• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151 year ago

    No it’s not though because they don’t own the crown estates, the public own that and give them a portion of the earnings.

    Everything they have comes from us, they didn’t earn any of it, it’s all just stolen wealth and unitaxed inheritance.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      No in the rather odd example you invent.mit would be paid for by the company owning the car. And if that money is given to you. It would be classed as your wages.

      But the point is. It would not be considered to come from the tax payer.

      Because any minimal research into the Crown estates makes it clear. They are not in any way shape or form. Owned by the tax payer. Nor have they ever been.

      At all poi ts in history the Crown has kept its own income separate from national income. (Ie taxes).

      When the us revolution happened the king funded it. And went bankrupt.

      Because unlike now. The Crown funded war. Not parliment then. So the king made a deal. All income from the Crown estates. Was to go to parliment. In exchange for the royal grant.

      Parliment knew at the time that long term this would be a huge benifit. Now it is.

      It is freaking petty and wrong to claim it is tax payer money. It is basically they Crown paying less then 100% tax on there company earnings.

      • Skua
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        I assume this was meant to be a reply to my comment. I’m not sure what’s odd about the example, and it’s hardly strange to “invent” an analogy. A party has control of an asset via the position they hold, they sell the rights to use and profit from that asset to a second party in exchange for financial compensation. That’s the deal. The monarch doesn’t have the rights to the profits of the Estate because the Treasury has the rights to it under the existing legislation.

        The Estate was established 16 years before the American revolution with the Civil List Act 1760. That the monarch used to fund wars is entirely irrelevant to who has the rights now.

        The Estate is also explicitly not the monarch’s private property. It’s a perk of the most overpaid and intentionally nepotistic civil service position in the country. Far from petty, I’d say it’s only right to question that

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11 year ago

      The Crown owns the Crown estates. It was never tax payer funded. The Crown has kept its income separate from the national income all through history.

      As for tax free. Since the US revolution. The Crown has given the income to the government. Somits pretty much a 75% tax rate for most of that time. Def higher then engine else was paying at the time.

      Simple research into the history of the Crown estates makes it clear it dosenot in any way shape or form belong to the tax payer.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        The Crown owns the Crown estates. It was never tax payer funded

        The state (aka us) owns the crown, the crown is not owned by the monarch.

        As for tax free. Since the US revolution. The Crown has given the income to the government.

        You mean our assets have paid money to the monarchy as part of a centuries old deal to pay for the last Charlie boys debts. Fuck that, I don’t see we have to keep one family in a state of perpetual luxury because of that.

        Simple research into the history of the Crown estates makes it clear it dosenot in any way shape or form belong to the tax payer.

        No, simple research shows that it does in fact belong to us. I’d love to see your source mate.

        Can Charlie sell any of it? Can he put it in his will? Can he even make renovations? No, well he doesn’t own it does he.