Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: RIP Philip  (Read 130033 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Princess MS

Warned
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 820

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 4648





Ignore
« Reply #675 on: January 29, 2022, 12:50:39 PM »

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.
Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

I think is the pain point - do people really want royal wills made public or is that just because everyone else's has to be public and don't have the option of making it private. Personally I don't think anyones will should be public so don't see why Philip's should be, but I understand people will feel it is unfair for his to be private while theirs can't be.

Truly, personally, I think Philip's will would be pretty boring. I suspect most things will have been left in Trust long ago - he was 99 years old and the Queen Mother put nearly all her assets in trust long before her death and Princess Margaret did the same giving her Mustique home to her son long enough before she died for it to qualify for the 7 year rule.

I suspect, as a very unmaterialistic man Philip would have been more likely to include bequests to staff, dividing up his library and other sentimental items such as horses, carriages etc than a long list of financial bequests.

Honestly, I can't see how Philip made millions out of his Civil List allowance. At very most he may have done so in the early days but really for years it was frozen at £359,000 a year. The Queen Mother was heavily in debt with almost £200,000 more than that.

Over 70 years and with minimal expenses he would have accumulated millions.... his wife paid for everything.... houses security and food.... probably clothes too ....
Logged
Hester
Board Helper
Warned
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 2744

Offline Offline

Samoa Samoa

Posts: 15472





Ignore
« Reply #676 on: January 29, 2022, 01:19:26 PM »

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.
Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

I think is the pain point - do people really want royal wills made public or is that just because everyone else's has to be public and don't have the option of making it private. Personally I don't think anyones will should be public so don't see why Philip's should be, but I understand people will feel it is unfair for his to be private while theirs can't be.

Truly, personally, I think Philip's will would be pretty boring. I suspect most things will have been left in Trust long ago - he was 99 years old and the Queen Mother put nearly all her assets in trust long before her death and Princess Margaret did the same giving her Mustique home to her son long enough before she died for it to qualify for the 7 year rule.

I suspect, as a very unmaterialistic man Philip would have been more likely to include bequests to staff, dividing up his library and other sentimental items such as horses, carriages etc than a long list of financial bequests.

Honestly, I can't see how Philip made millions out of his Civil List allowance. At very most he may have done so in the early days but really for years it was frozen at £359,000 a year. The Queen Mother was heavily in debt with almost £200,000 more than that.

Over 70 years and with minimal expenses he would have accumulated millions.... his wife paid for everything.... houses security and food.... probably clothes too ....

He spent a LOT on causes.
Logged
Oh_Caroline

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1366

Offline Offline

Posts: 5418





Ignore
« Reply #677 on: January 29, 2022, 01:23:17 PM »

I don’t think anyone’s will should be public so I hope they lose. If they win then the Queens will be made public as well I presume? The Guardian is just trying to stir up crap IMO.

Same here. The Guardian is sniffing around for scuttlebutt and evidence of mistresses.

That's my issue too.  The Guardian isn't fighting for equality but out of the hopes they can find some juicy scandal worthy material in his bequests.  The bigger the scandal the more headlines and therefore the more money the press stands to make.

I could see him having a couple of millions left but not anything particularly exciting.  IIRC whatever he didn't use on official expenses was taxed at the normal rate.  Plus I don't see Philip as the type to live off his wife for his personally items...clothing, books, art supplied, etc. so that would have eaten into his allowance.  And then any charitable contributions he made.
Logged
fairy

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 4831

Offline Offline

Posts: 20666





Ignore
« Reply #678 on: January 29, 2022, 01:35:49 PM »

I think that wills should always be private to the public, only those who are included and involved should get information. What I do with my private assests, belongings and such should be my very private and personal information just like health information and private person's financial aspects.
Just like any other civil-servant Royals should be given a salary that is completely theirs. And then there should be moneys allocated (like in any other company) for expanses such as housing, employees and such. And those expanses should be as public as they are in any other coperation eg. comparable e.g. with a ministry, the office of the prime minister etc...
I think it is completely ridiculous to give the queen one big pot out of which she is supposed to pay everything and the busfare. I can imagine that eventually a much more business like approach could be used: the office of the queen and the private person behind it. Like with ministers and presidents.
Logged

Mary's life motto:
"if I had the choice between world peace and a Prada handbag, I'd choose the latter one" Marian Keyes.
anneboleyn

Warned
Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 368

Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 3170





Ignore
« Reply #679 on: January 29, 2022, 01:57:30 PM »

I agree that everyone should have that privacy, but until we get to that point, I don’t think a select few should be granted it simply because of who they married or what family they were born into.

But I do think his will would be a bit boring, although probably charming.
Logged

“And she will keep coming back to life, over and over again, because beneath the skin of this gentle human lives a warrior unstoppable.” - Annabelle M. Ramos
Celia

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 866

Offline Offline

Posts: 3558





Ignore
« Reply #680 on: January 29, 2022, 03:51:36 PM »

I think that wills should always be private to the public, only those who are included and involved should get information. What I do with my private assests, belongings and such should be my very private and personal information just like health information and private person's financial aspects.
Just like any other civil-servant Royals should be given a salary that is completely theirs. And then there should be moneys allocated (like in any other company) for expanses such as housing, employees and such. And those expanses should be as public as they are in any other coperation eg. comparable e.g. with a ministry, the office of the prime minister etc...
I think it is completely ridiculous to give the queen one big pot out of which she is supposed to pay everything and the busfare. I can imagine that eventually a much more business like approach could be used: the office of the queen and the private person behind it. Like with ministers and presidents.

But the queen *does* have two income streams:  public expenses - Civil List; private expenses - duchy of Lancaster and inherited funds.

Her father was relatively poor, as he never had the duchy of Cornwall income, and he was king for only 15 years (duchy of Lancaster).  He also had to pay off his brother by buying Balmoral and Sandringham from him.  Royal dukes used to get 50k pounds a year from Parliament through the Civil List, so GVI might have saved some from there.  Do we know what arrangement the Edinburghs had in the less than five years of marriage pre-accession?
Logged
ralf103

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1397

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3855





Ignore
« Reply #681 on: January 29, 2022, 04:27:38 PM »

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.
Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

I think is the pain point - do people really want royal wills made public or is that just because everyone else's has to be public and don't have the option of making it private. Personally I don't think anyones will should be public so don't see why Philip's should be, but I understand people will feel it is unfair for his to be private while theirs can't be.

Truly, personally, I think Philip's will would be pretty boring. I suspect most things will have been left in Trust long ago - he was 99 years old and the Queen Mother put nearly all her assets in trust long before her death and Princess Margaret did the same giving her Mustique home to her son long enough before she died for it to qualify for the 7 year rule.

I suspect, as a very unmaterialistic man Philip would have been more likely to include bequests to staff, dividing up his library and other sentimental items such as horses, carriages etc than a long list of financial bequests.

Honestly, I can't see how Philip made millions out of his Civil List allowance. At very most he may have done so in the early days but really for years it was frozen at £359,000 a year. The Queen Mother was heavily in debt with almost £200,000 more than that.

Over 70 years and with minimal expenses he would have accumulated millions.... his wife paid for everything.... houses security and food.... probably clothes too ....

I would suggest personally that the fact his Civil list allowance was frozen at the same amount for decades suggests it was by no means what he relied upon for most of his personal expenditure.
Logged
Cordelia Fitzgerald

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 547

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2286





Ignore
« Reply #682 on: January 29, 2022, 04:32:45 PM »

I wonder if the Guardian is going to be happy with either of two outcomes.
If the will IS published, mission accomplished, obviously.

If the will is NOT published, it very publicly points up yet another privilege given to a select few - and at a time when not a lot is going well for the monarchy in the PR department, this can be yet another thing that chips away at their approval.

I'm curious about what's in it, but I'm mostly of the mindset that either ALL are public or NONE are public.  Just because a deceased person isn't royal doesn't mean that people can't be embarrassed or even devastated by the contents of a will being made public.  Many, many families have skeletons in their closet, and I think they're just as worthy of privacy - or, I think that Phillip, the Queen Mother, etc. are no more worthy of privacy.

But this is not a time when the Royal Family needs to keep playing into the "rules for thee, but not for me" narrative.
Logged
Paulina

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1115

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 4695





Ignore
« Reply #683 on: January 29, 2022, 06:04:18 PM »

Always the voice of logic and reason, Cordelia.  Star

Like many here. It’s why RD is so good.
Logged

The problem with incompetent, corrupt, fascist government is incompetence, corruption and fascism,  not government (Jerome à Paris - paraphrased)
perdie

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 1171

Offline Offline

Posts: 2048





Ignore
« Reply #684 on: January 29, 2022, 06:14:02 PM »

I wonder if the Guardian is going to be happy with either of two outcomes.
If the will IS published, mission accomplished, obviously.

If the will is NOT published, it very publicly points up yet another privilege given to a select few - and at a time when not a lot is going well for the monarchy in the PR department, this can be yet another thing that chips away at their approval.

I'm curious about what's in it, but I'm mostly of the mindset that either ALL are public or NONE are public.  Just because a deceased person isn't royal doesn't mean that people can't be embarrassed or even devastated by the contents of a will being made public.  Many, many families have skeletons in their closet, and I think they're just as worthy of privacy - or, I think that Phillip, the Queen Mother, etc. are no more worthy of privacy.

But this is not a time when the Royal Family needs to keep playing into the "rules for thee, but not for me" narrative.

The thing is, it's not just the Royal Family being seen as "rules for thee, but not for me".  The government has been let away with levels of corruption not seen in years, with cronies pocketing billions for shoddy PPE supplies etc, lying to the Queen with Brexit - it's been a few years of thinking "surely they won't get away with this" and seeing them get away with more.  And now, the thing that has truly stuck with the electorate is that the government was setting rules for others and not abiding by them themselves.  That poignant photo of the Queen totally isolated at Philip's funeral has been used over and over again - more so than even at the time - because there were parties in government only the night before (plus it turns out, the Queen was offered the opportunity to relax the rules and have more in attendance as it was only a few weeks to that would be the case but turned it down to be like everyone else).  It's the parallel of "one rule for them, but a different rule for the rest of us" that is most vivid at the moment.
Logged
PruNordstrom

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1111

Offline Offline

Posts: 4665





Ignore
« Reply #685 on: January 30, 2022, 05:09:58 AM »

How are trusts handled in UK/England?

They are the current popular way to divvy up possessions and assets after death in the US. You don't have to be rich to use one. Can't recall any relatives using a will to distribute their assets in the last 20 years - always a trust or assets distributed before death. Yes, the IRS wants their portion of taxes from the recipient but it is a private matter. A will could become public  if someone contested it - and was willing to foot the cost of doing so in court. Settlements are generally made before that happens. There are public and/or published records of real property (house, land) sold, possessions auctioned (furniture, art, clothing, etc.), transfer of ownership in businesses for those that used that method. Then the public knows, otherwise not,  unless a person divulges private transactions. (And, that happens. Whether inadvertently or purposely.)
Logged

The only thing most people do better than anyone else is read their own handwriting.
Lady G

Large Member
******

Reputation: 725

Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1506





Ignore
« Reply #686 on: January 30, 2022, 03:24:02 PM »

I thought Civil List money was for carrying out duties - so technically there shouldn't be an ability to save money from it for your own personal use. If you didn't spend it all on royal duties, surely it should be reimbursed or the following year's allocation cut?
Logged

"Cowards falter, but danger is often overcome by those who nobly dare."
Celia

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 866

Offline Offline

Posts: 3558





Ignore
« Reply #687 on: January 30, 2022, 04:05:50 PM »

Nah, you could still save from it.  I think the queen had a bit saved up at one point.  The government would set the amount for a number of years.  It wasn't "use it or lose it."
Logged
Oh_Caroline

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1366

Offline Offline

Posts: 5418





Ignore
« Reply #688 on: January 30, 2022, 04:28:45 PM »

I thought Civil List money was for carrying out duties - so technically there shouldn't be an ability to save money from it for your own personal use. If you didn't spend it all on royal duties, surely it should be reimbursed or the following year's allocation cut?

Whatever wasn’t used on official stuff was subject to income tax.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 44 45 [46]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: