The British monarchy, an institution steeped in tradition and privilege, is facing unprecedented scrutiny. With King Charles III becoming the first billionaire monarch in British history, questions about royal finances, inheritance tax, and the use of public funds are more pressing than ever. But here's where it gets controversial: while the monarchy enjoys immense wealth and tax exemptions, the public remains largely in the dark about the extent of their financial dealings. And this is the part most people miss: the intricate web of legal protections and institutional secrecy that shields the royal family from financial accountability.
In the wake of the Prince Andrew scandal, public trust in the monarchy has been further eroded, prompting a three-part BBC documentary series, What’s the Monarchy For?, hosted by veteran broadcaster David Dimbleby. The series attempts to address growing public skepticism, but it falls short of delivering a comprehensive critique. While Dimbleby, part of a broadcasting dynasty that has long been intertwined with royal coverage, raises important questions, the documentary often skirts around the most contentious issues.
One of the most glaring omissions is the monarchy’s tax status. Unlike ordinary citizens, the royal family is exempt from inheritance tax, and their income tax payments are entirely voluntary. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, vast medieval estates held by the monarch and the Prince of Wales, respectively, are also shielded from corporation and capital gains tax. These estates generate profits of up to £25 million annually, yet their financial operations remain shrouded in secrecy. A 2005 Parliamentary Committee investigation into these anomalies failed to hold the monarchy accountable, leaving many to wonder: Why are the royals allowed to operate under a different set of financial rules?
The documentary also fails to delve into the monarchy’s property holdings, which include vast tracts of land, industrial estates, and even iconic locations like the Oval cricket ground. Recent investigations by Channel 4 and The Times revealed that these estates charge commercial rates to public institutions like the NHS, further blurring the line between public and private interests. Is it fair for the monarchy to profit from public resources while remaining unaccountable to the public?
Another contentious issue is the secrecy surrounding royal wills. Since 1910, the wills of the monarch and their family members have been protected by an act of parliament, shielding sensitive financial arrangements from public scrutiny. In 2021, the High Court ruled that Prince Philip’s will would remain sealed for 90 years, raising questions about transparency and accountability. Should the royal family be exempt from the same rules that apply to everyone else?
The BBC’s reluctance to push for answers is particularly striking when it comes to political figures. David Cameron’s government tightened royal secrecy by removing the right to file Freedom of Information (FOI) requests about royal matters. Yet, Dimbleby fails to press Cameron on this decision, leaving viewers with more questions than answers. Why are politicians so hesitant to challenge the monarchy’s financial privileges?
The documentary also overlooks the growing republican movement, which, though still a minority, is gaining momentum among younger generations. While 81% of over-65s support the monarchy, only 41% of 18-24-year-olds feel the same way. This generational divide highlights a shifting public mood, yet the BBC seems more interested in maintaining the status quo than exploring alternatives.
But here’s the real question: Can the monarchy survive in its current form without meaningful reform? As historian Rutger Bregman argues in the BBC’s Reith Lecture series, we are living in a “Time of Monsters”—an era dominated by the super-rich. The monarchy, with its untaxed wealth and political influence, is increasingly out of step with the values of a modern, democratic society. Is it time for a moral revolution, one that demands greater transparency and accountability from our institutions?
The BBC’s series, while informative, ultimately fails to challenge the establishment. It leaves us with more questions than answers, inviting viewers to draw their own conclusions. What do you think? Is the monarchy still relevant in the 21st century, or is it an outdated relic of a bygone era? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
What's the Monarchy For? airs Tuesdays at 9 PM on BBC One and BBC iPlayer. For those interested in delving deeper into royal history, Tessa Dunlop’s book Elizabeth & Philip: A Story of Young Love, Marriage, and Monarchy offers a fascinating glimpse into the personal lives of the royals.
