Recent Posts

...

Now the Royals receive £100 million a year of taxpayers money. As a mixture of expenses and a percentage of profits from Crown Estates-although no-one knows exactly how much that bit is. It's a secret. We're not told how much of that £100 mill is expenses, and how much is profit. Because it is accepted they get a percentage of profit.
...

I have a feeling your opinions on this might be a little emotion based because some of this information (like how the monarch has no control over what property is in the Crown Estate and how the Sovereign Grant is calculated) - is not difficult to find.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/monarchy-funding-sovereign-grant-royal-family-b3003165.html

"The Royal Trustees’ review determined that the Sovereign Grant will now be calculated as 20.5 per cent of Crown Estate net profits from 2027-28, an increase from the current rate of 12 per cent, for the next five years."

That would be more than a £100 million in the past - last year the Crown Estate made a £1.1bn profit for example; but that profit is expected to fall quite a lot in the next few years because of regulatory changes.


I'm not sure where you're getting that any of the Sovereign Grant comes from general taxation - have you got a source for the expenses part?

[every]

Interesting take on things.

Because what you say is not untrue. It just isn't the whole story.

The deal that was struck during George 3rd's reign did indeed create Crown Estates. But in a totally different way to that of today. That deal was for the King to hand over various assets in return for an annual payment-what became the Civil List. Where the Monarch and certain other Royals received a payment that everyone could see what it was. But that system all went in 2014.

Now the Royals receive £100 million a year of taxpayers money. As a mixture of expenses and a percentage of profits from Crown Estates-although no-one knows exactly how much that bit is. It's a secret. We're not told how much of that £100 mill is expenses, and how much is profit. Because it is accepted they get a percentage of profit.

It was our last Queen who negotiated the current tax arrangements, both in relation to the new Sovereign Grant, and in relation to the UK Tax treatment of Private Property. Private property which, between the King and Prince of Wales is in excess of £1 Billion. Passed on in a way denied to absolutely everyone else.

Princess Margaret did not get on with her Sister. Andrew does not get on with his Brother. Harry does not get on with his Brother. How long before George's siblings realise that it is not only the Top Job that will be denied them.

Let's give 1 example how the Royal Family are treated differently. Prince William owns Dartmoor Prison. It has been unfit for human habitation for some years due to Uranium/Radon leakage. It was only finally cleared of Inmates in 2024. Which other Landlord would still be receiving Rent and not told to take urgent corrective action? Heard anything from our future King about the vast sums that will need to be spent in upgrades and likely compensation? Thought not.

I'm not averse to giving our Monarch and Future Monarch £hundreds of millions. I'm not averse to them having assets worth £hundreds of millions. I'm not averse to them having IHT and Income Tax perks worth £hundreds of millions.

All 3? Our Royal Family costs more than every other Royal Family in the whole World. Probably more than the combined cost of every other Royal Family in the World.i

... The Monarch also gets to choose which are "private" properties, and not part of the Crown Estate. ..

That isn't true

William the Conquerer introduced feudalism - which meant the monarch nominally owned all the land

The Civil War established that "the people", in the form of Parliament, were Sovereign over the Crown - which meant the end of feudalism

But the Monarch still owned a vast property estate - the balance that was struck was that the Monarch kept ownership but out of the revenue they had to pay for most government things (like the Civil Service and the countries defence for example)

George III changed that - rather than the Monarch having to fund government things he gave the revenue to the government, and they in turn gave the Monarch money to live on

The Crown Estate is neither the property of the government, or the property of the reigning Monarch - it is basically its own entity

The government gets all the revenue - but with an agreement to pay some of it to the Monarch

-- Completely separately to this, sometimes the King or Queen buys their own property

Sandringham was bought in 1862, Balmoral was bought in 1852 - they were just bought like anyone else would buy private property - nothing to do with the Crown Estate

The Monarch has zero control over the Crown Estate, they do not manage the Crown Estates and can't take things out or add to them.

Whether they should have tax concessions is another thing - that's very complex. Basically all very wealthy people should have tax concessions because it's very easy for them to avoid paying any tax's - giving them concessions is basically a way of tricking them into paying more tax than if you gave them nothing. No concesssions - they'll try and avoid it all; with concessions they'll pay less - but more than they would otherwise. And the actuall amount they pay is vastly more than everyone else so it's a pretty vital source of revenue.

The PR exercise that is Hing Charles/Prince William's voluntary tax payments amuses me.

I'm not particularly pro- or anti-Monarchy. If truth be told, I'm not particularly keen on the concept, but the ones we have by and large do a good job, and may well be better than alternatives to Monarchy.

But the Royal Family's Tax arrangements are faintly ridiculous.

Let's start with Property. A deal was struck whereby a lot of the Properties are deemed to be "Crown Estate". The deal is the Monarch manages these on behalf of the nation, in return for various tax advantages. In return, we pay for the upkeep of various of these Properties, as well as funding the expenses of working Royals. Not cheap-so we pay roughly £100million a year for Royal's expenses/Property upkeep, as well as a £250 million renovation to Buck House-where no-one lives.

But it is not that simple. The Monarch also gets to choose which are "private" properties, and not part of the Crown Estate. So-for example-the Sandringham and Balmoral estates are privately owned. And, provided a Monarch wills them to the next Monarch. no IHT is paid. Suddenly, you can see why William and Harry don't get on-knowing your Dad is going to leave £hundreds of millions to just 1 of you isn't going to help. Same for Highgrove, and a host of "private" properties.

And saying what income tax you "choose" to pay without also giving details of income, expenses and relevant deductions is not "transparent" in my World.

Do I agree that Senior Royals should have tax concessions? Yes. Just not the amount they currently receive.

Benny Glaser won the PPC overnight, well of course he did.  Mad how successful he has become.

8 bracelets now, gets the UK higher up in the bracelet count every year.

Shocking.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/a7lqanzCkZ8

BITB involved in a terrible ruling on the bubble not sure which event.

BITB moved all in  the villian tanked for 6 minuted before the floor was called
the floor counted down from 5 and declared the hand dead BITB was mucking his hand
and the villian said call the floor said the call stands, the dealer and all the players all said the hand was dea
their is video showing the hand was dead before the call came
2nd floor was called and within 10 seconds a 2nd floor agreed with the 1st floorman.

RIP Andrea's always seemed a nice guy. Far too young to be taken. 😪

As Starmer is in the process of being replaced, Politicians of all Parties seem to refer to the "good old days" when people voted in, and removed, Prime Ministers. However, the reality is very, very different.

Since 1940, there have been 18 (soon to be 19) Prime Ministers. How many were initially elected into that position? 7. Just 3 since Thatcher in 1979.

How many were both voted in, and voted out, by the electorate? 2. The last being Edward Heath (1970-74). The last Prime Minister to actually last for an entire term was Cameron (2010-14)-shortly before being forced to keep quiet about his Opposition to Brexit.

This constant need for change is not primarily due to Politicians. It is the electorate being unwilling to give anyone time to deliver the actual manifesto that people voted for. Conservative and Labour alike.

We get the Politicians we deserve.

His opposition to Brexit and discomfort it caused was brought about by him using the promise of a Brexit vote to get him elected and when said vote went against him, he jumped ship. Absolute spineless turd of a man.
p.s. I have equal contempt and disdain for most politicians. All conniving, self interested shitc**ts who disgrace the office they hold.

He always seemed to be having fun at the table.
R.I.P Andreas