Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
  
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
  
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
  
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

 

[peterb6a]

I truly hope this call for transparency comes public very soon.

 

[Leenie]

Time for the royals to start paying their way they are no different to anyone else. They are a drain on the public purse.

 

[Keswickian]

This article is very confusing and doesn't explain the situation very clearly.
Whatever the financial situation, the value of the Monarchy to the Country is enormous. The revenue from tourism, visits to Royal properties, souvenirs, media earnings, business credibility etc etc. far outweighs the cost of the Sovereign Grant. I believe the Tower of London and the Jewel House alone earns in the order of £90m per year from entry fees.
It is important to manage the establishment economically and I for one have confidence that King Charles and the responsible entities will do that but let's not condemn a very valuable asset to the country.

 

[IAN3005]

Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

View attachment 25798

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

View attachment 25799

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

get rid of the Royal family... it had it's day. To hell with the tourist attraction

 

[DaddyRon]

Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

View attachment 25798

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

View attachment 25799

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

The "royals" are nothing but corrupt,entitled parasites.
More evil elites !!

 

[Jest]

Time for the royals to start paying their way they are no different to anyone else. They are a drain on the public purse.

well, i will not certainly say i am the same as the royals. They are different and have been for hundreds of years.

 

[Jest]

The "royals" are nothing but corrupt,entitled parasites.
More evil elites !!

sorry, but your comment sounds evil.

 

[Jest]

Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

View attachment 25798

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

View attachment 25799

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

what has this to do with us here in Australia? NOTHING.

 

[Shane/#]

Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

View attachment 25798

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

View attachment 25799

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

Australia needs to become a REPUBLIC and leave the money hungry parasites in our wake time to piss them off remember Australia was the dumping ground for the worst of the worst time to cut the apron strings for good

 

[JKM_Storyteller]

Wow. So much vitriol. No wonder I am opposed to the idea of a Republic. As demonstrated by so many of our citizens in this group, we are nowhere near mature enough to go it alone. Whoever would become our head of state would be chosen by a policial party. Agendas and egos would control this 'figurehead'. Well, I for one, feel far safer in the hands of a monarch who is a-political, and not answerable to any of our miserable little walking egos who call themselves our elected representatives. Hell. We whinge and bleat about them - what makes people think we would be better off with a head of state that those same pollies choose?
As for the royals - the members of the slimmed down monarchy work their tails off; are subject to unending media scrutiny; and considered by the common multitudes as fair game for every insult and criticism they can come up with. Our king - and he is still our king - is 74 years old and still working. His wife is older, and still working. His oldest son and heir, and his wife, are constantly working. I guess wherever there is wealth, there is always the corrosive acid of bitterness and jealousy that screams more about the critics, than it will ever do about those they resent so much.

 

[Leenie]

U can’t be serious , working means a lot of things walking around shaking a few hands here and there is hardly hard work ,as political Charlie and his mob quite g often have their say .stop making excuses for them

 

[JKM_Storyteller]

U can’t be serious , working means a lot of things walking around shaking a few hands here and there is hardly hard work ,as political Charlie and his mob quite g often have their say .stop making excuses for them

I am serious. And I make excuses for no one - not even the mean-minded folk who make me ashamed to be an Australian (or even a human being, for that matter).

 

[Gsr]

While I like the royal family and have no wish for Australia to become a republic, I do feel with the immense personal wealth they have they should be able to fund themselves more instead of costing the public so much.

 

[Leenie]

For your info I am not a mean spirited person I go out of my way to help people like my dear old mum did but draw the line when it comes to people like the royals they can afford to pay their own way enough said .

 

[JKM_Storyteller]

While I like the royal family and have no wish for Australia to become a republic, I do feel with the immense personal wealth they have they should be able to fund themselves more instead of costing the public so much.

Something needs to be cleared up.

The Crown Estate is the name given to lands owned by the Crown from the time of the Norman Conquest.

The Crown Estate is a diverse, independently-run, commercial business, whose profits go to the Treasury (the public purse) - and those profits are used as the benchmark for the level of funding provided to the Royal Family (known as the Sovereign Grant), which last year was worth £86.3m.

The significant increase in profits from six new offshore wind farms (collectively worth £1bn per year) in the Crown Estate. This would have produced a very significant increase in the amount going into the Sovereign Grant.

Cutting the percentage will mean the total Sovereign Grant for 2024-25 will remain at £86.3m.
Without the reduction, it would have been worth £24m more that year, and £130m more in both 2025-26 and 2026-27.

The 12% figure will remain in place until 2027, at which point it will be recalculated.

Furthermore, in 1992, The Queen volunteered to pay income tax and capital gains tax on her personal income, and King Charles does the same.

The monarch (currently King Charles) receives income from the Duchy of Lancaster; and the Prince of Wales (currently Prince William, who is also Duke of Cornwall) receives income from the Duchy of Cornwall. By law, these two duchies are exempt from corporation tax, but both the King and the Prince of Wales voluntarily pay income tax on the revenue they generate.

Also, all members of the Royal Family pay tax on any income generated from privately-owned assets.

So contrary to everyone's opinion, the Royal Family DOES indeed contribute - significantly - to the public purse, and pay their own way, given that their Sovereign Grant is a small percentage of the profits from their Crown Estate. The public purse - not the Royal Family - enjoys by far the biggest portion of the profits!

For those of you who like visuals, I am attaching a graphic to show you how the Crown Estate works --- and has worked since 1760 when George III surrendered the Crown Estate's profits to the government.

In return, it was agreed that the King (and his successors) would receive a fixed annual payment - known as the Civil List. It was renamed The Sovereign Grant in 2012.

 

[JKM_Storyteller]

For your info I am not a mean spirited person I go out of my way to help people like my dear old mum did but draw the line when it comes to people like the royals they can afford to pay their own way enough said .

I am serious. And I make excuses for no one - not even the mean-minded folk who make me ashamed to be an Australian (or even a human being, for that matter).

I have to disagree. When someone who is clearly a stranger to the facts, starts ranting at me and telling me what I can and can't do, then I consider them - if not mean-minded, then certainly small-minded and close-minded. Your comments have shown quite clearly that you really are ignorant of the facts of the Sovereign Grant and how it works, but you also clearly gobble up every salacious bit of criticism of the Royals that you come across. Rather than seek out new and - of, golly gosh! - could it be, REAL FACTS? - you accuse me of 'making excuses' for the people you publicly denigrate.

I know whose opinions I value, and yours are not among them now.

 

[KSS]

There is a great deal of nastiness in many of these contributions and clearly made from a position of genuine ignorance supported by anti-monarchist vitriol.

Not one person here has pointed out that the worth of the working members of the Royal Family is almost incalculable. Every time Kate walks out in a new frock (and many of then come from high street shops), sales go through the roof; every charity and cause they spearhead attracts multi-millions of pounds in financial support/donations, their worth to the UK economy is many times what they receive.

And don't think Australia is immune to their economic support either; The Australian tax-payer does not contribute to their annual upkeep so why are people even commenting on that? When the Royals visit Australia, yes we pick up the tab for security. But we gain far more in tourism exposure, charities get a much-needed boost in their coffers, issues are highlighted in ways that would never have happened, not to mention Australian trade gets a boost via more sales of exports such as wine, foodstuffs etc. Mr Albanese does not achieve anything like the same returns from his weekly globetrotting yet costs us all a great deal more.

All this vitriol on display in this forum shows exactly why Australia is still not mature enough to become a republic. And becoming a republic is something the Royals have not and will not object to and will actively support should the vote eventually go that way. They have a great deal more manners, inclusivity and support for democracy than that on display here.

 

[Tygie]

Critics are calling for greater transparency from the UK's royal family, prompting questions about the secrecy surrounding Buckingham Palace's financial matters.

Many are raising their eyebrows at the fact that Buckingham Palace's veil of secrecy is perhaps sturdier than MI5's (the UK’s Security Service).

The question arises: why all the secrecy? In matters of the monarchy, the saying 'What you don't see won't hurt you' comes to mind.

However, the Royals' spending a lot of money on luxurious things and seeming to care more about living extravagantly could make people wonder if they are using public funds wisely and if their actions benefit the public they are supposed to serve.

View attachment 25798

The royal family's salary is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is a portion of the profits generated by the Crown Estate. Image by 12019 from pixabay

The high costs of travel and maintaining grand homes have caught the attention of critics.

This led to concerns about whether personal interests and political agendas might overshadow their public duties.

As a result, the demand for transparency persists, and many are increasingly questioning the royal family's actions.

Enter the latest saga of the Royal soap opera: the tale of King Charles's pay hike.

In a collaboration between the Palace and the UK Government, a recent announcement tweaked the calculation for determining the size of the Sovereign Grant, the official fund for the Royal household.

To the untrained eye, it may seem like a cut in the grant is on the horizon. However, it was revealed that a significant increase, around 45 per cent (£40 million), is expected by 2025.

According to the official statement, the Sovereign Grant will be 12 per cent of the crown estate's net profits next year, down from 25 per cent.

At first glance, it suggests a decrease. However, the plot thickens as the statement later reveals that the total grant for 2024/25 will remain steady at £86.3 million.

This suggests that rather than experiencing any reduction, there is a remarkable jump anticipated in funding, from £86 million in the upcoming year to a staggering £126 million by 2026.

View attachment 25799

The income from the Sovereign Grant is used to cover the official expenses and duties of the royal family members, such as their public engagements, official travel, and maintenance of royal residences. Image by Josh Withers from pexels

In addition to the funding increase, there is more to the story.

The Palace attempted to present a picture of royal generosity by issuing a statement suggesting that King Charles intended for the Crown Estate profits to benefit the public.

Surging offshore wind farm profits are expected to grant King Charles a substantial boost of $152 million from the taxpayer.

Back in January, Charles expressed his desire for the wind farm profits to be utilised for the 'public good'.

Considering British taxpayers contribute significantly towards funding the monarchy, it’s only natural to hope that the ‘public good’ extends beyond other ‘royal’ expenses.

Understandably, this muddies the waters for any discussion about royal finances.

King Charles does not own the Crown Estate. It is considered a national resource, not a personal bank account for the Royals, as signified by its description of belonging to the monarchy 'by way of the Crown'.

Similarly, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, often considered 'private estates', fall into the same category as the Crown Estate, being national resources.

Despite this, the monarchy convinces us that these revenues support their operations.

However, the reality is far more complex and obscured by misconceptions.

The truth may come as a surprise: the Crown Estate does not actually fund the monarchy.

This misunderstanding only emerged in 2011 when the grant size was linked to estate profits.

In this intriguing tale of royal income, funding, and wealth, things are not what they seem.

As we pull back the curtain, the UK Government, on the other hand, insists it can't afford crucial services.

The Sovereign Grant doesn’t foot the complete bill of the monarchy, which, according to Republic, costs us in excess of £345m.

Without the exposure of this secrecy and misleading information, that figure could continue to rise.

Key Takeaways

• Growing calls for an end to royal secrecy are increasing, with the monarchy being more secretive than UK security services.
• The UK Government recently announced a change in the calculation for determining the size of the sovereign grant, which gives the impression of a decrease, but in reality, it will probably increase by 45 per cent in 2025.
• The crown estate is not the personal property of Charles Mountbatten-Windsor but belongs to the crown, a state institution.
• The monarchy is accused of deceiving the public about its income, funding, and wealth, with the sovereign grant not covering the full cost of the monarchy.

Members, what are your thoughts on the demand for transparency regarding the UK's royal family finances? Do you believe that there should be more openness and clarity about how the Sovereign Grant is used and allocated?

Make him pay it back. What a ripoff. He's embezzling and rorting. Kick him out of being the King and put William in.

 

[KSS]

Make him pay it back. What a ripoff. He's embezzling and rorting. Kick him out of being the King and put William in.

You must have proof of your allegations so please post them so we can see for ourselves.