C4 Dispatches on Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster

[Babadookinthewardrobe]

I couldn’t find another thread on this. I watched this yesterday. I am so angry. The royal family are grim parasites funding their luxury lifestyle from the sweat of the British people. Via the duchies they are rinsing the NHS and charities for millions. It’s horrific. No IHT, no CGT, no transparency, no consideration for the environment of which they are supposed to be stewards in the duchies.

Their behaviour and greed is absolutely grim
and I am so sick of the lot of them. I’m joining republic, I’m so shocked at what I’ve just seen. The French had the right idea.

Ahhhh, so you are equating Charles and William with criminals?

that’s more like it.

Gosh you are bad at this.

I do believe Serenster has put them in the correct bracket @Delphigirl

The only reason they are not criminals is because they are in a position to lobby for their own cosy carve outs.

I doubt it. William is just as much of a leeching grifting hypocrite as his father is.

@BustingBaoBun

• I believe that once Charles snuffs it everything will change We thought that about when the Queen died.*

The Queen who made sure her son inherited £500m tax free.

William is as bad as his father except lazier and angrier

Does that include the costs of the vanity gold coach he had made for his coronation at vast vast expense, for example?

You mean the one that Australian Jim Frecklington built of his own initiative, self-funded and presented to QEII as a gift?

If that’s the one you mean (and I presume you do since that’s the only “new” coach, Charles didn’t commission it. It was passed into the ownership of the Royal Collection Trust, which will make certain posters happy to hear, as they have been concerned that this was not happening with gifts.

And yet you understood perfectly. But chose to pretend not to.
Tedious.

No deduction should be permitted under Section 336 ITEPA 2003 for the cost of ordinary clothing worn at work

No. HMRC is quite clear on this. Uniforms and necessary Protective Clothing are permitted for example but not every day clothing.

There is this though…
Costumes for actors or entertainers
Any clothing you buy specifically to carry out a performance is allowed

I guess maybe they’re ‘carrying out a performance’

The royal famoly are the viggest grifters of them all

I have friends who are actors and tv presenters and anything they buy for work
Is tax deductible under that rule.

I'm in favour of having our royal family.
There's not much that's special these days about our little island and I think they make us a little bit different and probably being in lots of tourist money.

But they should be paying tax on all of this. It's totally unacceptable that they should be exempt from tax. These Duchys are hugely wealthy organisations and should be contributing to central funds like the rest of us.

Yes, and?
That’s literally what my post stated.

The poster was asking if they could deduct their own work wardrobe. The answer is no unless it is a uniform, protective or for performance. Not sure what your point is.

I hope there is a public outcry - so hypocritical

@AuxArmesCitoyens Major US cities have vacant apartments that are owned by nationals of other countries. It's driving up the rents in the US. From what I've read, that is a problem in London.

We also had the issue of people moving from expensive cities to cheaper, more rural towns, this making them unaffordable. Your issues with housing in Cornwall are similar to our in the Hamptons.

Perhaps the focus should be on people to who buy properties just for investment purposes but never live in them so they remain vacant.

People in Valencia were pelting their "royals" with mud today.

I've always liked the Spanish people.

They don't care what Dispatches says or what we think. Nothing will change unless there is some brave soul in Government who advocates to abolish the Monarchy. That I am positive cannot ever be done of course, because consequences, laws, tradition, privacy, you name it there will be a reason.

The thing is that while people are comparing other rich folk out there with the wealth of the RF, the difference is that other HNW folk do not (I don't think anyway) receive any funding from the State for their upkeep. That means you and me paying for them, just like we do for the RF through our taxes. Annoying isn't it in this day and age?

I say Nationalise the lot of it. Give back a few acres and a couple of abodes so they can live in luxury anyway. Then get Michael O'Leary to run the Duchies. He might not be everyone's cup of tea, but he could have run off to a tax haven, but he resides in Ireland and pays his taxes there.

@BemusedAmerican that is all part of the problem. There are laws on the UK statute books that would allow us to expropriate that property overnight if the political will was there. William could apply political pressure behind the scenes for that to happen if he was serious about ending homelessness. Or lobby for more progressive taxation, or an end to his own family's tax carve outs. He could do so much more than he is doing if he was willing to rock the boat, but his position makes that pretty much impossible.

I watched it and I’m disgusted by the hypocrisy of the Royal family. Not paying tax on the profits made by these businesses just because they’re royal. Hearing how they are charging the armed forces to use Dartmoor for training so they can protect the country. Plus making millions by renting out a building to ambulances. It’s utterly disgusting. And they have the nerve to lecture us on saving the planet and ending homelessness. I hope they’re ashamed.

Wow. That post says a lot about you

I wouldn’t mind chucking a rotten tomato at our lot, given the 11 million charge to the nhs I feel it would be richly deserved.

I wonder what was left out. They must have pushed for this to be revealed so what else is hidden?

I do wonder if the process is slightly affected by the other wealthy landowners out there who are maybe sheltered from criticism, by Lancaster and Cornwall because they are held by the royals, and whose owners are not keen to be more open to scrutiny

Another very valid point, @MrsLeonFarrell, and I'd add, if I may, the point that the much vaunted "oversight" is potentially susceptible to the kind of favours the RF are in a position to bestow

As a general principle it's surprising how quickly unwelcome attention can be deflected if there's something in it for those doing the inspecting, and I''d be amazed if the family make less use of this than others in advantageous positions

I've not yet seen the programme, just read The Times article, and it seems to be based entirely on open source information.

But @2Magpies24 , they are a family who have exemptions that the rest of society does not have only because of their blood line. Not only, they spent who knows how many millions promoting the idea of them as a most excellent family.

The king - engaged father and grandfather, nuts about the grandkids. But why was he not in the Cambridge video? That was just the Middleton's.

PoW - the family man. Positively obsessed with the kids and giving them a normal childhood in various castles that they get to in helicopters.

The queen, we are constantly told, is a person who loves nothing more than putting her feet up by the fire with numerous grandchildren running around.

I take your point that they are "ordinary" in the sense that they will have the same human emotions as the rest of us.

For me, when they promote themselves and put themselves into "the just like you" basket, it becomes insulting.

Not least because I pay proportionately a lot more in tax than they do.