one house (presuming she even has one of her own seeing that many folk can't actually afford one without substantial parental assistance). How many properties do the RF have at their disposal ? 25 ?

"How many properties do the RF have at their disposal ? 25 ?"

Between how many of them?