Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Queen avoids taxes on mother's estate - special provision for the reigning sovereign - $73 MIL
Associated Press ^ | May 8, 2002 | Associated Press Staff

Posted on 05/08/2002 1:53:40 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP


Queen avoids taxes on mother's estate

Under 1993 accord, $73 million inheritance exempt from 40% levy

05/08/2002

Associated Press

LONDON - Queen Elizabeth II will pay no inheritance tax on her late mother's estate, Buckingham Palace said Tuesday, a collection that included race horses, jewels and art worth an estimated $73 million.

Inheritance tax on such an estate would normally be 40 percent. But under a 1993 accord, assets passed from sovereign to sovereign or from the consort of a former sovereign to the reigning monarch are exempt.

Commentators say the lack of controversy over the tax saving shows that the queen is enjoying a resurgence in popularity during her Golden Jubilee year.

The Queen Mother Elizabeth, who died March 30 at age 101, lived in lavish style in a fine London house, a large lodge at Windsor Castle, a country retreat and her own castle in northern Scotland. The queen mother was the consort of King George VI.

According to The Sunday Telegraph and The Guardian newspapers, the queen mother amassed $73 million in jewels, art and race horses. Buckingham Palace called the figure "speculative."

The 1993 arrangement with the Conservative goverment of the time was set out in a public document when the monarch first volunteered to pay income tax.

Buckingham Palace said Tuesday that the sovereign was exempt from inheritance tax as he or she needed an "appropriate degree of financial independence" from the government and because a king or queen was unable to "generate significant new wealth through earnings or business activities."

A spokeswoman said, however, that others who inherit assets from the queen mother would pay tax. Details of the queen mother's will have yet to be announced.


Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/world/stories/050802dnintnuroyal.72b3.html


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: deathtax; monarchy; queenelizabethii; queenmother
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: MeeknMing
Buckingham Palace said Tuesday that the sovereign was exempt from inheritance tax as he or she needed an "appropriate degree of financial independence" from the government and because a king or queen was unable to "generate significant new wealth through earnings or business activities."

Wouldn't it be nice if EVERYONE were afforded the right to an "'appropriate degree of financial independence' from the government," especially when he is, for ANY reason "unable to 'generate significant new wealth.'"

21 posted on 05/08/2002 2:48:34 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrDavid
But the Queen is only the head of state. The Prime Minister is the head of the government. A subtle, but important distinction as her position is entirely ceremonial now, much like the Vice President.

In any case, her taxes would go to the Exchequer, just like Tony Blair's do. The Queen can't just walk over to the Treasury and grab a pocketful of tenners whenever she feels the urge to go and grab a pint.

22 posted on 05/08/2002 2:53:00 PM PDT by Slainte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FryingPan101
:O)
23 posted on 05/08/2002 5:02:07 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Does this mean that all the Queens in San Francisco are tax exempt to?

Well, I guess that's one good reason to be gay huh? *LOL*

24 posted on 05/08/2002 5:05:32 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
BTW...on a serious note. HOW can someone 'rule' over a country, where laws are imposed on subjects, that the sovereignty are exempt from, because they are in-bred, German, bastards.

Ooops did I say that?

Just smacks of hypocrisy to me. My answer? Get rid of goddamn inheritance tax for everyone. Why should the Queen benefit from gazillions left to her by her old Ma, who never had to take a mortgage in her life anyways. While those who slaved their lives away can't legitimately leave their children (who are probably slaving to put grandchildren through college!!), a house or an asset without having to hand it over to Government.

Something stinks in the state of Britain.

It's a load of bollix...(now THAT's an Irish phrase) :-)

25 posted on 05/08/2002 5:12:57 PM PDT by Happygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness;dan from michigan
,,, Gael-Mheiriceánach croitheadh.

Once a king, always a king. Once a (k)night is enough. Escaping death duties on an estate is a great way to cushion the grief. Don't delay - apply to be a royal now!!!

26 posted on 05/08/2002 5:28:51 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Commentators say the lack of controversy over the tax saving shows that the queen is enjoying a resurgence in popularity during her Golden Jubilee year.

I don't understand some of these Brit liberals....they **tch and complain all day about the National Health Service, the never-on-time trains, illegal immigrants sponging off the government, etc.

Yet, they don't give a **** that HM is exempt from a hefty tax that they (the peons) are subject to.

Granted, I am not at all for the socialist state, but if I have to ante up my hard-earned dollars for public services, I expect the monarchial leeches to give up their share as well!

27 posted on 05/08/2002 5:42:12 PM PDT by HennepinPrisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
ping
28 posted on 05/08/2002 5:57:09 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Slainte; B-Chan
I realize the Queen isn't a supreme monarch. However, from what I understand, the Queen still have a veto over decisions made by her government. This veto power has never (or rarely) been used.

She is also paid a stipend by the exchequer. Yet in some sense as Queen she "owns" the government. I'm not exactly sure how to word it but this is as close as I can get. I suppose it is part of the evolution of the monarchy from totalitarian rulers to national treasure.

29 posted on 05/08/2002 8:34:04 PM PDT by DrDavid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
I think Hillary is a different type of Queen.

Not to be confused with the 80's rock group

30 posted on 05/08/2002 8:35:57 PM PDT by DrDavid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Don't delay - apply to be a royal now!!!

Bwahaha. My bloodlines are incapable of anything royal outside of being a pain in the royal ass(to wannabe royals like Klinton).

31 posted on 05/08/2002 10:08:52 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
It's a load of bollix...(now THAT's an Irish phrase) :-)

By, golly, I think she's got it! :O)

32 posted on 05/09/2002 3:32:00 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson