Thoughts on the King and Prince of Wales tax disclosures

[Kirschcherries]

According to the BBC KC and PW have released details of the tax they paid in the 2024-2025 Tax Year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8x2151y8q4o

Apparently KC is in the Top 100 tax payers - The Sunday Times Rich List for 2025 placed him at 238.

I think it’s good they have done this and believe they are entitled to use the same legal tax avoidance measures everyone else can use. I don’t think we have a right to know every detail of their personal wealth but this is balanced against transparency regarding the Sovereign Grant and Duchies.

@Mulledjuice "It's an illusion of transparency."

Yep this.

You said you hope William is transparent too. If you did read the article you’d see that he also published how much tax he paid.

I know about his £7.7m, I have said when he becomes monarch will he continue with the transparency

Well we do have some information just not enough whch is why its still not transpare to enough. But with what we have its fair to make some after all you do plenty of that with other royal members yourself. You dont have all the facts but make comments based on assumptions. Pot kettle black. Don't call other people out when you do the same thing.

This apparently doesn’t include their security. So is it really transparent?

That’s not the way a lease works though. A landlord doesn’t have to go through some kind of “merit” or popularity test to enter into a lease agreement. We enacted protective legislation to stop them discriminating against prospective tenants, in fact.

Security for Royals is provided by the Home Office, as it is to all people in the UK protected by the specialist Metropolitan Police divisions. The cost of that is never disclosed (for anyone protected) on the grounds of national security.

I think it would be better if they were transparent about what tax they paid on what.

So £x on Dutchy income and £y on private income.

I can see though that they’d be then worried about more questions about where the private income comes from.

IMO it would better if they even said £x on dutchy income and then normal tax rates on private income.

My autocorrect hates Dutchy without the t 🤦🏻‍♀️

I know, Serenster, and totally get the very obvious reasons why the details of what's provided have to remain confidential

But I've never yet seen a good reason why the actual cost couldn't be disclosed, since even if some priced it up - "such and such costs xyz", etc - we'd still never know what was actually brought in, when and where and for who

But I've never yet seen a good reason why the actual cost couldn't be disclosed, since even if some costed it out - "such and such costs xyz", etc - we'd still never know what was actually brought in, when and where and for who

Which is a fine question to ask, but it’s for the Home Office, not the King, as the provision of security is (as we now know thanks to Harry’s court cases) is not something he has any involvment in.

One question I have wanted to ask but can’t find quite the right words to start a thread is - If there was a referendum to abolish the monarchy:

• how would you define/divide up what the RF walk away with in terms of property, wealth etc. I.e. what happens to the Duchy’s, CE etc. as well as personal wealth.
• What or how would you fund, staff, remunerate etc. a President
• would you remove all hereditary titles e.g Duke of Kent’s son becomes Mr Kent or just the HRH?
• Privacy - if KC became Mr Windsor and PW Mr Wales i.e. ordinary citizens how would you give them, particularly G, C and L, the level of anonymity ordinary citizens enjoy I.e. the right to be forgotten on the Internet, media, social media etc?

I realise this too, Serenster, and just as I understand that the Sovereign Grant is a matter for parliament I haven't suggested it's Charles who should be disclosing such figures

Admittedly I'm not as confident as some that Charles wouldn't attempt to meddle in this area, but once again we're seeing the utterrly supine attitude of parliament to anything concerning the RF, which feeds in to the discontent

This is only one part of why it's really really complicated. The monarchy is entrenched in every part of our public life and financial arrangements have been made and remade over the centuries.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but anytime who has a one paragraph solution simply doesn't know enough to even propose one.

I think it would take a multi year commission to unravel it all and suggest a way forward. I think a good place you start would be unravelling royal finances, crown estate, royal collection, royal duchys, sovereign grant, and work out who owns what, who influences what, who makes the actual decisions, what is private wealth, what is public, again I suspect a multi year project. But if we want reform, and I think most agree it's needed whether you are a republican or a constitutional monarchist, then you start with financial clarity and transparency. For that to happen all parts of the establishment need to be onboard and I don't see evidence they are.

And then what?
This is the problem when people say just get rid of them without thinking ahead. It’s just like Brexit all over again. The leave campaign didn’t have a plan because they never thought they’d win.

That’s why people can say the RF costs us pennies a week each. Because that cost doesn’t cover security.

@MrsLeonFarrell It is complicated and that is why I struggled to articulate a question.

I agree the starting point is a full audit of everything (I love a spreadsheet😂 ) which would be the baseline. This would give transparency - the issue I have is where does privacy kick in for existing personal wealth.

A good example is the Greville Bequest - this was left to the Queen Mother as personal property.

I have one example of this , which is very old. . A chap I used to work with , many decades ago , brother in law was a minister for NI, and I don't think even The minister for NI. He still had security after he left the job. Those were different times though. I shouldn't think anyone even knew he still had security, let alone the cost.

1 think we should house migrants there,

That's fair. I suspect it would be a few more pennies though , given who gets it and when , rather than ££££s. But I don't know. You may.

Yes its obscene that public service wages have effectively no progressed Since 2008 and the people happy to support that throw money at an obscenely wealthy family.

Im wondering why we are paying £369 million pounds or similar to upgrade his house, although he won’t live in it.

You want taxpayers to fund migrants in accommodations that are far more costly and luxurious than their own dwellings?
im sure that would go down like a cold bucket of sick! 🤷‍♀️

Probably the cost of security pushes up the amount.

Possibly because it’s going to be open to the public and the safety compliance for public buildings is much higher and rigorous than that of the royal family?