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

The royal family

Should the Royal Family receive more money?

109 replies

TightlyLacedCorset · 11/03/2026 12:35

Yes. I am asking this question.

Do they have enough? Is a lack of money leaving our Royal family vulnerable to exploitation?

I'm interested in this quote from Royal Biographer Andrew Lownie in The Guardian

"That’s what the Chinese and Russian secret services realised – that the easiest vulnerability of the British establishment is the royal family,” says Lownie. “There’s no scrutiny. They’re greedy. They’re short of money.

Are our Royal Family short of cash? I mean short of cash in relation to their current position, not the average Joe.

Consider that our Royal Family tend to have to borrow things from other people richer than themselves. Super Yachts from the Saudi Royal family as one example. Why do they not have their own, if that is seen as social currency in the circles they're required to mingle in? I remember Meghan receiving earrings or something from a Saudi family. I also remember them having to borrow Tyler Perry the film producer's Mansion. Tyler Perry is now being accused of serious sexual harassment. Yet Meghan and Harry felt compelled to stay in his mansion (albeit before the charges) and likely remained friends out of a sense of compulsion afterwards. They needed to stay in a place befitting their station.

Why are our Royal family being tempted with lavish gifts and having to borrow from other Royals when they are Royals themselves, or borrow cash as Fergie, from other murky super millionaires? Surely as representatives of Britain, the former Empire, they should be the ones giving the gifts? Do they feel like poor cousins or poor relations when schmoozing with people of similar pedigree?

They do seem poor in relation to the Saudis and many multi-millionaires and people of influence today. When we send them abroad to hobnob with influential powerful people as our 'soft power' brokers, do they appear underwhelming in terms of wealth among those people? So that these people quickly realise that offering gifts or the use of lavish conveniences will be a permanent way into the Royal graces and possibly a way to exploit and compromise?

Aside from state functions, can Charles and Camilla or William and Kate really put on an imposing display of power abroad?

I've read that a lot of the Royal dwellings are in need of repairs. Andrew's was. How embarrassing to be a Prince and invite people of influence to a home in need of doing up!

It's a new world. There are more billionaires than ever and we will soon enter the era of the Trillionaire. Royals are surrounded by people much wealthier than them. Decades ago it would have been more equal or unequal in their favour.

I remember when Harry and Meghan were offered Frogmore. Many people, particularly Americans, could not get their heads around the concept of a Duke and Duchess being expected to live in a cottage. No amount of explaining that a cottage can still be an extremely large home within the UK and their relatively minor place in the line of succession made sense to many. There is a disconnect between these high faluting titles Prince, Duke, Princess, Duchess and their actual accompanying material wealth/assets in the eyes of other people. It surely puts pressure on the individual to live as though they're wealthier than they are.

Meghan is making Jam for money!

OP posts:
DaisyDooley · 12/03/2026 09:59

RainbowBagels · 12/03/2026 09:24

Well now it seems quite a few others have been paying ' peppercorn rents'- why do Bea and Eugenie have London offices? So it looks like the Crown Estate isn't scrutinised enough at all, despite them saying it is.
Re William and Charles declaring their taxes- because the things they say they care about- the environment, homelessness, mental health support, early years etc are things that all need huge government resources paid for through taxation. So if they are not revealing how much tax they are paying then all they are doing is telling people who do not trouser £30m a year to pony up. Why isn't he saying how much he is paying towards these costs? He can say he pays tax and he does, but how much is he writing off? Charles paid £4m in tax even though he's a billionaire nearly 2x over. He managed to write so much off, his tax bill reduced even when his income increased. William decided he didn't want to reveal his so the suspicion is he has managed to pay even less but doesn't want anyone to know if about it. Not to mention the Late Queen decided to pay tax in return for less scrutiny in Parliament and a move away from the Civil List to the Sovereign Grant. So we have handed them less scrutiny but have no idea to what extent they are holding up their side of the bargain.

Edited

No. No others are paying ‘peppercorn rents’ (I don’t know where you hve got that from as I did not infer or say that. Who are you accusing of not paying rent?) as they pay an annual/monthly rent.
Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

What the King and The Prince of Wales care about doesn’t matter when it comes to paying their taxes.
If you think the King and the Prince of Wales should have to show their private tax affairs then you should lobby your MP for EVERYONES tax affairs to be open to scruitiny. I’m sure you wouldn’t want your family/friends/work colleagues/neighbours etc to miss out on seeing how much you pay in tax?
Being able to ‘write off so much in tax’ is also something you should lobby your MP about if you feel so strongly.
Why should they not have the same rights as the rest of us to use the tax laws set in place by successive governments to ensure their tax is paid at the correct t rate with the correct deductibles applied?
‘Less scrutiny’ applies to everyone in the uk. All tax affairs are between the individual and HMRC. As I said - when every single part of your life is scrutinised and discussed, when you are constantly lied about I suspect that anything you can choose to keep private you will.

PiMCA · 12/03/2026 10:38

You don't make corrupt, greedy people less corrupt and greedy by giving them more money. Charge them all the tax they have avoided over the years, redistribute all the stolen land etc. and send them on their way.

RainbowBagels · 12/03/2026 11:51

No. No others are paying ‘peppercorn rents’ (I don’t know where you hve got that from as I did not infer or say that. Who are you accusing of not paying rent?) as they pay an annual/monthly rent.
Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

Edward has been paying peppercorn rents too on his huge mansion. And that's all we know about. The Crown Estate are suddenly doing an investigation into the finances as a result of all this, which is probably why the Royals suddenly think AMW is beyond the pale after 20 years protecting him.. How are Bea and Eugenie paying rent on prime office space in London when they are not working Royals? Just on their salary? I doubt it. It all stinks and needs a complete overhaul.

simpsonthecat · 12/03/2026 12:26

Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

I would love to know if they pay market rates. I really bet not. Other Royals who have had apartments have paid a tiny amount. The Kents were paying £67 a week for an enormous apartment overlooking Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens (7 bedrooms and 9 reception rooms) until the public got wind of it. And yes, they can advertise them, Catherine Zeta Jones has one. Or did have.

simpsonthecat · 12/03/2026 12:29

RainbowBagels · 12/03/2026 11:51

No. No others are paying ‘peppercorn rents’ (I don’t know where you hve got that from as I did not infer or say that. Who are you accusing of not paying rent?) as they pay an annual/monthly rent.
Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

Edward has been paying peppercorn rents too on his huge mansion. And that's all we know about. The Crown Estate are suddenly doing an investigation into the finances as a result of all this, which is probably why the Royals suddenly think AMW is beyond the pale after 20 years protecting him.. How are Bea and Eugenie paying rent on prime office space in London when they are not working Royals? Just on their salary? I doubt it. It all stinks and needs a complete overhaul.

Indeed. Bagshot Park 120 rooms, 51 acres. You couldn't make it up

Trezo · 12/03/2026 13:25

TightlyLacedCorset · 11/03/2026 12:35

Yes. I am asking this question.

Do they have enough? Is a lack of money leaving our Royal family vulnerable to exploitation?

I'm interested in this quote from Royal Biographer Andrew Lownie in The Guardian

"That’s what the Chinese and Russian secret services realised – that the easiest vulnerability of the British establishment is the royal family,” says Lownie. “There’s no scrutiny. They’re greedy. They’re short of money.

Are our Royal Family short of cash? I mean short of cash in relation to their current position, not the average Joe.

Consider that our Royal Family tend to have to borrow things from other people richer than themselves. Super Yachts from the Saudi Royal family as one example. Why do they not have their own, if that is seen as social currency in the circles they're required to mingle in? I remember Meghan receiving earrings or something from a Saudi family. I also remember them having to borrow Tyler Perry the film producer's Mansion. Tyler Perry is now being accused of serious sexual harassment. Yet Meghan and Harry felt compelled to stay in his mansion (albeit before the charges) and likely remained friends out of a sense of compulsion afterwards. They needed to stay in a place befitting their station.

Why are our Royal family being tempted with lavish gifts and having to borrow from other Royals when they are Royals themselves, or borrow cash as Fergie, from other murky super millionaires? Surely as representatives of Britain, the former Empire, they should be the ones giving the gifts? Do they feel like poor cousins or poor relations when schmoozing with people of similar pedigree?

They do seem poor in relation to the Saudis and many multi-millionaires and people of influence today. When we send them abroad to hobnob with influential powerful people as our 'soft power' brokers, do they appear underwhelming in terms of wealth among those people? So that these people quickly realise that offering gifts or the use of lavish conveniences will be a permanent way into the Royal graces and possibly a way to exploit and compromise?

Aside from state functions, can Charles and Camilla or William and Kate really put on an imposing display of power abroad?

I've read that a lot of the Royal dwellings are in need of repairs. Andrew's was. How embarrassing to be a Prince and invite people of influence to a home in need of doing up!

It's a new world. There are more billionaires than ever and we will soon enter the era of the Trillionaire. Royals are surrounded by people much wealthier than them. Decades ago it would have been more equal or unequal in their favour.

I remember when Harry and Meghan were offered Frogmore. Many people, particularly Americans, could not get their heads around the concept of a Duke and Duchess being expected to live in a cottage. No amount of explaining that a cottage can still be an extremely large home within the UK and their relatively minor place in the line of succession made sense to many. There is a disconnect between these high faluting titles Prince, Duke, Princess, Duchess and their actual accompanying material wealth/assets in the eyes of other people. It surely puts pressure on the individual to live as though they're wealthier than they are.

Meghan is making Jam for money!

As well as the sovereign grant, security is separate from that about £150 million and the foreign office pays for their overseas trips even though it’s supposed to be paid by the SG. Local councils fork out for their visits. So they never put their hand in their pocket to pay for anything. Charles and William pocket over £50 million between them from the duchies, which should go to the state. Ditch the Duchies. None of them work.

Ihateboris · 12/03/2026 13:43

They are already rich. The King is a billionaire. They should just get paid for each official engagement they carry out..not be fully tax payer funded. They should also all start paying the correct amount of tax (not just what they fancy paying)

wordler · 12/03/2026 21:59

DaisyDooley · 12/03/2026 09:59

No. No others are paying ‘peppercorn rents’ (I don’t know where you hve got that from as I did not infer or say that. Who are you accusing of not paying rent?) as they pay an annual/monthly rent.
Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

What the King and The Prince of Wales care about doesn’t matter when it comes to paying their taxes.
If you think the King and the Prince of Wales should have to show their private tax affairs then you should lobby your MP for EVERYONES tax affairs to be open to scruitiny. I’m sure you wouldn’t want your family/friends/work colleagues/neighbours etc to miss out on seeing how much you pay in tax?
Being able to ‘write off so much in tax’ is also something you should lobby your MP about if you feel so strongly.
Why should they not have the same rights as the rest of us to use the tax laws set in place by successive governments to ensure their tax is paid at the correct t rate with the correct deductibles applied?
‘Less scrutiny’ applies to everyone in the uk. All tax affairs are between the individual and HMRC. As I said - when every single part of your life is scrutinised and discussed, when you are constantly lied about I suspect that anything you can choose to keep private you will.

Actually, they do advertise apartments within St James Palace on the open market. Catherine Zeta Jones rents one. They don't come up very often and I assume there's some vetting involved as part of the process.

There are many properties which are leased out to non royals in the same way as Edward and Sophie have a lease on Bagshot. It's just a different way of paying the 'rent' than the usual monthly version of rent.

It can be seen as an investment because you can sell on the lease to someone else and potentially make money if the market has increased the value of the property. Of course the closer the lease gets to its end the less your lease is worth.

One of the most famous properties like this is Fort Belvedere in Windsor which was where Edward VIII abdicated and lived there as his 'grace and favour' property until the Crown said he could no longer have it when he moved abroad with Wallis.

In 1953, it was offered as a 99-year lease and bought by Gerald Lacelles who had to sell it when he got divorced and he put the remaining 78 year lease up for sale. It was bought by a son of the Emir of Dubai and then sold again to a Canadian billionaire and that family still owns it. I guess the original 99 year lease will be up in 2052 so it might get sold again before then, and who knows if they will be able to renew it.

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 09:30

simpsonthecat · 12/03/2026 12:26

Personally I don’t think Beatrice & Eugenie should have apartments inside St James Palace/Kensington Palace but it’s not my decision. However, they pay rent on them which is income for the Royal Palaces - they can hardly advertise them on the open market can they?

I would love to know if they pay market rates. I really bet not. Other Royals who have had apartments have paid a tiny amount. The Kents were paying £67 a week for an enormous apartment overlooking Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens (7 bedrooms and 9 reception rooms) until the public got wind of it. And yes, they can advertise them, Catherine Zeta Jones has one. Or did have.

Just quoting my own post to link this.

As I guessed, they do not pay market rates on the two properties the daughters have.

Beatrice has an apartment in St. James Palace and Eugenie a 3 bedroomed cottage at Kensington Palace. Why? They are not working members of the royal family and NO they do not pay market rates.

Andrew negotiated it. At one point he was paying £1,600 a month for a 4 bed apartment in St. James Palace for them. We have a house in our road being rented for more than that!

They now have these two properties mentioned above. Beatrice's apartment is worth £19,000 a month! They won't be paying anywhere near that.

Later this year, the Public Accounts Committee will start to examine rental agreements between the Royals and the Crown Estate, whose profits are returned to the Exchequer.
It can't come soon enough.

It is a Times article but is behind a paywall so I have archived it.

archive.ph/dayWJ

JacknDiane · 13/03/2026 11:57

Those girls are knee deep in it.

HolidayHideaway · 13/03/2026 13:18

JacknDiane · 13/03/2026 11:57

Those girls are knee deep in it.

They were smart enough to marry stable, rich men. Especially B. They’re so protected & unlikely to end up in SF’s mess.

BillericayDickie · 13/03/2026 17:08

JacknDiane · 13/03/2026 11:57

Those girls are knee deep in it.

They are in their late 30’s so not girls

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/03/2026 17:44

HolidayHideaway · 13/03/2026 13:18

They were smart enough to marry stable, rich men. Especially B. They’re so protected & unlikely to end up in SF’s mess.

Did you mean Beatrice or should that have read Eugenie, HolidayHideaway?

Because granted Eduardo's rich, but personally I wouldn't fancy my chances of a stable relationship with someone who'd left his fiance and mother of his child for me ... and TBH I wouldn't have got into such a relationship anyway

HolidayHideaway · 13/03/2026 17:46

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/03/2026 17:44

Did you mean Beatrice or should that have read Eugenie, HolidayHideaway?

Because granted Eduardo's rich, but personally I wouldn't fancy my chances of a stable relationship with someone who'd left his fiance and mother of his child for me ... and TBH I wouldn't have got into such a relationship anyway

I can’t disagree at all. Is that really what he did? I thought the relationship with his partner had already broken down?

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/03/2026 17:56

"It had already broken down" is what they always say, @HolidayHideaway, but the nearest we can get is comments that they split in 2018, shortly before he and Beatrice met

Or in other words, "Oh god this is going to look bad - better think up a sanitised version pronto"

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 17:56

Excluding Spain, other European monarchies manage with c.£30m a year public funding. Ours gets £160m. We need to be aiming for c.£30m and stop being mugs. As for their vulnerability, wealth breeds the desire for yet more wealth. No family of four (the Edinburghs) needs 51 rooms.

MyTrivia · 13/03/2026 17:57

No. They need to go.

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:03

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 17:56

Excluding Spain, other European monarchies manage with c.£30m a year public funding. Ours gets £160m. We need to be aiming for c.£30m and stop being mugs. As for their vulnerability, wealth breeds the desire for yet more wealth. No family of four (the Edinburghs) needs 51 rooms.

120 rooms!

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 18:11

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:03

120 rooms!

Even worse! Sophie must spend a lot of her time dusting and vacking. I hope the Crown Estate audits how many of the 120 are used (except for dusting and vacking).

Typo

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:23

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 18:11

Even worse! Sophie must spend a lot of her time dusting and vacking. I hope the Crown Estate audits how many of the 120 are used (except for dusting and vacking).

Typo

Edited

Not being funny who would want to live as a couple (daughter at Uni, son boarding school) with 120 rooms. It sounds horrendous. And spooky 😂
I would've thought they would fancy something like Kate and William have got. Something manageable and more family oriented.

tartyflette · 13/03/2026 18:26

To answer one of the OP’s points, the RF did have a yacht, the Royal Yacht Britannia. It was sold off/mothballed/whatever quite a few years ago now. They didn’t use it that much, apart from Prince Philip in his younger days — and there were a few problems about his usage…. But Charles and Diana honeymooned on it too.
And it occurs to me that a salient point in any discussions on Royal finances is that their wills are sealed so that we may never know exact details of their true wealth.
It is said that the late Queen Mother left quite a lot more in her will to Harry precisely because William, as heir to the throne, was always going to be ok for dosh. But who really knows? Not us.

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 18:28

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:23

Not being funny who would want to live as a couple (daughter at Uni, son boarding school) with 120 rooms. It sounds horrendous. And spooky 😂
I would've thought they would fancy something like Kate and William have got. Something manageable and more family oriented.

How would you remember so many rooms?

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:30

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 18:28

How would you remember so many rooms?

You wouldn't!

Good for hide and seek when the DCs were younger! you would probably never find them again lol

wordler · 13/03/2026 18:35

tartyflette · 13/03/2026 18:26

To answer one of the OP’s points, the RF did have a yacht, the Royal Yacht Britannia. It was sold off/mothballed/whatever quite a few years ago now. They didn’t use it that much, apart from Prince Philip in his younger days — and there were a few problems about his usage…. But Charles and Diana honeymooned on it too.
And it occurs to me that a salient point in any discussions on Royal finances is that their wills are sealed so that we may never know exact details of their true wealth.
It is said that the late Queen Mother left quite a lot more in her will to Harry precisely because William, as heir to the throne, was always going to be ok for dosh. But who really knows? Not us.

I’ve never understood that story about the Queen Mother leaving more money to Harry because William was going to be richer as heir - what about all her other great grandchildren? Arguably Harry as son of the future King was going to have more access to money via his father than the other six great grandchildren.

IdaGlossop · 13/03/2026 18:36

simpsonthecat · 13/03/2026 18:30

You wouldn't!

Good for hide and seek when the DCs were younger! you would probably never find them again lol

Our losing them all together.

Swipe left for the next trending thread