Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Should the Royal Family have to declare gifts

205 replies

Polka83 · 12/10/2024 20:21

I would be interested in people thoughts. Should the royal family have to declare gifts made by other states?

There is a Guardian article which says royal family agreed to declare gifts received over the last 4 years but they have failed to do so.

I understand that the royals will receive gifts from friends which don’t need to be declared, but what about gifts from other heads of states? It is unlikely that these gifts would come to the royals if they were commoners.

There are strict rules in how the royals should handle these gifts and if they belong to the state rather than personally by individual royals. For example, the Duchess of Sussex got £500,000 earrings from Saudi Arabia. How can we check if these rules are being followed unless they declare them?

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/12/buckingham-palace-published-list-official-gifts-royal-family-king-charles

King Charles and royals fail to reveal official gifts for past four years – despite promise to do so | Monarchy | The Guardian

Royal family had pledged to declare all presents received in an annual list, after several controversies

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/12/buckingham-palace-published-list-official-gifts-royal-family-king-charles

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Original poster
Polka83 · 25/10/2024 19:47

Serenster · 13/10/2024 09:16

It’s an article that has been posted previously and discussed by a previous poster who appears to no longer post under that name. I don’t know why. But look - now a different named poster has dug up the same article.

Show quote history

Not posted about this before - but read an article about this - this month in Guardian- linked in original post.

OP posts:
Original poster
Polka83 · 25/10/2024 20:25

MrsLeonFarrell · 13/10/2024 11:52

I would have more respect for The Guardian if they went after other rich people as well. Even if we abolish the monarchy the country will not suddenly become economically fairer. The art and other treasures will simply be bought by other very rich people, most of whom contribute nothing to society.

Show quote history

you should look at the work that the guardian did on the Panama papers about rich people using off shore tax havens

www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/22/panama-papers-whistleblower-speaks-out-politicians-must-act-now

OP posts:
Original poster
Polka83 · 25/10/2024 21:20

MrsLeonFarrell · 13/10/2024 11:49

The article says much of the art Charles owns was inherited from his Grandmother, who bought it with her own money, when it was cheap. So not a gift that needs handing over.

The Chagall bible was gifted to Prince Philip by Chagall himself before the rules about gifts came into force. They came in the next year which suggests the Bible left the monarchy in a difficult position which they recognised and brought in rules to cover future gifts.

There are no examples in the article of items which were gifted to the royals and which they kept against the rules.

I understand The Guardian is anti monarchy but this is reaching. Charles inherited art like many other rich people (and which he would have paid IHT on because it wasn't a monarch to monarch inheritance). Philip accepted a gift within the rules at the time it was gifted.

The Guardian need to do better. I am sure there are lots of things that need changing in the monarchy to align better with modern societal and economic realities but the way to bring about change is not with specious arguments.

Show quote history

Do you think Chagall would have given the gift to Prince Philip if he wasn’t married to the Queen? They had not known each other. They have not retrospectively put it in the Royal Collection - but happy for people to prove this Guardian article wrong. I couldn’t find it in Collection.

”More than a third of the 392 pieces identified by the Guardian in private royal collections appear to have been gifts of one sort or another. Some were wedding presents, while others were official gifts on overseas trips, including from artists themselves. All were displayed in exhibitions of “personal” art collections. None are part of the public royal collection.”

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/17/the-other-royal-collection-windsors-multimillion-pound-private-trove-of-art-may-include-official-gifts

The other royal collection: Windsors’ multimillion-pound private trove of art may include official gifts | Monarchy | The Guardian

Guardian identifies almost 400 artworks as being privately owned by family, including works by Dalí, Monet, Freud, Chagall and Lowry

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/17/the-other-royal-collection-windsors-multimillion-pound-private-trove-of-art-may-include-official-gifts

OP posts:
Original poster
Polka83 · 25/10/2024 21:31

@MrsLeonFarrell There were no guidelines to break at that point- but by current guidelines this should be in the Royal Collection. Why did it require the development of guidelines? One might expect individuals not in want of anything to be able to act in good faith?

OP posts:
CathyorClaire · 26/10/2024 11:20

Polka83 · 25/10/2024 20:25

you should look at the work that the guardian did on the Panama papers about rich people using off shore tax havens

www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/22/panama-papers-whistleblower-speaks-out-politicians-must-act-now

Show quote history

That work revealed some interesting facts about TLQ's offshore investment portfolio.

Not just that it existed at all but also that it included investments in companies such as the exploitative Brighthouse.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/revealed-queen-private-estate-invested-offshore-paradise-papers

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread