Charles financially supported the Sussexes until summer 2020

[SnottyLottie]

news.sky.com/story/duke-and-charles-paid-substantial-sum-to-harry-and-meghan-after-megxit-but-couple-paid-back-rent-for-frogmore-cottage-12340192

Prince Harry revealed in his Oprah interview that the Sussexes stopped receiving money from the royal family in the first quarter of 2020. However, newly published accounts reveal that Prince Charles continued to financially support the Sussexes until summer 2020.

I wonder if this is going to be a case of their truth or incorrect wording on Harry’s behalf. Interesting!

What do Zara and Peter get from us? They don’t receive any income as Royals, do they?

@CallmeHendricks

What strikes me about royals such as Princess Anne (and Sophie Wessex, for that matter) is that they don't make their visits about themselves. The documentary made to mark Anne's 70th birthday exemplified this perfectly. I always knew she'd had unfair press (probably in part because she wouldn't conform to the media's ideal of a glamorous princess role - luckily Diana eventually came along and saved her from any more of that) but my word, she does a lot. Can you imagine Anne slagging off her family (or anyone) on TV?

Very true. They do their jobs without the side order of pity and poor me/it's just not fair! everyone is so mean! etc etc

you cannot impose the U.K. charity model or expectations onto it

Completely agree. It's a different set up

Don't quite understand, did H&M announce that they will be moving Archewell to the UK?

no, posters are just saying that UK charities and USA non profit foundations are very different - and for UK based posters, there is considerably opaqueness about how the foundations work in terms on income, expenses, minimum levels of charitable giving etc.

And what has that got to do with Archewell exactly?

So you think that an obligation to donate only 5% to charity is acceptable? Either M&H are great philanthropists, or they are using an efficient - and legal in the US - vehicle.

Anne has already talked about the RF. She did her own interview. 'Moaned' about 'bothersome presents' from the natives at her visiting countries. 'Whinged' about her privacy and the press.

At least 'moaned' and 'whinged' are the words used for H&M, I say retold a series of events, just like I think Anne was retelling events that took place.

@IrmaFayLear

Where did you read these stats. Because I have never seen them being reported anywhere. It sound untrue or libellous at best.

Mummy194

And what has that got to do with Archewell exactly?

Archewell Foundation is an impact-driven non-profit created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Our core purpose is to uplift and unite communities—local and global, online and offline—one act of compassion at a time.
archewell.com › foundation
Archewell Foundation | Uplifting & Uniting Communities

From the Archewell website.

@Mummy194

Anne has already talked about the RF. She did her own interview. 'Moaned' about 'bothersome presents' from the natives at her visiting countries. 'Whinged' about her privacy and the press.

At least 'moaned' and 'whinged' are the words used for H&M, I say retold a series of events, just like I think Anne was retelling events that took place.

Mummy, do you recall when that interview was?

Anne in her youth had a reputation for being somewhat caustic on more than one occasion - and the press went to town over it with countless headlines. Negative media attention for royals is nothing new.

Have to say I loved the Juneteenth poems featured on Archewell as well as the Pride stories.I only found out about them on Twitter as don’t check their website. I wish they had a social media presence. I understand why don’t have though after the abusive and racist comments they used to get on their Instagram as well as charities they support often having to lock their accounts due to trolling.

Libellous? I was referring to all US foundations. And agreeing with pps that charity in the US is very different from charity in the UK.

Therefore lauding M&H as great charity fundraisers in the US is barking up the wrong tree. I don’t think they’d thank you for suggesting that they should not take advantage of the rules and donate more than they need to!

Libellous? ha ha so you do agree with everyone that the way US Foundations are run is not tasteful to the UK ears and not charity!

I'm sure if it was anything more more than the usual 5-10% and more like 90% to charity then it would be made clear - it would noteworthy and made public to encourage more interest in the particular cause.

It will be assumed that only 5-10% is given to charity unless H&M can show differently as that's how US Foundations work and exactly what they're designed for: tax efficient earnings whilst giving a small percentage to charity. The earnings come before the charity bit as they are the raison d'être. Fine and dandy and part of system/lawful in every way and do get some work done that needs doing. Great. Just don't pretend it's anything other than that. It's not what we in UK refer to as charity. It certainly doesn't make you "good" or beyond reproach.

@IrmaFayLear

You are implying that they are giving 5%, something that you have no knowledge of, unless you can produce their reports. It is not the norm actually, to donate that little and pocket the rest. Infact the few foundations that have done this, have been exposed. Not sure why you think you should lump Archewell in this, other than trying to smear them.

Watercharity has a typical model for a lot of the foundations infact.

It can also be assumed they use the same model as Watercharity unless they prove otherwise.

Anne in her youth had a reputation for being somewhat caustic on more than one occasion - and the press went to town over it with countless headlines. Negative media attention for royals is nothing new

And Anne did an interview in the same format as the Oprah interview, Captain Philipps came towards the last minutes of the interview.

They had a different experience to H&M, but talked about their strifes too nonetheless .

@Zuluqueen

Have to say I loved the Juneteenth poems featured on Archewell as well as the Pride stories.I only found out about them on Twitter as don’t check their website. I wish they had a social media presence. I understand why don’t have though after the abusive and racist comments they used to get on their Instagram as well as charities they support often having to lock their accounts due to trolling.

Those were quite lovely. I saw they have a link to Get Lit. I suppose it being a US commemoration, it would not get that much publicity here.

Archewell is a 501(c)3 non profit corporation registered in Delaware - and according to Wikipedia there are 29 different types of 501(c)3 model. No idea of what the differences are and I suspect not many people in the UK do. Have no idea of what format Watercharity use and its not clear on their website so unless Archewell is very clear on its own website, the general public are none the wiser.
It's an American way of doing things which is unfathomable to the average Brit

@Mummy194

Anne in her youth had a reputation for being somewhat caustic on more than one occasion - and the press went to town over it with countless headlines. Negative media attention for royals is nothing new

And Anne did an interview in the same format as the Oprah interview, Captain Philipps came towards the last minutes of the interview.

They had a different experience to H&M, but talked about their strifes too nonetheless .

did you manage to find when this happened? I'm sure it did but I would be interested to know when?

I have never seen Anne do an interview like that ever. Moaning about the family and how hard done by she is? Complaining that her mother doesn’t give her enough money? When has she done that?

Foundations are not what you hope for I fear - it's about raising and preserving tax efficient capital each year and there are fines for not giving away at least 5% during that tax year. That's why it's 5%.

So when someone with a Foundation is giving they're also saving money. Win, win. Not saintly at all.

People have got in trouble for saying they're carrying over some of the 5% for the next year for their philanthropic aims etc. no-one has got in trouble for giving 5%, as that is what is required.

Here's someone trying to get it changed to 10% as so few give more than 5% (think he says about 22 (including his own ) gave 10% ie more than the 5%. Let's see H&M campaigning like this chap for all their friends to start increasing to 10%...

eu.clarionledger.com/story/opinion/2020/12/20/wealthy-foundations-give-more-crisis-charitable-commitment/3922958001/
It's shocking to find out that shared language has so many things that each country misunderstands by coming at it with their own set of experiences. They're just US people using a system that works in a way that the UK don't really admire/respect/wish to emulate etc.

www.vox.com/recode/2020/5/1/21242144/billionaires-foundations-giving-money-coronavirus-fight

learning.candid.org/resources/knowledge-base/payout/

www.ncfp.org/2008/10/15/what-is-the-5-payout-rule/

I too would be interested in seeing the interview you're referring to. There are a couple where the two of them are seated together being interviewed, it I can't see any where she is mainly talking alone with MP arriving at the end.

Opaque is the main issue for all of us : foundations/non profit/ tax /accounting - depends what it means to you - "kind" or "self-interest" - when it comes to accountants it's usually about maximising your own position.
differences etc:
"foundations are organizations that did not qualify as public charities. They are very similar to nonprofits, except money for a foundation usually comes from a family or a corporate entity, whereas nonprofit money often comes from their revenues."

All we can guess at is 5% unless they start saying otherwise and I'm sure they'd want to shout about giving 90%

I just stated what Anne complained about on the my post, I suggest you go and read what I said.

She and H&M had different experiences, they nevertheless both sat down for an interview to talk about their strifes.
Anne had no troubles with racism, obviously. She does not say about MH - we are aware that the RF does offer this service to some members. So maybe none of the same issues as H&M were her problem, so I don't see why you think she should complain about things that did not apply to her. She was definitely talking about herself and her family and her own problem (which some may see as less serious than H&M's, but everyone has their own problems nonetheless).

The interview was around 1980 with Parkinson, widely available on youtube.

It's chopped up into parts.