What reform if any is needed in relation to Crown Estate Property? Subletting of royal properties currently in the news.....

Samwam

"The British taxpayer does not owe palatial homes to Charles's extended family. Why are we making homes available at huge discounts to Andrew's daughters, or the late Queen's cousins?"

"Charles and William are billionaires, avoiding inheritance and other taxes, taking personal incomes from public property portfolios in excess of £50m a year. The royals can pay for their own homes."

"The Crown Estate and royal palace property portfolio is state property. It should all be used for the benefit of the public, not the private enrichment of the royals."

"The NAO's report raises far more questions than it answers. MPs need to seize this moment to push for radical reform, including removing all royals but the monarch from publicly owned accommodation."

Since the arrangements conform with British property law and the tenants are paying market rents for the properties, whatis the problem. Why move non-working royals from the properties, if they pay the market rent . Would you prefer to see these properties let out to Chinese billionaires and Middle Eastern royalty - most Middle Eastern royalties idea of royalty seems to continue down the generations so their are thousands and thousands of them. Chacun a son gout.

As for the rest, yes, I think they should pay death duties, they do pay income tax

I am with Monica- if the Royals are operating within the law and tenants are paying the market rent themselves, or someone is paying on their behalf- e.g. Kind Charles- what is the problem?

The British monarch began voluntarily to pay taxes in 1993 so fair.

Currently the sovereign is legally exempt from paying inheritance tax on assets passed from one monarch to the next- all other royals are subject to paying death duties I understand.

On the one hand this preserves the Crown's assets from one monarch to the next. Successive taxation over generations could gradually erode the monarchy's estate, which could undermine its financial independence and traditional role in national life. Plus a large proportion of royal wealth (such as palaces and the Royal Collection) is held in an official capacity by the monarch on behalf of the nation anyway. Thus they are not assets that can be sold- thus making standard inheritance tax inapplicable.

If you are an anti monarchist most likely you would support the payment of death duties and would not be unduly concerned about erosion over time of the monarchy's estate. If you are pro monarchy and anti republic you might wish the sovereign grant to be increased in the year the monarch dies to allow for death duties payable in order to preserve the institution.

Also a republic in place of a monarchy would cost the nation money- i.e. cost of periodic presidential elections, presidential residence, travel, pay, financial support and security for former heads of state and their families etc etc. Would it be less or more. than the current cost of the monarchy?

The royals, including those who do few public engagements, are benefiting from free palatial homes in Kensington Palace and St James's Palace.

Others are getting massively subsidised rents which are paid for by Charles's Duchy income.

The so-called 'privy purse' which the royals use to pay for some of these palatial homes is also funded by public funds, drawn from the state owned Duchy of Lancaster.

Eleven royals get free homes in Kensington Palace and St James's Palace.

Multi billion worth public property for the royals use cannot be justified. Good that the Audit Office is looking into this.

It’s a shame Charles did not ‘honour his mother’s wishes’
before turfing Angela Kelly from her promised home.

what happened to Charles place in Wales, does anyone know?
I have looked, honestly, only found that he didn’t want to keep it now that he was no longer PoW
which seemed a little churlish
that William showed no interest even though he is now PoW
then the trail goes cold
I thought it was lovely, plain, simple, Shaker ish, an antidote
to the red gold splendour of palaces

Also why hasn’t William had an investiture if he is PoW
there has been no solemn ceremony; are the Welsh disappointed?

Wont some of these properties be for their workers?

There are a few very old money people nr here and their properties on their estates (or villages) are just let out to normal folk and the people who work on the estates. There is a lot of philanthropy involved. I'm trying to look for a silver lining

11 working royals are granted free housing directly connected to their official roles- we know all who the current working royals are. Several other Royals have their rents discounted i.e Eugenie (at Ivy Cottage), Beatrice (St Jame's Palace), Prince and Princess Michael of Kent (Kensington Palace) - any more? The gap between discounted rent paid and full market rent is paid by King Charles private privy purse funds. All legal and I can't see the problem. A president would also be granted free housing directly connected to their official role.

The King's private privy purse funds are primarily generated by the net revenue of the Duchy of Lancaster, a massive private estate held in trust for the reigning monarch since 1339. I don't have a problem in Charles accessing this fund to pay the discounted rent amount of the handful of Royals who do not pay the full market rent in Kensington Palace and St James's Palace. Realistically these properties could not be released for rent on the open market to anyone other than the royal family

No problem in the Audit Office looking into either rent. paid, King Charles private privy purse funds etc - transparency is good.

Grandmaofone

Also why hasn’t William had an investiture if he is PoW
there has been no solemn ceremony; are the Welsh disappointed?

The King never owned the house in Wales, it belongs to the Duchy of Cornwall, and he leased it. It hasn’t been sold.

William himself decided he did not want the pomp and expense involved in an investiture as Prince of Wales. He’s good at reading the zeitgeist, and has been well thought of in Wales as a result of making that decision.

The financial accounts of the Monarch's private Duchy of Lancaster estate are already legally required by law to be presented annually to Parliament- so already transparent. The estate is legally and financially separate from the Crown Estate.