The Queen - Inheritance tax?
Discussion
Just reading an FT article:
“Elizabeth II was one of the world’s wealthiest individuals, with property holdings ranging from central London prime real estate to farmland across the country”
Forbes goes on:
“Her personal assets from investments, real estate, jewels and more have an estimated worth of $500 million, according to Forbes magazine. The entire royal family was estimated to be worth at least $88 billion as of 2017.”
Does anyone know the inheritance tax position on this?? Is 40% due - and if so how will the Royal Family afford it without selling off vast swathes of Regent Street?
“Elizabeth II was one of the world’s wealthiest individuals, with property holdings ranging from central London prime real estate to farmland across the country”
Forbes goes on:
“Her personal assets from investments, real estate, jewels and more have an estimated worth of $500 million, according to Forbes magazine. The entire royal family was estimated to be worth at least $88 billion as of 2017.”
Does anyone know the inheritance tax position on this?? Is 40% due - and if so how will the Royal Family afford it without selling off vast swathes of Regent Street?
Just reading into this a bit more now. Looks like you are correct and IHT is exempt.
So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
siheb said:
Just reading into this a bit more now. Looks like you are correct and IHT is exempt.
So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
How do you work out the IHT on a crown or jewels. I think it is more to do with the Queen not actually owning a lot of that £200m but it belonging to the royal family. Is the queens name actually on the deeds to Buckingham Palace or Balmoral or is it held in some sort of trust.So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
[/quote]
How do you work out the IHT on a crown or jewels. I think it is more to do with the Queen not actually owning a lot of that £200m but it belonging to the royal family. Is the queens name actually on the deeds to Buckingham Palace or Balmoral or is it held in some sort of trust.
[/quote]
IHT easy to work out. Valuation then vs valuation now.
It’s who owns what and how it’s treated that’s my question
This report from 1993 sets out Royal tax arrangements:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
Balmoral and Sandringham on the other hand are privately owned by the Royal Family. So they'd retain these two if the monarchy was ever abolished.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...
WY86 said:
How do you work out the IHT on a crown or jewels. I think it is more to do with the Queen not actually owning a lot of that £200m but it belonging to the royal family. Is the queens name actually on the deeds to Buckingham Palace or Balmoral or is it held in some sort of trust.
Buckingham Palace and other royal palaces are part of the Crown Estate. Effectively they only belong to the Sovereign while they are the Sovereign.Balmoral and Sandringham on the other hand are privately owned by the Royal Family. So they'd retain these two if the monarchy was ever abolished.
Mr Spoon said:
I don't know for fact. But I'm making an assumption. They will be exempt.
Or they don't own anything, and all the while the monarchy is just a custodian.
Basically this.Or they don't own anything, and all the while the monarchy is just a custodian.
The previous Queen, or Charles now, are not going to stick a Monet on EBay for a bit of pocket cash.
When you’re at the top you make the rules. When you look at a lot of national trust properties in some cases the family died out but in others inheritance tax meant the kids couldn’t keep it and they had to sell it to national trust.
Must be nice to be outside of those rules as having to sell the family home that’s been in the family for generations because you can’t afford x amount of million must be pretty crappy really.
Must be nice to be outside of those rules as having to sell the family home that’s been in the family for generations because you can’t afford x amount of million must be pretty crappy really.
siheb said:
Just reading into this a bit more now. Looks like you are correct and IHT is exempt.
So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
They were always exempt from income tax; the Queen in the late 90s actually advocated for paying it and the then Chancellor accommodated that request.So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
There is an FT article that covers this,
https://www.ft.com/content/00d91c28-88eb-47a6-8b96...
Or without paywall
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2...
Tldr: the Queen’s estate is exempt from IHT.
https://www.ft.com/content/00d91c28-88eb-47a6-8b96...
Or without paywall
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2...
Tldr: the Queen’s estate is exempt from IHT.
brickwall said:
The conceptually confusing bit is that technically the Sovereign is the state. The Government acts on behalf of the Crown, justice is dispensed in the name of the Crown, the armed forces fight for the Crown.
So paying tax as Sovereign is paying tax to themselves.
Obviously in practice it doesn’t work like that, and the 1993 agreements sets things out in much more clarity. But it’s why we can get anomalous quirks.
The Crown is the State?So paying tax as Sovereign is paying tax to themselves.
Obviously in practice it doesn’t work like that, and the 1993 agreements sets things out in much more clarity. But it’s why we can get anomalous quirks.
The 'Sovereign' as in the person who is King or Queen today is not quite the same thing?
How does it work further down the royal tree? Do minor royals have property which is personal and property which is 'Crown Estate'?
siheb said:
Just reading into this a bit more now. Looks like you are correct and IHT is exempt.
So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
I wonder if the exemption is merely a legacy that enabled the act to be passed? Wasn't the core purpose of IHT to break up the big land owning estates? Or is that waffle?So - and this is a genuine question and not at all politically motivated (I am a Royalist) -why is this so and what are the reasons behind it other than simple privilege?
Seems especially odd given the Royal family pay income and capital gains tax.
Are there genuine reasons for the exemption I haven’t thought of. Or is it a case of taxes really are only for little people - especially when there’s £200mm at stake.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff