Revealed: King Charles secretly profiting from the assets of dead Brits

The Guardian ^ | Nov 23 | Maeve McClenaghan, Rob Evans and Henry Dyer

[MeganC]

You’re welcome. We have a trust and an advantage is there is no probate or estate tax when a member of the trust passes away.

[Larry Lucido]

Exactly.

[joshua c]

king charles the turd

[fuzzylogic]

Yes, this guy is the lefty you probably think he is. Surprise...instead of being generous with out peoples money, this one is actually TAKING the money the is for charity and using it to enrich himself.

He is an arrogant king and a shadow of his mother.

[null and void]

I had no idea they had this arrangement where they assume assets of those who die without a will or next of kin.

In the good ol' USA, if you die without a will (intestate) and no easily located next of kin, your property goes to (escheats) to the state.

[Quentin Quarantino]

If Charles is doing it, the Queen did it.

If I went on state health care, the state would assume on my assets when I die.

Same difference.

Governments gather gold, that’s what they do.

[lee martell]

We don’t know if Queen Elizabeth had the same arrangements.
A government with a still active monarchy will seek methods to quietly and graciously fleece the economy so as to maintain this monarchy at royally high standards of living.

[bert]

Journo riff raff muckraking for a living

[hanamizu]

“...A leaked internal duchy policy from 2020 gave officials...”

---

Doesn’t this mean the money was going to her, since she was quite alive in 2020?

[cgbg]

“I don’t see a problem with this.”

I would not have a problem if the royal family were hung in the town square—but to each his own....

;-)

[AnAmericanMother]

Yes we do - QEII had the exact same arrangement - so did George VI - and V - and Edward VII - and Victoria - and so on. Escheat goes back to the early Common Law, and wrt the Duchy to the 14th century. As the direct holder of the duchy, the property of intestates w/ no heirs reverts to the original holder, the monarch.

The exact same thing is the law in almost every state of the USA. Don't know about Louisiana because their law is weird, but unless escheat has been abolished in the state constitution, it's still the law. Usually here there's a "grace period" to reclaim the property if an heir shows up.

[ridesthemiles]

IF there is NO WILL-THERE IS ZERO TO PROBATE.

I have tried for years to get people I know to write even a simple will...but for a variety of reasons-—I cannot make headway.

My “MOTHER” left a will, but it was so vague that my brother who was named Executor scooped up most of it all for himself.

I WILL NEVER FORGIVE HIM

[nutmeg]

bookmark

[ridesthemiles]

IF you actually write a will—you do NOT have to have ‘heirs”.

Many single people with NO kids can leave their assets to WHOMEVER they please.

BUT they have to put it in writing. Should also name an executor.

[Mean Daddy]

By not having a will or a trust, you’re inviting the State into your financial and family business. We set up in our will that if anything were to happen to my wife and I, our estate and kids would go to my sister and BIL. Since they both are professionals, the likelihood of the State deciding different is minimized. Without the will, the State would decide what’s “best” for our assets and kids.

[ridesthemiles]

FUNNY HOW THE WORD CHEAT is inside the other word-——

[lastchance]

I think the problem is that the monies (after costs) was supposedly going to charities but instead is used to make more profit for Charles.

[Vermont Lt]

I wonder if most people know what happens to money in abandoned accounts in the US?

It’s held by the state. Until someone comes for it.

[BipolarBob]

Not all of it but I know where 10% of it goes to.

[Varda]

IMO there’s a big difference between abandoned assets confiscated by local/state elected governments and a monarchy.
Thank God for the American revolution.