What is the Monarchy For?

Glad to meet so many fellow Republicans.
Seems to me they are in it for what they get.
Andrew all over the papers giving Epstein opportunities
In the same network as Blair and Mandy
Mandy has hid knighthood and jouned by Starmer.
Says much for JC that he’d never accept those ‘honours’
So many hangers on with political power. Frightening.

There is some serious emotional detachment issues and hypocrisy with the royal family. Philip was extraordinary rude to and about the people he met and their cultures. A short google would reveal that some of his public statements seemed to be dismissed as 'just Philip'. In he was representing his country or business in any proper job he would have been sacked. What, if anything, Meghan has said to offend, seemed to have caused sufficient offence to make her unwelcome in royal circles!
Look how easy it was to invite Andrew and his daughters to stay at Balmoral while the children's mother was not allowed indoors but in a nearby house!
Charles and Diana gave 'tell all' TV interviews and remain idolised by so many, but Meghan and Harry did the same and are despised.
Andrew - bailed out easily by his mother for £12 million pounds to keep him out of the courts in the USA, while giving us annual tomes on morality! And look how long it has taken for them to strip Andrew of his titles - not for his misuse of public funds, extravagance, dodgy dealings abroad, or immoral behaviour - but because he had begun to threaten Williams future!
As for the wholly inappropriate and nauseating picture opportunities of William selling the Big Issue before going home chauffeur driven to his mansion and then Kate and Williams trip to Jamaica seeing local children behind a wire fence and literally looking down on the population while standing on a jeep! No excuse - they have both had the benefit of very expensive education so cannot claim ignorance.

I agree with most of the comments on here, I don’t see the point of them, they are living off hard working people and wasting so much of our money with their palaces and mansions.
Imagine what the money could buy if all those diamonds, Artworks and properties were sold, people are dying due to poverty and lack of money in the NHS, I understand when people say the riches etc belong to the country ok then why don’t they give the country a vote whether we want things to be sold to benefit our country and the people in it.
I really don’t care that there are precious works of art and gems locked away but I do care that the public don’t have any benefit from them and I also care that people are dying because the NHS isn’t funded properly, of course there are numerous things this money could benefit such as housing education etc so come on the family are not just there to cut ribbons, if they have to be there which I don’t believe they should let them have a clear out and put the money to good use.

The thing is, where did the wealth come from for them to inherit?
As I see it, it comes from a past when force was used by leaders of private armies to extract payments from farmers and just about anybody else, or if they were too poor and weak their land was simply taken. Or both. Then they had to pay rent to live on it.
As with ourselves, they tended not to pass on their wealth for the benefit of all, but left it to their own children.
Those with the biggest armies ended up with the most power and in time there were fewer but bigger armies.
At least in ye olden days the leaders tended to ride out front in battles. Today they live in their palaces and big houses on large private estates, sometimes passing their time by riding on their horses and paying servants to do the mucking out.
Having said that, our royal family is respected the world over ( though not by everybody) but are precariously in danger of losing this attribute As long as this remains so however, they are useful as ambassadors, not much else.
Will they be paying inheritance tax on their lands, like the farmers, or is that a stupid question? Yes. right. stupid question.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202512/medium-5y21el-img-1342.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202512/medium-dtbhlm-img-1343.jpeg

As if we should forget this

Exemption from inheritance tax for the king and heir, not the entire family

Royals with Private (Sealed) Wills

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh: Ruled in 2021 to remain sealed for at least 90 years.
Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother: Sealed in 2002.
Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon: Sealed in 2002.
Prince Francis of Teck: The first to have his will sealed, in 1910.
Queen Mary: Consort to King George V.
Duke of Windsor (formerly King Edward VIII):
Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester:
Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent:
Prince Arthur of Connaught:
Princess Patricia of Connaught:
Lord Leopold Mountbatten:
Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom:
Prince Georg of Denmark:
Prince Maurice of Battenberg:
Alexander Duff, 1st Duke of Fife:
Helen Frederica Augusta, Duchess of Albany:
Princess Helena Augusta Victoria:
Princess Frederica Sophia Maria Henrietta Amelia Theresa of Great Britain:
Princess Louise Victoria Alexandra Dagmar, Princess Royal:
Dowager Grand Duchess of Mecklenburg-Strelitz:

None of us can make our Wills private. Diana’s Will was made public.

I’m happy to have a royal family. I work in the civil service and the royals bring in an absolute ton of money from tourism every year.

As many of the Total Estates have farmland /are farmed, they have been exempt from inheritance tax. They like many others (Jeremy Clarkson made the point clearly) invested in farmland to keep inheritance tax free! Came unstuck Jeremy and Farage after boasting about it.

Sealed wills is not exemption from inheritance tax

I loved the Queen but can’t stand Charles, yes many things are wrong with the royals such as Charging the NHS etc. but don’t forget the Queen would be sent to countries to pave the way for government in difficult situations, they bring in lots of money from tourism. It has its uses.

I think that the monarchy does make some money for the economy but certainly not enough to make allowing the people involved to pay no income, capital gains or inheritance tax.
I don't know much about how it is funded by the British people, but however much they get it is not acceptable.
It simply is not fair on the rest of us who pay all our taxes.

Juliepat

I am glad to see this raised here. It is appalling to think that the Royal family don't pay inheritance tax and even worse that they charge the NHS to use buildings. Why do we put up with their greed and privilege? I am furious about the advantages they take.

That is not true, the only member of the royal family who does not pay IT is the monarch, Princess Margaret’s children had to sell some of her Jewellery to pay IT. However there is nothing to stop them setting up Trusts as many others do.

cc

I think that the monarchy does make some money for the economy but certainly not enough to make allowing the people involved to pay no income, capital gains or inheritance tax.
I don't know much about how it is funded by the British people, but however much they get it is not acceptable.
It simply is not fair on the rest of us who pay all our taxes.

The royal family all pay taxes, they volunteered to do so in 1993, only the monarch’s estate is exempt from Inheritance Tax.

Apparently the RF always paid tax until the Queen’s father took over and complained he didn’t have enough money!

I work in the civil service and the royals bring in an absolute ton of money from tourism every year
I have family in the Civil Service.
It is not true and certainly not the whole story at all.
Tourists come to the UK regardless of whether a royal is there or not. Tourism does not drop when the Royals are on one of their many holidays.
Tourists come for our Museums, Roman sites like Bath, Scenic sites like The Cotswolds, the Lakes, the Highlands and Islands. The come in thousands annually to the long abandoned castles and monasteries, the National Trust sites and listed Gardens. Yes, they will hang out for days to see big royal events - but many are UK royalists camping out and not paying into hotels and restaurants. Edinburgh and London are buzzing all year round - nothing to do with royals. We have enough history, culture, scenery and events to keep our tourism going royal family or not - just as France does or indeed (until the recent buffoon took office) does the USA - both Republics. We have to stop believing the nonsense that the royals are attracting our tourists and that they 'pay for themselves'. They do not. The security bill is on us. We also have to knock the idea on the head that the only model of a Presidency is one like Trump. We can do much better than that.
At least with the Irish Republic model we don't have to keep their Presidents children, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces, nephews in high value properties paying peppercorn rents and able to staff their houses with double and in some cases, triple figure staff and pay for their wardrobe, travel and staff expenses as 'working royals'. Let them do the so called 'work' as volunteers as so many of us do at the National Trust and other charities and see how often and enthusiastically they turn up! Can you imagine Andrew or Edward or latterly Philip volunteering? They can barely tolerate the public. William would do a 'photo shoot' and pop off home again. Kate seems to think her extortionate income is just reward for dressing up in expensive dresses and giving us parenting lessons - despite her heavy use of Nannie's and servant.

Paddann54, I am with you all the way. They have lived off the backs of the working people for centuries. Time they were abolished.

Parasites every last one of them

I am a supporter of the Monarchy. I think they do a wonderful job and am not in the least bit envious of their wealth or tax status. I couldnt do what they do in a million years. I follow Princess Ann in particular and she works so hard its astonishing given she is 75. Of course no retirement for royals, look at the Queen meeting with the new Prime Minister just 2 days before she passed away. Still working at the age of 96.

The properties, whether privately or stated owned provide income for all who work there - as do the farms, stud farms and trainingyar

Oops sorry …training yards and any other activity the royals are involved in.
If anyone could convince me that money saved by getting rid of the monarchy would definitely benefit the NHS, the homeless, education etc al and not be siphoned off to some dubious destination I’d vote for a republic.
As it is I think the monarchy serves us by preventing what could be a lot worse

I do wish republicans would stick to facts

I’m a royalist too.I loved the Queen and I think Charles has excelled in his role,even though he has been battling cancer.The alternative is awful.

I have always liked having a monarchy and that will never change. I don't understand all the resentment and complaints about them. Some of them work very hard for their country. There are some awful freeloaders, obviously Andrew and Sarah, who I hope will go and live in another country and never be heard of again. I feel very sorry for their daughters. And YES they do bring in tourists, as people in other countries love to see the various elaborate, centuries-old ceremonies, pageantry, and formal traditions (like Trooping the Colour, coronations, State Opening of Parliament, and Jubilees) that mark major national, constitutional, and royal events, using music (like Elgar's marches), elaborate dress, and processions to create spectacle, reinforce national identity, foster continuity, and project majesty, combining solemnity with public celebration.
I can't stand Charles and even less Camilla, ever since their scandalous goings on, and was very sad when Diana died and I went to watch the funeral procession with my mother. I am looking forward to when William is king and Catherine Queen. There is no way Camilla is my Queen.
I agree some things need changing, but William is already planning on doing so. Yes, they should pay tax, but I understood that they already do so.

Of course no retirement for royals

Charles only became King st the age of 73! He was still serving an apprenticeship. Why do you think that was? William was serving the same apprenticeship alongside him! He is now 43 and still not in 'the job'. Their wives and in the queens case, her husband, did/do nothing but support the monarch.

By no means are they doing onerous jobs - state dinners they attend and say a few pleasantries at, prime seats at galas, meet dignitaries, cut ribbons etc. They do not make decisions for the government, don't stand for election, don't get judged by regulatory bodies like Ofsted, don't ever go without financial support, risk losing their job, never have to worry about childcare, healthcare, education, transport, employment or even unemployment or pensions! Ye gods, it's by pure chance Andrew isn't the King and Fergie the Queen! Nothing positive has come from Edward or Andrew's pampered lifestyle on the taxpayer - quite the opposite! Yet to see what William with his temper and lack of forgiveness can bring to 'the firm', but half his life has passed with no evidence of anything apart from being a dad!