The British royal family, including King Charles III and Queen Camilla, has a vast collection of wealth, including real estate and private assets. A large portion of King Charles’ wealth comes from the Sovereign Grant, which was set at £86. 3 million in 2021-2022. The royal built significant wealth through investments, estimated to be worth $172 million. The monarch is currently worth roughly $2. 2 million (or £1. 82 billion). The finances of the royal family come from various sources, including the British government supporting the monarch and some of his family financially.
The Sovereign Grant, which replaced the Civil List in 2012, covers much of the royal family’s expenses. In the 2021-2022 financial year, the property is valued at $140 million. The royal family has three main sources of income – the crown estate, the Duchy of Lancaster, and the Duchy of Cornwall – amounting to assets with a combined value of $28 billion. Most of the money used to fund the British monarchy comes from the Duchy of Cornwall, a private estate that funds the life and death of the monarch.
The net worth of the British royal family can be approximately summed up at around $28 billion. The royal family contributes £2. 5 billion to the British economy annually, with the Crown being probably worth around $88 billion. The Windsors can’t spend that much, as they own castles, priceless art, and the Crown Jewels. The Sovereign Grant, which replaced the Civil List in 2012, currently stands at £86. 3 million a year.
| Article | Description | Site |
|---|---|---|
| How rich is the British royal family? | Charles III made the Duchy of Cornwall particularly profitable, and it generated $26 million in 2021. The entire property is valued at $1.3 billion. | cbsnews.com |
| As Charles Became King, Here’s the British Royal Family’s … | The net worth of the British royal family is estimated at $28 billion (£21.3 billion), according to Forbes. Queen Elizabeth II had a separate … | investopedia.com |
| Finances of the British royal family | In 2002, she inherited her mother’s estate, thought to have been worth £70 million (the equivalent of about £144 million today). Sandringham House … | en.wikipedia.org |
📹 The Royal Family Gets £86M A Year From The British People. Are They Worth It? True Cost
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have quit, and Prince Andrew has courted controversy – but the British royals remain one of the …
Does The British Royal Family Have Any Power?
The British monarchy today operates as a constitutional monarchy, where the Sovereign serves as Head of State but wields no actual political power. King Charles III, like his mother before him, reigns without ruling, acting primarily as a ceremonial figurehead. While the Royal Family possesses significant wealth and privilege, their influence is largely symbolic. The monarchy has developed over a millennium, evolving from absolute power to a position restrained by law and convention, with parliament holding actual authority.
Although the King has ceremonial responsibilities, including appointing the Prime Minister, his role is fundamentally non-political, and he remains politically neutral. Public sentiment generally supports the monarchy for its historical and cultural significance, yet concerns about taxpayer costs and its relevance in a modern, equal society linger. The King receives daily dispatches from the government, maintaining involvement in governance.
Ultimately, despite historical prerogative powers, the monarchy’s contemporary status is characterized by a diminished capacity for direct governance, emphasizing its function in representing national unity and charity support rather than exerting political power.
How Does The Royal Family Get Money?
The British royal family's funding comes from three primary sources: government funding through the Sovereign Grant, inherited assets, and private real estate holdings. The Sovereign Grant, funded by taxpayers, was £86. 3 million for the 2022-2023 fiscal year and serves to support official royal duties. This figure has remained consistent with the previous year. Additional income streams include the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall, valued at substantial assets.
There was also an income boost of £45 million from the Crown Estate due to profits from offshore wind farms. The royal family garnered £9. 8 million from visitor fees to royal residences, although this is less than pre-Covid figures. Previously, funding was provided through the Civil List before transitioning to the Sovereign Grant in 2012. The royal family's wealth is tied to extensive property holdings and collections of art and antiques, creating a mix of public and private revenue streams.
Where Does The Royal Family Get Their Money From?
The British Royal Family's income is derived from several sources, primarily the Sovereign Grant, which replaced the Civil List in 2012 and currently amounts to £86. 3 million annually. This grant financially supports the royal family's official duties and stems from the Crown Estate, with the family relinquishing profits in exchange. Additionally, King Charles III benefits from the Privy Purse, funded by the Duchy of Lancaster, a vast estate covering 45, 000 acres across England and Wales.
The Prince of Wales earns net profits from the Duchy of Cornwall. Both Duchies are audited independently and regulated by Acts of Parliament. Most of the royal family's income is allocated for property maintenance and staffing costs. Historically, the royal family's expenses, including Queen Elizabeth II's income, were funded publicly through these estates, inheritance, and private investments. Despite their wealth, including valuable assets like properties, artworks, and heirlooms, critics argue that much of it is tied up in public resources and not directly owned by the royal members.
Where Does The Royal Family'S Wealth Come From?
The British royal family's wealth is derived from multiple sources, including a taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant, a substantial real-estate portfolio, and inherited assets. The Sovereign Grant, amounting to £86. 3 million annually, is provided by the government to support official royal duties, replacing the Civil List in 2012. Additionally, King Charles III benefits from the Duchy of Lancaster, a private estate inherited by each monarch. The royal family's total wealth was estimated at $28 billion by Forbes in 2021, primarily based on real estate and various collections, although precise valuations are challenging.
Queen Elizabeth II, prior to her passing, had her own personal fortune, which is now part of King Charles's legacy. Members of the royal family also have incomes from the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster, and various private investments. The monarch's private income, known as the Privy Purse, mainly comes from the Duchy of Lancaster estate. The royal family's financial structure is complex, incorporating public and private funding, and includes significant collections of art, stamps, and other valuables, bolstering their overall wealth.
How Much Money Does The Royal Household Receive?
The funding for the Royal Household is directly linked to the government's revenue from the Crown Estate, with the Sovereign Grant now being the primary source of financial support since the Civil List was replaced in 2012. The Sovereign Grant for the 2022-23 financial year was £86. 3 million, with £51. 8 million allocated for core funding to cover official travel, property maintenance, and household operating costs. This amount remains unchanged from the prior year and is approximately £1.
29 per person in the UK. Total net expenditure for the Royal Household was reported at £107. 5 million, reflecting a decline of £18. 4 million from the previous year. Income for the Royal Family also comes from other sources, including visitor payments to royal residences, which was just under half of pre-COVID levels. Anticipated changes include an increase in the Sovereign Grant to £132 million by 2025/26, driven by profits from the Crown Estate’s wind farms.
Additionally, the royal family’s wealth, such as that of King Charles and Prince William, contributes to their overall financial status. Critics, such as the anti-monarchy group Republic, suggest that the royal family’s total costs amount to about £510 million annually.
Is The Royal Family Still Necessary?
Though the British monarchy has no political or executive power, it retains significant national importance as the Head of State, fulfilling constitutional and representational roles steeped in over a thousand years of tradition. Time magazine notes that while the monarchy garners broad, albeit decreasing, support among Britons, younger generations exhibit growing skepticism. A survey indicates that 40% of those aged 18-24 prefer an elected head of state, questioning the monarchy's relevance in a meritocratic society.
Despite this, more than half (55%) of UK adults under 25 do not see the royal family as a strong leadership source. Interest in the monarchy is waning, with only 32% of 18-24-year-olds supporting its continuation. Polls reveal a declining attachment to the royal family, prompting discussions about the monarchy's future in an age marked by populism and identity politics. However, many still associate the monarchy with British identity, making abolition appear unlikely.
The royal family's continuing popularity globally contrasts with the indifference shown by younger demographics. While some advocate for the monarchy's relevance, others question the justification of inherited privilege in the modern era. Ultimately, the future of the British monarchy remains uncertain amid shifting societal attitudes.
How Much Was The Royal Family Worth In 2021?
In 2021, Forbes estimated the British royal family's wealth at $28 billion, though this figure derives from rough estimates due to the complexity and secrecy surrounding their finances. Princess Beatrice is valued at $1 million, while Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson's divorce marked a financial shift. Following Queen Elizabeth II's death, King Charles inherited $500 million, which represents just a fraction of his overall wealth. Queen Elizabeth's personal assets, approximately $530 million, included significant properties like Sandringham Estate and Balmoral Castle.
The royal family's income sources are diverse, with Charles III effectively managing the profitable Duchy of Cornwall, generating $26 million in 2021. The Sovereign Grant for 2022-23 was £86. 3 million, funding various royal activities. Despite the total assets being valued around $88 billion, the royal family cannot liquidate these assets, which include historic estates and art collections. Personal net worth estimates comprise Princess of Wales valued at approximately £7. 7 million, while Meghan Markle and Prince Harry together have a net worth around $50 million. Overall, the royal family's wealth remains difficult to quantify accurately.
What Is The Salary Of King Charles?
King Charles III is projected to receive a substantial pay rise of over £45 million ($60 million), reflecting a remarkable 53% increase in the monarchy's official annual income, according to recent accounts. This follows the notable inheritance of Queen Elizabeth II's estimated $500 million fortune. Currently, King Charles, aged 75, earns a reported $25 million annually as the King of England and is worth approximately $750 million.
The increase in the sovereign grant, which supports the royal family's official duties, will see King Charles receiving about £132 million from the UK Treasury in the 2025/2026 tax year, an increase from the previous £86.
3 million. Additionally, his income from the Royal Collection Trust is expected to rise significantly. King Charles's financial standing dwarfs the average UK salary of around $46, 000, making him one of the highest-paid heads of state, earning 162% more than Belgium's King Philippe. Alongside his annual salary, King Charles enjoys tax exemptions under the "sovereign to sovereign" rules regarding his inheritance, allowing him to benefit significantly from his royal status.
Does The UK Benefit From Having A Royal Family?
Recent evaluations of the royal family's influence on UK tourism estimate the monarchy's capital value as £67. 5 billion, representing an increase from £44 billion in 2012, with an annual economic contribution of £1. 766 billion. Following Queen Elizabeth II's death, support for the monarchy rose briefly to 67%, up from 62% during her Platinum Jubilee in May 2022. Time magazine noted that while the monarchy has enjoyed broad yet declining support, individual family members have faced mixed opinions.
The royal family's lack of political power does not diminish its considerable wealth and privileges. Financial benefits from the monarchy are estimated at over £8. 50 per person annually, while recurring costs remain a concern. The coronation of King Charles III serves as a reflection point for assessing the monarchy's relevance. Public surveys indicate a significant portion of the population (68%) views the monarchy as beneficial for Britain. The royal family engages in numerous official duties, charitable activities, and diplomatic efforts.
Support for the monarchy persists, particularly among those over 65, despite rising costs and diminishing benefits. The Sovereign Grant funds much of the royal expenses, while members are taxed on private income. Overall, the monarchy's economic impact and socio-cultural legacy continue to prompt discussions on its future relevance in British society.
How Much Is The British Royal Family Worth?
The British Royal Family boasts a significant net worth estimated at $28 billion (£21. 3 billion), according to Forbes, making them the fifth richest royal family globally. Queen Elizabeth II was valued at approximately $470 million as a private citizen, while King Charles III inherited about $500 million in assets after her passing, although his wealth is now speculated to range from $750 million to over $2 billion. Princess Beatrice is worth around $1 million.
The family's wealth derives from tangible assets like properties and the Crown Estate, which held assets worth £16. 5 billion in 2022, including prime London real estate. Their net worth, while impactful, is primarily tied to assets that cannot be readily liquidated, such as castles, priceless art, and Crown Jewels. Efforts to quantify their wealth face challenges due to the complex nature of royal finances and separate personal fortunes.
Insights into their income sources reveal earnings through various endeavors, including investments and personal undertakings by family members like Prince William and Kate Middleton. The estimated wealth of the royal family offers a glimpse into their financial stature amidst the broader global context of royalty.
Why Is The British Royal Family So Difficult To Value?
The British royal family possesses a vast and intricate portfolio of properties, gems, art, and other assets, making it challenging to accurately assess their worth due to limited public information. In 2021, Forbes estimated their value at $28 billion, but this figure relies heavily on speculation. Much of their wealth stems from historical and intangible aspects, which complicate valuation. Anti-monarchy group Republic claims the royal family costs Britain around £510 million ($680 million) annually, despite their broad public support.
The monarchy significantly contributes to tourism and the economy, indirectly benefiting tax revenue. As public scrutiny of the monarchy increases, so does disdain for its relevance amidst societal changes. Despite the soft power generated through royal tours and the economic impact of royal attractions—where visitors spent $85 million on palace admissions in 2022 and an additional $24 million in royal gift shops—putting a concrete value on these contributions remains elusive.
Critics note the lack of transparency surrounding royal wealth and question the monarchy's legitimacy, especially regarding tax exemptions. While the Windsors leverage vast estates, their actual liquid wealth is relatively modest, estimated in the low hundreds of millions. King Charles's reign may prompt discussions about the financial disparities inherent to the institution of monarchy within the framework of a constitutional monarchy.
📹 The Dark Secret Behind the Royal Family’s Wealth Empires of Dirt
As the world mourns Queen Elizabeth II’s reign, it’s also important to acknowledge that some of the significance and power of the …
I don’t buy the tourism argument. I live in Vienna. The city attracts millions of visitors each year to see the palaces, parks, operas and what not. The city’s face defiantly was shaped by the monarchy. Schönbrunn palace is in fact the most visited attraction in the whole of Austria. Without having Royals living there for over a century now.
I see a lot of people who are pro-Royal say they generate tourism income. However, wouldn’t the same landmarks and buildings owned by them still be exactly the same if it were managed by the state just like how all other museums and cultural sites already are? It’s not like you get to see the Queen every time you go to Buckingham palace…that place will be exactly the same with or without the royal family. Idk, it’s a weak argument IMO but I’m open to having my mind changed.
The fact that all the attention goes to the BRF and people think it’s the only royal family in the world, the Spanish royals get tons of money, and the Prince of Liechtenstein is the richest monarch in Europe, and Buckingham is nothing in size if we compare it to others like Versailles, Royal Palace of Madrid, Palace of Caserta in Italy, Winter Palace in Russia and honestly dozens more.
The statement at the end – ‘People are inherently conservative and don’t want to change anything’ is infuriating. I think there’s quite a lot we’d like to change. I’d like to live in a world where people don’t have to sleep on the streets in one of the richest countries in the world, just to name something extremely relevant I’d immediately love to change. It’s hard to maintain the argument for their exorbitant costs when so many people suffer as a result of the circumstances created by extreme wealth division. Sure they might generate more based on some enigmatic calculation, but take care of the people who pay your insane rent as a built-in cost of living in their own houses. Throwing your hands up and saying… ‘tradition.. we stay out of government’ is a copout. Private wealth can be donated or otherwise put to use in amounts only limited by the size of their wallet, and they have a particularly large one. There is a cost to society that results from implying that people are better by birthright. It enforces a caste system and devalues other lives. Children’s lives who don’t even understand the crap that’s about to be enforced on them due to their class and circumstance. I thought this would all be obvious in 2023. I guess that’s progressive? So maybe this inherent conservatism thing he mentions is him saying he’s inconsiderate and justifies that by incorrectly saying that we’re all inconsiderate deep down, which is (fortunately) deeply untrue.
I can’t say i’ve taken much interest in the royals, but they are an intrinsic part of Britain’s continuity with the past and therefore identity. If they generate more than they take and don’t weild any real power that can compromise the democratic process what does it matter if you have a monarchy? Don’t shoot yourself in the foot for foolish, ideological reasons.
All these people complaining about the taxes and such… ya know, the Monarchy has been unpopular many a time in their history, just as much as they’ve been popular. There’s a reason why even after shortly being abolished due to Cromwell, the people supported the Monarch’s return. Even IF the Royals were stripped of their titles, all the possessions of the Windsors would still be in thier hands, as it would just be another rich family at the end of the day. If anything, the government would lose some money if the Monarchy was abolished, so maybe the tax payers need to understand the situation regarding where the money goes and how it’s handled. The Royal Coronation costs the UK less money than a Presidential Campaign in the US… and yet, the cheaper situation happens only a fraction of the time a new President is running up. Why don’t more people talk about that? People say the tourism is weak, but even Versailles and other places of past royalty are visited because they were royal seats of power. So the monarchs who had established those places are still the reason why the tax revenue is coming in droves. This hatred for the Monarchy is very interesting to see 😅
There are royals all around the world with less influence. I don’t think it’s necessary for their monarchy to die/forcing them to “abdicate”(since in practicality this had happened) it’s just that the Brit royals are overglorified and that probably needs to change a bit. Where I live I know there’s still princes/princesses and palaces but even if I pass them by the street I wouldn’t recognize them. They’re just still keeping their “family tradition” alive by keeping their title. I think people love/hate the Brit royals so much that they foget there’s no need to choose between glorifying or eradicating them 😅
There is another element to this not addressed in this….the APOLITICAL role played by the monarch in our constitution laws. We have an apolitical police force, military, legal system, judiciary & civil service, their allegiance is to The Monarch. Look to USA & Jan 6th hearings to see how attempts were made by exerting party political pressure on each of those branches, the revocation of Roe vs Wade etc to see the benefit of THAT. The Monarch is our defence against overweening politicians & that is not to be taken lightly.
In this day and age where people are struggling with bills especially the elderly who have to decide between food and bills and we are giving them more money, the duchy of Cornwall makes billions and it’s there for them to use and buy things so why can’t they use that money, it’s not like they will run out! The money UK makes from tourism doesn’t affect my bills or council tax – I don’t see a penny from that
The argument that the monarchy generates huge tourism dollars doesn’t hold water. Nobody is saying we should burn down Buckingham Palace, just that there shouldn’t be a bunch of old white aristocratic nobles residing inside. The tourism dollars would still be there with or without the monarchy physically still being current. The Palace of Versailles by itself generates around €100 million per year in revenue and a monarch hasn’t occupied that palace in over 230 years.
I can’t think of anything in this country that has improved because of the monarchy. For me, they symbolise the top of the very damaging class system that still imprisons us to this day. Also, to say that they ‘bring in tourism’ is hilarious because Legoland Windsor has more visitors than Windsor Castle. An elected Head of State that can speak in the interest of the people is far better than a family with no concept of normal life or normal people. It’s time we start discussing alternatives. We got rid of the monarchy once, we can get rid of them again.
Its not the royal family fighting to keep the monarchy. They would get out tomorrow if the British people let them. People don’t realize how much property these people, this family owns. Property that, since they are royalty, has been forced into a trust that is ineptly, incompetently and corruptly managed by government bureaucrats. The royal family would gladly trade in their forced responsibility as heads of state and, between, a £100-1,000k stipend each per year, to regain the ownership and control of the family real estate, companies, buildings, trusts, etc., that government civil servants get to mismanage and skim money from. None of the royal family want these awful jobs. Its not worth what they get in return.
The Royal Family are the personification of our Anglo heritage and culture… SO HANDS OFF!! They’ve done more for the actual people of Britain than the last decades years of socialism combined! KC3 has proven a canny businessman and everything he’s touched he’s grown into something for his nation including the Princes Trust and Dumfries House, not to mention the continuing energy for the locals around his wind farms and the revenue generated by same contributing to the nations coffers by almost a billion a year! What has Elon Musk or the Kardasians, the Rockefeller’s, the Astors any of those done for America but create a new poverty for the working class. America where they espouse the mentality of, “let them eat cake”.
“lots of evidence that the monarchy does create his wealth” yet his financial “report” just says estimated and provides none of this evidence. The release of this report had a launch with a director from the Princes Trust speaking, they have a charge on companies house from The Crown Estate Comissioners on Behalf of Her Majesty the Queen and he also runs a PR company. So looks like David Haigh has some vested interest in claiming the monarchy is good value for money so not an unbias source. Also there is no data from the national tourist board Visit Britain to back up the tourism claim either. Poor reporting from Business Insider
The Crown estate doesn’t make money because of the monarchy, the way this point is painted is like the wind turbines stop generating electricity without the monarchy or people stop visiting historical landmarks with a monarchy. We all know how no one visits Versailles because France has no monarchy, this point is ridiculous. The Crown estate can of course generate money without a monarchy (probably would be called Crown estate at that point anymore).
TOURIST INCOME..REALLY..???? TOURIST ARE SMARTER THAN THIS. THEY SEE A BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY. WARM PEOPLE AND MANY WONDERFUL TRADITIONS…I DONT REALLY THINK THE ROYALS ARE WORTH IT YOU GUYS KEEP PAYING FOR IT..TOURIST WILL CONTINUE TO VISIT WITHOUT THE ROYALS.. I WOULD THINK THE BRITISH PEOPLE ARE MORE INTELLIGENT THAN THINKING THE ROYALS ARE IT.. OTHER COUNTIES WITH NO ROYAL FAMILY ARE DOING OK
Everyone always focusses on monetary reasons for either keeping or abolishing the monarchy. As an institution, it gives the United Kingdom more soft power than it really deserves and keeps it more relevant on the world stage. We would lose all of that if we had someone like Boris Johnson as our head of state.
Hands down, the monarchy generates a huge economic benefit for the UK. They also project a tremendous amount of soft power and influence worldwide. Structurally, they also remove the “religiousness” from politics. Look at how hysterical many Americans become about the President, for example. It’s great that the monarch takes that away from government. Some traditions can’t just be brought back once they have been abolished. We should be careful what we change. I’m not religious but God Save The King.
They’re not inofensive. They wield real power. There have been several scandals of “””royalty””” lobbying for their interests or for parties that support them. Just because their cost is not shown in records, it doesn’t mean they do not cost anything the people of their country. Wonder how much money have gone to their pockets instead of the public treasury or through “donations”
Interesting, a number of the most eminent market experts have been expressing their views on the severity of the impending economic downturn and the extent to which equities might plummet. This is because the economy is heading towards a recession and inflation is persistently above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target. As I’m aiming to create a portfolio worth no less than £850,000 before I turn 60, I would appreciate any advice on potential investments.
Assets are you saying we should sell of our kingdom property? the arguments to be a republic like America are so bad. This also doesn’t account for tourism. It doesn’t account for the role as ambassadors they play on world stage. Influence you can’t buy. They work, they do ambassador duties. Are the only thing liked about the UK atm. Nobody like our MP’s and are clossing down embassies in Russia. since they are Americas pawns.
It’s very interesting to see how people think extremely black and white. Either they do have a monarchy or they have a democracy. In the Netherlands we do have a royal house and the reigning king or queen does have some duties they have to perform. The king or queen doesn’t hold any extreme power, but rather the minister does since they’re an elected figure
I love the pomp, ceremony and majesty the monarchy brings, I love it’s aesthetics and principles, and that the PM can speak with the monarch and seek advice on steering the ship of state. I don’t want to abolish a millennia-old institution and lose the last vestiges of tradition and our living history on economic grounds.
1. These days the crown estate is owned by the State so you have to think if we did abolish the monarchy who would it go to… I shouldn’t imagine it would go to the royal family given that the crown is not the personal property of the royals 2. The political ‘cost’ of having an unelected head of state is quite high. There is no evidence that Constitutional Monarchies do anything to save democracy, they only really care about self preservation, and when it comes down to full on authoritarians Republican presidents haven’t been much better but when it comes to suspected violations of the constitution the Irish, German and Italian Presidents have all vetoed bills and government decisions while our King has never done so. So try to think… what does the King do for the money and property he gets to use? 3. My argument for the royalty during Elizabeth’s Reign would be their popularity but now they only have the support of around 45% of the nation I would hardly call them unifying.
The question is how the royals accumulated the wealth. By colonization, exploitation, paparazi, and gifts??? How they spend it also matters to the citizens and tax payers. The UK is not an attractive tourist destination because of the Royals. The modern tourism is not sightseeing or even shopping. Rather, active experience of local life is the impulse. For that purpose, the Royals have little impact.
As someone who has been to London twice and is trying to get back next year, I can tell you I would prefer that the royals dip. I have zero interest or want to see them….I don’t understand how the royals bring in tourists??? Who ever gets to see them? Are their special events really that big? I can’t imagine they are such a draw anymore.
Brand Finance is essentially a PR company helping to give the Palace some positive spin. Many of the material assets like the Crown Jewels cannot be sold, so their valuation is meaningless – but more significantly, lands such as the Crown Estates and the duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster would become state property if the monarchy were abolished: the dynasty currently reigning has no private ‘right’ to them any more than the descendants of James Stuart they supplanted. That these can be considered a point on behalf of monarchy is absurd. As for the ‘intangible’ assets, that’s for the birds – but solid evidence has never actually been provided to show that a statistically significant number of tourists come to the UK because of our monarchy (let alone the notion that people buy products because they have the royal coat of arms on them 😂). And in any case, it reflects a severe lack of confidence in what our nation has to offer if that is considered to be the main reason for retaining the institution.
7:19 – This right here. I believe this article could have been cut down to one sentence. Besides other disagreements, I don’t even know how they can talk about money. I know the U.K. doesn’t look too fondly at the U.S. in many regards today. However, when they broke from the British Empire, they would additionally inquire enormous costs in maintaining an army, government, and order. It had absolutely nothing to do with money and everything to do with what they viewed as right, just, and fair.
Oh so the Royal Family actually makes their own money, gives most of it to the British government, and gets that much a year from THEIR investments and properties. By law, nothing is wrong here and we shouldn’t be complaining about it, if you own shopping malls and big houses that make money from visitors then surely you have the right to keep the revenue you make from YOUR property. It isn’t the “peoples” money to begin with anyways.
The French President cost the French taxpayer an average of 108 million euros, plus an additional 10 million euros for ex-presidents. The entire Royal Family costs around £100 million and is cheaper than the French presidential system. Please do some research. The Royal family is funded by the Sovereign grant, not the taxpayer. All of the income from the Crown Estates (Tower of London etc.) goes to the Treasury, and the Royal family get a small cut of the proceeds. This has been the case since George III signed the proceeds over to the Treasury. The Sovereign grant is then used primarily to maintain the buildings.
I think it’s one of the unique things you’ll see in world, where the kingdom is part monarchy and part democracy. I think they really go hand in hand. Not to mention that they Royal Family can step into political complexities. For instance they help relations with other nations. I think the crown should stay no matter what. I’m an ardent supporter of the crown. It’s like two pillars of political power.
Right, let’s try it. Get rid of the monarchy, they keep all their assets and let’s see how it goes. Whether I like the monarchy or not, and whether I think it’s fair they have all these personal assets, or not, the asserts are still theirs. I suspect some days they would prefer not to be on constant display with no privacy. I know I would.
As stated monarchy contributes £1.7 billion to the economy and here’s another stat, 4.1 BILLION people (BBC say 5) watched the funeral of the Queen Elizabeth. That’s a statistic that speaks a thousand words to just how important the monarchy is internationally and what a massive part of national identity it is. Like many I don’t care for the monarchy, but if you really believe we would benefit from its abolition you’re either ignorant or simply don’t care for our already failing economy. It’s an economic gold mine, we would be morons to get rid of it. But hey, we left the EU and look how that turned out, so nothing would really surprise me.
8:01 😊😌😌😌 I’m glad majority of the ppl in Br!tain support the Monarch and are conservative in nature The monarchy is the only way to save heritage, traditions and Culture of that particular country… Monarch is represented as the cultural head of the state These guys should remember that land belongs to the K!ng 👑😌 The N€pal did the same when republic movement started, the same argument what he said ppl have no jobs, no food and no elected govt, blah blah blah 😂😂 Now that country is republ!c and still suffering from political crises and those issues I guess it’s better to have constitutional monarchy 😊😊 The United K!ngdom 🙏🏻😌
The bulk of the income from their assets goes to the Treasury. They are the hereditary owners of the Crown Estate and they only receive a portion of the profits from that. The government takes the rest. So instead of criticising, they should be looking at the huge amount which the Treasury gets from the Crown Estates.
The royals make money for UK. An alternative arrangement can’t do that. When was the last time tourists went to France or USA to see their presidents? Like all countries, heads of state need security. It’s not just an issue of the RF of UK. In USA, the president, their family are protected. The security detail remains even when they leave office – George Bush, Obama are examples. Is that a cost? The financial issues in UK are a result of bad policies from the government – the government is run by elected politicians. So an elected head if state will add no value. The RF bring is stability. Remember Trump was eager to dine with the Queen. No other head of state can offer that. RF events stimulate growth and support local businesses. So many stand to become unemployed should the RF cease to exist. The Republic group in UK are dumb. The King/Queen have never been naughty. Why bring the thr Andrew episode? It happens everywhere. What did people do to Bill Clinton? He didn’t go to prison. He just stepped aside. My argument is that elected head of state has all liabilities too, which people overlook. The structure of British Government gives all powers to an elected PM and cabinet. There is no interference from the RF in this process. The real power is still with the people. Also, all problems UK is in today is due to the politicians. Why no hold the politicians accountable? The RF are doing their job very well. They bring in stability for the nation. Unlike a game of chess played in parliament – what a shame that no PM has complete term in the last decade or more.
IT IS WORTH TO KEEP THE ROYAL FAMILY EVEN IF THE COUNTRY DOUBLE THE PAYMENTS. BRITAIN IS MADE MORE MAGICAL WITH THE ROYAL FAMILY. THE KING BIND THE COMMONWEALTH TOGETHER. PEOPLE ARE JUST ENVIOUS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY THAT IS WHY THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTROY THEM. WITHOUT ROYAL FAMILY BRITAIN WILL BE BORING AND LIFELESS COUNTRY. KING CHARLES SHOULD JUST GET BACK THE CROWN STATE, MANAGE IT HIMSELF TO SUPPORT THE ROYAL FAMILY AND STOP ASKING MONEY FROM THE CIVIL LIST SO TAXPAYERS WILL STOP THINKING THAT MONEY COMES FROM THEM. LUCKY BRITAIN HAS HUMBLE AND SIMPLE KING NOT LIKE RULERS FROM OTHER MONARCHIES WHO PLUNDER THE MONEY OF THE GOVERNMENT SPENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON LUXURY ITEMS FOR THEIR OWN ENJOYMENT AND IF CITIZENS COMPLAIN THEIR HEAD WILL BE CUT OFF OR GO TO PRISON.
I get the whole historical aspect if the royal family. But they just seem like more trouble than they are worth. And I cringe when people talk about their fortune. None if what they have is legit. They made their family fortune off the backs of millions of native peoples from their old “colonies”. How is that legit? If they had any honor at all they would cancel themselves, give the money to the people of the U.K., and just go away.
If you think that buillding worth 4 billion pounds it’s because you asked a fake expert. Let’s make it more realistic between the charges generated to take care of an historical monument, the difficulties to heat and te realated cost plus the marginal utility of surplus surfaces… well you will discover that no monument worth that much for private people.
As an American I just can’t with this article. With all due respect, I hope the UK people see it our way someday and choose a Republic. Great article but disgusting and gross to watch how an institution has insulated itself by making itself a spectacle and a country an amusement park for a fairy tale that there are people better than others because what family they were born from. Perpetuating that narrative because it is profitable. Sheesh. Just because it is profitable doesn’t make it moral, ethical, or right.
I’m writing from a republic! So let me explain why I am a monarchist. 1. Yes I can elect a head of state, sound good right? Not really! Why? There is always the 2 great parties between you can choose, and whoever wins will make everything for their party… that means those who have boted for him/her love him those who voted against him hate him. So there isn’t an icon or a person that unites the nation. 2. Costs. What do you think, where does the president and his family live? In a palace, has a big staff, makes banquets, travels around the world, visits places with his gang(indeed the politicians that supported him for the job). Beside that please add the costs of the elections every 4/5 years( double scrutiny) and the referendums organised by the other party to make him gone( 1/2 every mandate). 3. He meats the citizens during the campaign and usually disappears for the next 4-5 years and reappeares when the next scrutiny is held. 4. The states builds him a villa, (after his term ended, he gets a huge pension, and the state provides for him, usually he maintains his status to be above the law), where he can live, usually not one that a simple person could live in. 5. What has he done for the nation? Usually nothing, just making a huge division in it, it costs a lot, and many people usually even do not know who he is. He adds no value for the state or for the nation. 6. The monarchy? It is expensive? It is, but the money comes from itself, not from taxpayers, it’s not politically inherited, and usually people that got to be monarchs are tought how to rule, not our presidents who can be even a shoemaker(like Ceausescu was) who will emberass the nation in front of all the world.
Its funny how entitled the whole comment section is. 😂 Youre literally talking about the royal family of England. “Boohoo they have money, grrr taxes etc 😢” Whut up its the fing King dude $80m a year is nothing for them. Its the literal king. And $80m to the most influencial family on earth who also run half the modern world is not much to cry about
Can someone explain to me how the royal family brings tourist income? Like if you abolish the monarchy, are people not wana go see buckinham anymore? Is it impossible to hold highprofile events in London without the royal family? Like I’ll grant that Micky Mouse is an important symbol for Disney, but the guy who wears the mask doesn’t get paid 500 mil a year.
nOT WHEN YOU ARE HARBORING A DRUG ATTIC, AND I NOT MEAN HARRY!!! OR KEEP YOUR ROYAL HOOKER WITH TITLES!!! NOT THE KING THOUSANDS WANT! tHE BRITISH PEOPLE SHOULD NEVER BE PAYING THE ROYALS THAT GIVE TO THE RICH DRUGGER OR THE HOOKER…ROYALS ARE SINKING EVERY DAY! WAITING FOR WILLIAM TO BE KING, THEN WE MIGHT BE GOING SOMEWHERE.