Sorry Charles, we’re not all in this together
Dan Marsh via Wikimedia Commons
In the first instalment of her column this term, Nora Redmond argues that the royal family needs to play a greater part in tackling the cost of living crisis.
During his first Christmas speech as monarch, King Charles spoke about the “great anxiety and hardship” of those facing financial difficulty. The Resolution Foundation has estimated that as a result of rapid inflation and wage stagnation, real household disposable incomes will fall by 10% this year. The cost of living crisis is on track to force a further 3 million people into poverty. Charles’ sentiment is misplaced if he does not take action to help the very public that funds his wealth.
Whether a royalist or a republican, the influence of the royal family in British society cannot be denied. With their public appearances and commitments to charities and organisations, much of the country feels a sense of connection with the royals. Following the death of Queen Elizabeth II after a reign of seventy years, and the subsequent succession of Charles, now is the time to consider reform. The royals must do a better job at responding to national interest if they wish to continue to be present in public life. Whilst Charles does not have the right to direct policy or bring in new laws, it is his responsibility as ‘Head of Nation’ to represent the nation, and encourage unity, pride and stability.
It’s no secret that the royals are wealthy - the secret is to what extent. Estimates of the royal family’s net worth are currently placed at £23 billion. Transparency over their finances has further been avoided as communications with the royal family are exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. What is more certain is the amount of money provided to the royal family by taxpayers. For the years of 2021 to 2022, the Sovereign Grant was set at £86.3 million. Due to the cost of refurbishing Buckingham Palace, this spending has increased by 17%. It seems incongruous for the King to remark on people trying to “pay their bills and keep their families fed and warm” when the royal family is in such a position of privilege, wealth, and power - to which we don’t even know the full extent. At the very least, with an impending recession the British public are due some openness regarding the finances of the royal family.
Whilst Charles has committed to paying income tax, he will not pay any inheritance tax due to a 1993 agreement with John Major in which assets passed from the sovereign to their successor were made exempt from inheritance tax. The average citizen, by contrast, would pay a standard rate of 40% if the value of their estate is £325,000 or above. When many families are forced to choose between heating and eating, there is no time more fitting than now to abandon this clause. The monarchy is accountable to the public and ultimately depends on their support. As such, the people of the UK should have the opportunity to voice their views on the special treatment of the royal family. They did not have a say in 1993 and they certainly do not today either.
The Crown Estate has assets worth £12.4 billion, with a portfolio including London’s Regent Street and about half of St James’s district. There are 22 royal residences which are not subject to inheritance tax. With over 60% of the Sovereign Grant spent on the maintenance of royal palaces, it is the public's money that directly continues to fund their access to these houses. Considering that hundreds of rooms are empty amidst a national housing shortage, the royal family should divest themselves of some of this unused space to be put to public use.
Charles’ sympathy thus extends only so far with those who are struggling. A cut-price coronation was originally suggested given concerns over the cost of living crisis - yet Charles is reported to have rejected initial plans for a less extravagant ceremony out of a desire to showcase the UK internationally. What’s also troubling is that the costs of the coronation and state funeral remain vague. Without transparency or input into these decisions, the taxpayer is left on the hook for the bill whilst one in five people in the UK live in poverty. There should be no confusion regarding royal finances when the majority of spending is covered by the public. The taxpayer should have the opportunity to question this concealment.
The public’s Britain is not the same as the King’s. The British public can ill-afford extravagance and pomp when living standards are set to fall to the lowest level on record. This is especially the case considering that the family’s vast wealth means they can afford to pay for their own members’ ceremonies and luxuries. The extent to which the royal family requires public support demands more transparency and accountability. As the British monarchy enters into a new age, it owes it to the UK to play an active role in tackling the cost of living crisis.