Oh, so Prince Charles really did give the Sussexes money in the spring of 2020

The Prince Of Wales And The Duchess Of Cornwall Host Reception For The Elephant Family Animal Ball

As we discussed, Buckingham Palace and Clarence House released some information about their Sovereign Grant expenditures and Duchy of Cornwall expenditures. Which is how we learned that Prince Charles spent £4.4million last spring/summer to “support” both of his sons. Clarence House refused to itemize who got what and when, which is telling in and of itself. But what about Prince Harry’s narrative that his father cut him off financially? That was a big point in the Oprah interview, which led to Harry and Meghan briefly discussing their business deals since moving to America. Charles has been seething about Harry’s “cut me off financially” comment for months and he’s been itching to release his receipts. Curious then that he didn’t get more specific about what money went to which son, right? In any case, there was some confusion, and I admit it, I was confused. I thought every country counted “first quarter” of the year as January-March. Not so in the UK, where “first quarter” is April-June. Katie Nicholl had more at Vanity Fair:

The royal expenditure reports published Thursday reveal that, in the fiscal year beginning of April 2020, he provided both Harry and Prince William’s families with £4.5 million. The report does not break down how much money went to each prince, but a spokesman for Charles at Clarence House clarified that the Prince of Wales had allotted “a substantial sum” to support Harry and Meghan as they transitioned out of their royal roles. “That funding ceased in the summer of last year,” the spokesperson continued. “The couple are now financially independent.” When asked about the remarks Harry made to Winfrey about being financially cut off, the spokesperson said, “I wouldn’t acknowledge that they are dramatically different. All I can tell you are the facts.”

A spokesperson for the Sussexes insists, however, that there is no contradiction in what Harry told Winfrey. “You are conflating two different timelines and it’s inaccurate to suggest that there’s a contradiction,” the representative said. “The Duke’s comments during the Oprah interview were in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in the U.K., which starts annually in April. This is the same date that the ‘transitional year’ of the Sandringham agreement began and is aligned with the timeline that Clarence House referenced.”

[From Vanity Fair]

I’m including the relevant clip of the Oprah interview below, which Omid Scobie tweeted out. I assume Scobie – like Katie Nicholl – got a call from the Sussex spokesperson clarifying what the “first quarter” meant when Harry said it to Oprah. Yeah. As an American, I definitely did not get that he meant April-June. I thought he was saying Charles cut him off financially at the end of March 2020. But the end of March/early April sounds like when the Sussexes’ royal protection was removed. Charles must have cut them a check around the same time to “help with the transition” in the hopes of eventually bleeding them dry financially when it came to paying for their own security.

oprah harry1

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, CBS.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

96 Responses to “Oh, so Prince Charles really did give the Sussexes money in the spring of 2020”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    If it’s any consolation, no-one who comments over at the Guardian believes this attempt at obfuscation. They – we – see this egregious smear atrempt and treat it with contempt. There are so many in the UK who are firmly on H&M’s side and fully support and admire them.

    • swirlmamad says:

      It is heartening to hear this, even as they try to gaslight us every day that Harry and Meghan are the most hated people in the UK. Charles, William and their cronies are contemptible.

    • Sofia says:

      As someone who lives in England, I co-sign this.

    • taris says:

      it only takes a little critical thinking to dismantle most of the trash that comes from the tabloids. it is rather concerning, though, when the broadsheets start mimicking the tabloids for clicks.

      if harry received a substantial sum from charles last year, i’m certain it would have been spelled out in bold print in yesterday’s docs + if the sussexes were loaded when they left the UK, they wouldn’t have had to rely on the kindness of a stranger for accommodation and security. anyway, even the CH spokesperson did say the timelines given by charles and harry “weren’t dramatically different” – there’s no story here, and it’s annoying that some people are trying very hard to make it so.

      i do think h&m have support in the UK (esp among young people and minorities); it’s just that these aren’t the demographics that are in charge of the media, so…
      the royalists know this, hence the increasingly unhinged attacks on the sussexes.

      • HannahB says:

        Agree with all of this.

        Also, even the US federal government operates on a Fiscal Year schedule, which starts October 1st of each year, rather than a Calendar Year schedule.

  2. Amy Bee says:

    In India and Japan, the financial year also starts in April. I’m sure there are other countries that do the same thing. I just want a breakdown of the funding for both couples. I said it yesterday, William and Kate gave away £1.9 million to charities for COVID relief in July/August 2020. Did that money come from the funding that was supposed to go to Harry and Meghan? Another thing, the money given to Harry and Meghan was supposed to come out of Charles private funds so why is it being reported in the Duchy report?

    • swirlmamad says:

      We won’t get any detail about the specific breakdown of how the money was allotted to each brother, because the discrepancy will be crystal clear.

      • Becks1 says:

        And my guess is that was the case even when H&M were working royals. Remember they told Meghan they couldn’t “afford” her! How many bespoke button dresses does Kate have?

      • Exactly, SWIRLMAMAD. Charles and his PR team have been frothing at the mouth to release specifics. So, why not release it here? Why not shut it down with facts and figures in this report? I’m thinking it’s because the breakdown would show how very little Charles provided for the Sussexes. You can make numbers lie, especially, if you leave out the breakdown or don’t present them at all. Instead —- by publishing something vague — the 🐀Royals and the 🐀Rota can continue to spin this BS out ad naseum.

      • Huh says:

        But isn’t that appropriate where one family is slated to fit into a very particular role in a constitutional monarchy and the other simply isn’t but never was? Harry seems rather entitled, and dishonest.

    • Seaflower says:

      In Australia it starts in July.

    • Mac says:

      The Duchy is the source of Charles’ private funds.

    • Haapa says:

      I am Canadian and we do here as well. In fact, I thought the US did too? Isn’t that why you file your income tax in April, because the fiscal year ends March 31?

      • Tiffany :) says:

        No, you file individual taxes in April for the period ending December 31st. They give you 3 1/2 months to put your numbers in order before filing. That’s for individual returns.

        For Corps/partnerships/etc, they can also have a calendar year fiscal year set up, but you can also have your fiscal years be set for a different date. It’s flexible.

  3. Truthiness says:

    At my work, the fiscal year starts in April, it is very common.

    • Lozface says:

      In Australia, our financial year is July to June. So Q1 is July to Sept. it works well so EOFY isn’t at the Christmas/New Year period.

      Although I used to work at one of our big banks and our bank financial year was Oct to Sept.

  4. LaraW” says:

    Put your money where your mouth is, Charles. Give us totals, terms and conditions because you better believe that money came with strings attached.

    If it didn’t go towards security, Tyler Perry flew them out on the private plane and allowed them to stay at their house— was it money to cover the cost of the place they rented in Canada? Or was it, as someone else suggested yesterday, money to cover the cost of administrative things re H&M’s staff or offices?

    ETA- Found the quote from ABritGuest:
    My guess is that Charles provided one off sum for winding down their office& charity including payments to lay off staff, legal & administration fees (eg wasnt Clarence House still handling their mail?).

    ETA 2: There’s that word “allotted” again coming the Charles. I mean, I can allot a substantial sum to buy a bakery. Doesn’t mean I actually bought it.

    • Cecilia says:

      Im confused over this as the accounts of the duchy of corwall published in 2020 clearly state that charles paid for the sussexes until 31 march 2020. So how did he give them a substantial sum in april? Charles is the one contradicting himself here.

      • LaraW” says:

        They are being so very careful with their language. “Allocated,” “allotted,” when they could have said “provided,” or the very clear and unambiguous “paid for.” Nor does CH state the funds that were alloted were provided in full.

        Pro-tip, dear Charles: don’t release “receipts” that contain no details. You’re just inviting more scrutiny. Put up or shut up, beloved Never Complain Never Explain. You can’t do a half-in-half-out here.

    • Myra says:

      The thing is he still cut them off financially without ensuring they had a home or security. His son and grandson’s lives were at risk and that man gave zero f*cks. And if the amount was that substantial, you bet he would have published it.

      • betsyh says:

        Exactly Myra.

      • Sunday says:

        You’re exactly right, and there is a glaring omission in all this talk about precisely when Harry and Meghan were cut off: Meghan had a miscarriage around the summer of that year, i.e. during this exact timeline. The stress and fear caused by this are 100% to blame for the loss of their child. That’s what Meghan and Harry mean when they say that “so much has been lost already.” It’s not just Meghan’s relationship with her father, it’s the baby she and Harry lost, too.

        And if that weren’t bad enough, I am curious at to whether it’s possible they were cut off before the agreed upon transition period ended because the family KNEW she was pregnant and they thought that this was another opportunity to leverage them into coming back? That has been Charles’ MO so far – he thought that by cutting off escape routes and options he’d be able to keep them under his thumb, and we saw how the smear campaign ramped up while she was pregnant with Archie, so I don’t think it’s beyond the realm of possibility that her being pregnant a second time kicked it up another notch, only that time they succeeded in causing the miscarriage they intended to with Archie. It’s just awful.

    • Christine says:

      It is going to be fascinating to watch this play out. Everyone speaking for the royal family is reacting in a bubble where they are as they always have been, and get propped up by the crown, the press, and the British people.

      They have never had to deal with a person who has truly broken away from the institution, who is fully financially independent AND geographically independent, their last go at this was Edward and Wallis Simpson, and the British taxpayers paid for the both of them for the rest of their lives. They can’t quite seem to figure out that no matter what they say in the press, the only thing Harry and Meghan need is an honest apology from their family, and changes going forward to ensure that it never happens again. It’s not that hard. They don’t need money, they need basic human decency.

  5. Lala11_7 says:

    Charles could have drank his tea & shut the “f” up…He was WRONG as a Father…leader of his family & wrong as the future King of England in how he handled EVERYTHING after H&M got married…but instead of taking that well deserved “L” he ONCE AGAIN has proven that you CAN’T teach a trifling ass old dog…new tricks!

  6. PEARL GREY says:

    The relentless effort to prove Harry and Meghan as liars is so insidious. They will deliberately misinterpret everything to fit their narrative because they know the damage caused by what was told in the interview was immense, and most people don’t care to understand and would rather react to click bait headlines. The timings match what was told in the interview. It is clear that Harry received no further financial assistance from his father after his move to America, hence their need to quickly ink deals with Netflix and Spotify so they could afford their home and security, which was also abruptly pulled. If Charles gave a sum of money, it wasn’t anywhere near what they would need to get on their feet, which is housing and protection for their family in the first year of their major transition in the middle of a global pandemic. Will they reveal the amount that was given, since the press are so eager to frame this as their “gotcha!” moment if the week?

    • Amy Bee says:

      Harry received no money for security or housing so what exactly did Charles pay for? This needs to be answered but the press is not going question Charles on that.

      • Mich says:

        He likely paid for travel and security around their final ‘official’ engagements during the Commonwealth events.

  7. My3cents says:

    I’m guessing out of the 4.5 mil helicopter rides and buttons the Sussex’s got a 20$ Starbucks card and good luck in America , see you around.

  8. Lauren says:

    And these were the receipts that Chuck wanted to use to prove that he helped his son financially beyond what Harry said? Or Chuck didn’t understand what Harry said or he does get that his receipts confirm Harry’s statement that his father is an a-hole.

  9. Lili says:

    I think regardless of if he got 1/2 of the 4.5 million, I don’t think that would have been enough, when you think that for how they live when inside the bubble there were expenses they didn’t have to take care of , house , travel security. At the time estimates for security were sky high and more than the 2 million they may have received.
    Luckily they landed on their feet

  10. Sofia says:

    He does say “in the first half, the first quarter of 2020” so he does say first half and that first quarter of 2020 is most likely referring to the first quarter of the fiscal year which is April/May/June.

    If Charles did give them anymore money after that, he would have said so immediately after the interview aired. He went to the times to shut the “Archie and Lili won’t have titles” pretty fast.

  11. Becks1 says:

    So its clear that the security was pulled at the end of March 2020, right? And that’s why Tyler Perry sent his plane and let them live at his house with his security team in place. that would make sense because the security would probably be up to a different entity than Charles.

    But its also clear that whatever help Charles was giving them was not enough to pay for their own security and without that 4.4 million being itemized, we don’t really know. Remember that Charles had COVID in April and so did William, pulling Harry’s funding may not have been his #1 priority (but he got around to it).

    Regardless it seems that he did “cut Harry off” pretty abruptly at whatever point and that’s when they got deals with Netflix and Spotify. That tells me that Charles was supposed to support them for longer than he did. I wonder if he got ticked about them being in California?

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Becks: It’s clear that Charles reneged on their agreement.

    • Liz says:

      Wouldn’t you just love to know what Tyler Perry knows about how badly Charles and the BRF treated H & M? TP seems like a genuinely good human and I bet he’s disgusted by someone being able to treat their son/brother/grandchild the way the Sussexes were treated.

      • BlueToile says:

        Agreed. I honestly didn’t know exactly who Tyler Perry was prior to all this, but have total respect for him to respond so generously and quickly when H&M needed help, pronto. That was a significant marshalling of resources to stay just ahead of Covid lockdowns. He seems like a true friend and I now understand he is equally kind to many others.

    • Emile says:

      Yes, and I think this is what the whole “one-year review” thing was actually about — in their Sandringham agreement Charles was probably supposed to fund them for one whole year (start April 2020 till end March 2021) to help them transition into their new lives, but instead ended their funding sometime during that first quarter (April-June) hence Harry’s language that they had been “cut off”.

      • My Two Cents says:

        Yes Emile, I think so too from reading on Twitter, it seams the original agreement was that Charles would support them for one year to let them settle in. That’s why Harry uses the expression ‘cut-off’, because he was cut off after 3 months! This would be end of June and they announced the Netflix deal in September. During those months they lived off his mother’s money, that’s my understanding. Though I admit they don’t make it very easy to understand!

        Charles’ talking point is that, see? i didn’t cut Harry off… but we know that he did.

      • My Two Cents says:

        *seems – duh!

  12. Eurydice says:

    The fiscal year for the US government is Oct 1through Sep 30. But the taxable year for individuals is Jan through Dec.

    • Chip says:

      The fiscal year at my org is July 1- June 30. I had no idea it varied so much in the US. I work in education.

  13. Jay says:

    As someone noted yesterday, there is a difference between “allocating” money in a budget and that money being spent. This latest report doesn’t clarify or prove anything, especially because it’s not clear which funds went to the Sussexes and which went to the Cambridges.
    My hunch is that if Charles could produce proof that he has been secretly bankrolling Harry and Meghan, he would, but he can’t. They would love to shock the papers with details about Meghan’s “Hollywood” spending habits, if only to distract from those odd weekly helicopter trips by *someone*in the royal family during lockdown.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yup, if Charles could say “I spent a million on them between April and July 2020, here are bank statements” he would have done that LONG ago.

    • swirlmamad says:

      Exactly. As someone who, like Meghan, keeps receipts for EVERYTHING, if he could provide specific and hard proof that he did not cut them off when Harry said he did, he would have done it LONG ago. There’s nothing better and more satisfying than being able to prove someone wrong who is trying to accuse you of something you didn’t do — because of my own receipt-keeping I’ve been able to do this multiple times in my life and I know for a fact that when you’ve got the proof, you’re going pull it out with a quickness, not hold on to it and hem, haw and beat around the bush. Try again, Chucky.

    • Excellent analysis Jay. You nailed it. But, as always, this sort of vague ‘fact’ will provide weeks of click bait headlines from the media. So, I’m sure Charles will see that as a win against his son. With a family like this, who needs enemies?

      • Marivic says:

        This is why Charles is leaving town during Prince Harry’s visit. He’s afraid to face his son because he knows he’s lied again.

  14. Alexandria says:

    Hey Chuck, itemize!

    Oh and yes you’re a very bad father, leader, son and husband. You look sick already.

  15. ABritGuest says:

    I saw H&M fans tweeting that interview clip where Harry said he was cut off in the first half, first quarter when the Express story broke & even before their press team responded on Wednesday night way before Omid’s tweet. So doubt H&M ‘s team told him to post that-Lots of royal reporters get stuff from fans on SM.

    The CH spokesperson basically said Harry’s timeline was correct & whilst Charles claims it was a substantial sum- the vagueness is deliberate & suspect. And whatever was agreed at the Sandringham summit -sounds like Chuck reneged on it which was likely why Harry was left scrambling.

    It is rich people problems & the Sussexes landed on their feet but I find it pretty nasty that on one hand press & members of the royal family can press point that if it hadn’t been for Bashir, Diana would have had RPO & might not have died & on other hand lobbied last year for no Duchy of Cornwall funds to provide funding to Harry & for Charles to perhaps use worry about paying for security to manipulate Harry into returning. Charles of all people should have known issue around security wasn’t something to play with.

  16. L4Frimaire says:

    I saw some tweet that got 1.1 million from Charles but not sure. It’s messy talking about money but it’s like this is a divorce settlements and very rich people problems. At the same time the UK go over everything the Sussexes say with a fine tooth comb and Harry did actually say 1st quarter, not a specific month. We are conflating when they lost their security to when any royal money was stopped, and the press want to make it about the spoiled Sussexes again. Think of it as a Golden parachute you get when leaving a corporation . They do want Charles to look better then he is and the Sussexes are always wrong in their eyes. Well now it’s summer 2021, a whole year later without any royal funding, so what will they do next year when they can’t use them to hide the helicopter expenses?

  17. MsIam says:

    I think that if it were a substantial amount of money we would know it. The fact that Clarence House won’t release the amount and when it was spent is telling. The devil is in the details.

    • ABritGuest says:

      Exactly. There were briefings that Charles had receipts etc so I’m sure they would have showed these to a friendly journalist like Jobson if it helped Charles point.

      The Duchy accounts released last September said that funding for H&M ended March 2020. Charles briefed that he helped with their move to Canada too. I’m inclined to think whatever this sum was tied into the living expenses for Canadian place & then winding down their operations in the UK.

      And L4Frimaire I suspect the palace is trying to arrange for bullying review to be held back until next financial report. I think I saw that it was meant to be discussed in this years (I guess alongside stats on diversity) until Meghan’s lawyers reportedly said they wanted breakdown of claims against her.

      • betsyh says:

        Forgive me if I don’t understand you—all this talk of numbers and end of financial years is messing with my brain. So do you think that the bullying findings won’t be presented until next year’s financial report in order to divert attention away from the royal family’s spending? Do you think they are that confident that the results will support their allegations?

    • Alexandria says:

      And these awful creatures have never been good at details unless it’s which cutlery goes next to which at royal banquets.

    • ➕💯 MsIam ➕💯. Charles is notoriously tight with his money. I think he promised to fund them for a year and then absolutely — without warning — reneged on that promise, thus leaving Harry and his family dangerously vulnerable. Harry’s mistake was believing anything that came out of his father’s mouth.

  18. Chelsea says:

    When Harry said that in the interview i was assuming he got cut off in March/April as that seems to have been when the security was removed. Remember how it was revealed in some reporting las summer that Tyler Perry sent a plane wirh security to Canada to take them to California? He has a habit of doing that; he similarly sent his plane to get Bobby Brown when his daughter was sick.

    Does anyone know if CH usually pays out money to the sons at the beginning of the quarter or continually through the quarter? If it was only at the start of the quarter and he was told then that was it even though this was supposed to be a “one year review period” I can see why he was caught offguard. Especially since their security costs millions and it seemed like from the first statements after the Sandrigam Summit that Charles would be privately funding that as well since the threat to Harry exists because Charles decided to have a second son who he knew would need security his entire life. And there is no way that what they gave was enough to covee security, a rental, and downpayment on their house even if they bought a house only a third of the price they bought so i get why he had to use Diana’s money and get help from Tyler.

    Clarence House is being deliberate in not saying exactly when the last check was sent and how much it was for and while i understand Harry’s reasoning for putting this in the public domain as they were being attacked for earning a living by his father’s allies after his father cut him off i think Team Sussex should be the ones to bring into the public domain when exactly was the last check if CH refuses to.

    • HannahB says:

      Absolutely. The Sussexes could disclose what funds were provided to them and when, then let the chips fall where they may – most likely at Chucky’s feet.

      • L4frimaire says:

        They don’t need to, because then why not disclose other money they have? I bet whatever amount it was, it wasn’t enough for a decent 3bd in Los Feliz.

  19. equality says:

    What the haters like to ignore is that Harry’s problems with needing to have top rate security (his rich people problems) is because of being a member of the royal family who had people whipped up against him by the tabloids. Things completely out of his control but that he has to now finance so he either needed family help or the high dollar contracts he now has. He didn’t stress about being cut off out of greed but because of concern for protection. I really don’t understand Charles. If members of my family were in danger I would do whatever I could to help. To not even try is extremely cold.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Yeah, I saw some royalist talking about Harry being 36 and that he should be able to fend for themselves but he was put in a situation where he was made to be dependent on the Royal Family and which makes leaving extremely difficult.

      • MsIam says:

        For a royalist to say that is really dumb. Which royal has their own income that they earned and that wasn’t handed to them or inherited? The “royalists” ought to apply that same standard to the rest of the bunch then.

      • swaz says:

        No one is talking about William being supported. Nobody even cares about the 47 helicopter trips. In America the taxpayers would be all over these helicopter trips.

    • Agree, Equality. However it’s not just that Harry is royal…..He also is a known, high profile target with a bounty on his head due to his military service (while being royal) in the Middle East. His threat risk was and remains high. Harry stated very clearly in the Oprah interview that ALL involved in security being abruptly pulled agreed that nothing had changed concerning the threat risk.

      I’m not even addressing how high risk Meghan and the children have become due the unconscionable actions taken by Harry’s family and the contemptuous 🐀media. I’m sure the Firm just sees their lives as ‘necessary collateral damage’.

    • betsyh says:

      I would add “through the active leaks from his own family” to the end of your first sentence:

      What the haters like to ignore is that Harry’s problems with needing to have top rate security (his rich people problems) is because of being a member of the royal family who had people whipped up against him by the tabloids.

  20. Midge says:

    This was a completely deliberate attempt to make Harry appear to be a liar. I love that Scobie cleared it up. And yes, some itemized receipts please!

  21. Nic919 says:

    How is this even an issue when they do not receive any money now and no one disputes that it stopped mid 2020 at the latest? They should be focusing on the ones spending a million dollars for helicopter rides during travel restrictions and lockdowns. Taxpayers should be outraged that their money is used to fund people who are living a luxurious lifestyle and doing nothing in return for it.

  22. Mina_Esq says:

    It’s not even an American v UK thing. Even in the UK, some large companies align their fiscal year with the calendar year. Unis usually use end of school year as end of their fiscal year. Gun to my head, I wouldn’t have known that the BRF’s fiscal year ends on March 31. Anyway, is Charles expecting a pat on the back for not immediately cutting off his son and son’s family? What a clown.

  23. Catherine says:

    The Sussexes released an official response through their spokesperson. Some outlets and some reporters chose not to make it part of their reporting. I never thought first quarter meant Jan.-Mar. They were still officially working royals until end of March.

  24. iconoclast59 says:

    What’s getting lost in this entire debate: This is a FATHER and SON. Most kids at some point take issue with how one or both parents raised or treated them — it just comes with the territory. The parent should be the bigger person and do some soul-searching to see if there’s a legitimate criticism that needs to be taken to heart. And, as long as the child hasn’t been absolutely vicious and horrible (which Harry hasn’t been), demonstrate love and tolerance.

    It’s disgusting that Charles is being so vindictive and petty towards HIS OWN SON, that he can’t put aside his own ego and show some love and support. I often think about Harry naively saying upon his engagement that Meghan would get “the family she never had.” Well, that’s come true, but certainly not in the way he imagined! I can only imagine how hurt and betrayed he must feel.

  25. anotherlily says:

    The UK financial year begins in April and they were probably notified in March that financial support would end by June. At the same time they were told police security was being withdrawn in March. This is what caused the panic for the Sussexes. They couldn’t stay in Canada without security. They needed a safe base from where they could earn an income and that wasn’t going to be the UK. It really was a flight to freedom when they left.

    • Emmitt says:

      Also the US/Canadian border was closing (and remains closed over a year later) so they had to leave for the US right away.

  26. Caribbean says:

    So it’s ok for 1 son and wife to get money, the protection of the R family, good press, and be able to refute All bad press?
    While
    The other son should wait for scraps, take the Bad press (aka lies), no protection, no money, and just do not refute lies or speak up?
    Why??

    I also notice the angle in the press is like Harry and Meghan need to somehow be making up to the family or seeking forgiveness.
    Again, Why?

  27. Question says:

    Neither Harry nor Meghan are working for the British Royal Family any more. So why would they get any more money out of them? They wanted to be on their own and now they are. That Pounds 4,5 Mio parting gift is really nice, btw. I wish my parents had given me such a parting gift when I moved out. I work as a teacher and I educate the next generation. Kind of an important job. Nevertheless in my whole life I will never earn near as much as that parting gift which Harry and Meghan received. Talk about equality and BLM, yeah.

    • Question says:

      Remember, Harry and Meghan left the RF and fled to the USA around christmas 2019.

    • equality says:

      If you read the article you would have seen that money was also to Will and Kate and no specifics were given in amount to either or what the money was actually used for. It could have been a “parting gift” to those who were in Harry and Meghan’s employ while they were “working” royals. Talk about equality? What do royals do to earn that amount even if they are “working”? What does any of this have to do with BLM?

      • Becks1 says:

        I feel like this poster is mad at the wrong royals. Take the anger out on the people who are spending almost 1 million dollars on helicopter rides during a pandemic.

    • equality says:

      And also could have been funds owed from previous “work”.

    • Emmitt says:

      Go back to the Fail, you’re tired.

    • Becks1 says:

      They did not get a 4.5 million pounds parting gift. That was the money Charles spent on all four of them (W&K, H&M) in the last fiscal year. We have no idea how much of it was for Harry and Meghan, but my guess is not much.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Like I said previously, this payment is the equivalent of a Golden parachute or severance pay. Does Harry even get a pension/ 401k for all his royal work? This shows how messy royal arrangements are. These roles aren’t salaried and professionalized the way regular jobs are, instead you’re paid in perks and maintenance ,and that infantalizing term, “allowance”. Remember Meghan said she wasn’t considered an employee when she went for help with her mental health issues. It seems they originally were going to get funding for a transitional year, but then that was no longer the case and it was only for Q1 . Anyway, they are now financially independent, yes it would have been less messy if they made a clean break sooner so this BS wasn’t hanging over their heads, but there it is. People will take figures which aren’t itemized, use summer 2020 instead of Q1 2020 and then you have a new narrative. Anyhoo, as they say, the rich are different.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Question, let’s use your figure of 4.5 mil pounds that PC allocated for both W and H’s families. One half of that was 2,250,000 pounds for each family. There are 4 quarters in a year. So divided that by 4 and you get 562,500 pounds. This is probably the MOST that was ALLOCATED to H&M by PC for the QUARTER. If you listen to the interview, H says that their security was cut off at the end of March–when they were no longer working royals. So, they were in a house everyone knew where it was located because it was leaked to the british tabloids. They would have NO security at the end of the month. It appeared that the cutting off of security was a huge surprise to Harry. Since the royal family had been leaking lies to the british tabloids, the british tabloids whipped up hate AND DEATH THREATS against the Sussex family. Prince Harry is a high value target because he is a PRINCE for God’s sakes, and because of his tours in Afghanistan he is a high value target to the Taliban. Now, can you for one second of your life try to understand how that would have put him in a panic? Well, too bad for the royal family, because the Sussex family are all alive and thriving. Harry now has the money he needs to provide security for his family. And, that’s what was imperative to him and continues to be to this day. If you want to pretend that everything a tabloid says is true, that’s your CHOICE. But don’t come here and try to convince us that we don’t have brains and thought processes. We see through the lies.

  28. NotSoSimpleTaylor says:

    At the very least, Charles should have agreed to pay for private security for 5 years. Harry didn’t ask to be born a prince. He and his family need security.

    I can’t argue with Charles denying direct cash to Harry, especially if he knew how much Diana had given him and that the money was perfect for Harry finding his own way. But there was nothing but sheer cruelty at taking away Harry’s protection and refusing to pay for it privately.

  29. TEALIEF says:

    Anyone with a drop of common sense knows what Charles aka Chucky “the Good Guy doll” did. As CFO of this organisation, and the head of household he tried to strong-arm them. He put the financial thumb-screws to them instead of negotiating in good faith. He cut off his son, his daughter in law and his grandson. He left them bereft, and, knowingly put them in harm’s way to get he wanted. This was his version of my house, my rules; my way or the highway. They took the highway, literally and metaphorically. Good for them, it’s easy to cave to institutional power and pressure.

    He is as loathsome, as he is reprehensible. He is emotionally stunted. The financials are only good for papier-mâché. The institution should be investigated for their evasive financial shenanigans and obfuscations. Fish rot from the head.

  30. Jeremy says:

    I thought they (William and Harry) got their money in lump sums so if they got money in Q1 2020 then wouldn’t it have lasted them the whole year and they would have been cut off only for a few months (April – now 2021?)

    • fluffy_bunny says:

      You think Buttons is able to budget for a whole year? She’d blow the whole wad right up front and they’d be screwed.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Jeremy, do you really think that if PC gave Harry the entire amount on April 2020 that he wouldn’t have told the world by now? I think he probably gave them one quarter of the amount for the fiscal year (if Harry was lucky he got that much). Then it’s up to W & H to make it last until the next quarter. I can guarantee that if he gave the full amount to W, K would have spent most of it on clothes in a very short period of time. As far as W goes, who knows what he spends money on? I suspect the british tabloids do.

      • equality says:

        I agree. Charles would have definitely been putting out there that he funded them for the year.

  31. Barbara says:

    Even in death, Diana still is taking care of Harry and his family. And still showing what a pathetic, little man Charles is and always will be.

  32. Jolyn says:

    Why does Charles have to give Harry money in the first place? It’s pathetic for a 35 year old to go on national tv to whinge about his family cutting him off and he was not able to provide for his wife and kids.
    I think we all understand that no company will continue to pay us if we quit. So why does Harry think the British tax payers (who funds the royal family) need to continue to fund his lavish lifestyle if he quits his job as a Royal?
    Logically if you cannot afford a certain lifestyle then either you work harder to earn it or you downgrade your lifestyle. Why go around blaming everyone for your situation.
    It just solidifies people’s perception about those of us who have depression that we are a bunch of whiners who cannot deal with what life dishes us.

  33. Tursitops says:

    Hey Chuckles – if you want to impress me, then tell me what you’ve done lately to support your youngest on a non-financial basis. Here’s a phrase that you may never had heard: unconditional love.