Some Freeper awhile ago said that the monarchy brings in more money due to tourism than it spends. I have no idea if that is true, but it could be.
The monarchy reminds me of a music critic’s statement about the music of Emerson, Lake and Palmer.
.
.
“More pomp than circumstance”.
I have seen Brits claim that the taxes on the trinkets and general tourism associated with the Royal Family bring into the UK Treasury something like 4X the total expenditures paid to keep up the Royal Family and their properties.
If true, I can see why they stick with their Constitutional Monanarchy.
“Some Freeper awhile ago said that the monarchy brings in more money due to tourism than it spends. “
King Charles III surrendered the Crown Estate in exchange for an annual stipend funded from the profits of the estate.
The estate is worth about $15 billion.
Reference Sovereign Grant
Most of the personal income into the household is through the Royal properties. There are extensive farming lands leased out. The tourism you mentioned would be similar I think. Also, the islands of Jersey and Guernsey off of France in the English Channel and I think Isle of Man in the Irish Sea are royal protectorates completely separate from Great Briton.
As I understand it, the several places in London are used for State functions so costs for operation and maintenance are shared by the government. In addition, when royals are engaged in anything thing government related, the royals are essentially on a government expense account so to speak.
Feel free to correct anything where you have better information than I.
Like hell, their concerts were great!