Prince Andrew is in ‘despair’ because King Charles won’t ‘share’ his inheritance

Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip’s wills were both sealed. No one will know whether Philip left money to random exes or any secret children. No one will know if QEII left a chunk of money to her grandkids or her “favorite child,” Prince Andrew. After Philip’s death, Andrew did seem to act like he had gotten a big inheritance. Andrew was apparently bragging to everyone about getting a big inheritance from his mother too, and he was already planning on using the money as a “war chest” to clear his nonce name. Only… maybe that didn’t happen? This story is very strange – apparently, Andrew is mad at King Charles for not “sharing” the money left to him by QEII.

Prince Andrew has been left “bewildered” that he has not yet received any inheritance from Queen Elizabeth II, royal sources have claimed. After the Queen’s death last September, her £650 million Duchy of Lancaster estate was automatically left to King Charles.

However, Prince Andrew, 63, is said to have told friends he feels “despair” that the King has not shared any of his new wealth among his siblings. According to the Daily Mail, Prince Andrew feels an amount of “resentment” at the situation.

A palace source told the paper that the Queen’s fortune had passed directly “from monarch to monarch” because that was the most “tax efficient” way to transfer it.

In 1993 new legislation was passed under Sir John Major which meant inheritance tax did not have to be paid on the transfer of assets from one sovereign to another. As a result, the estate was left in its entirety to the new monarch, as opposed to being divided among family members.

A friend of the Yorks said: “Andrew is in despair. He’s been left completely in the dark. Andrew’s a member of the family, for God’s sake, yet he had no idea this was coming. I gather he’s checked it out and it’s true. It’s all gone “monarch to monarch”. What’s he meant to do? Go cap in hand to his older brother to keep a roof over his head? Things are going from bad to worse. It’s a disaster.”

[From The Telegraph]

It’s hilariously awful to picture Charles’s sad-sack face as he complains, “how would one even begin to share £650 million?” But I have a question – is Andrew upset that Charles hasn’t given him an inheritance “owed” to him by the terms of QEII’s will, or is Andrew upset that Charles hasn’t suddenly shared his largesse in general? I sort of understand in any case – Charles is making this big, stupid deal about “evicting” the Sussexes from Frogmore Cottage, just so Andrew could live there (rent free) after being evicted from Royal Lodge. All of these property swaps because Charles won’t use Duchy of Lancaster money to simply fund his nonce brother’s excessive lifestyle! I don’t know. The whole “penny-pinching Windsors” was always a fake narrative, especially given the fact that Prince William and Kate are just a few months away from demanding extensive renovations on their fifth home, Royal Lodge.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

70 Responses to “Prince Andrew is in ‘despair’ because King Charles won’t ‘share’ his inheritance”

  1. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Andrew probably got like 20 mil, but he’s flabbergasted Charles isn’t splitting the rest up with him and the siblings. He expected another hundred fifty or so tossed his way and, nope. Not gonna happen. Never gonna happen. Charles hates all his siblings, maybe even Anne, and resents the favor his parents showed them. He’s a greedy victim, a villain, and loves the fact that he’s gotten the last word on everything and controls everyone else’s lives. He enjoys making them beg for scraps. He’s a monarch, through and through. And monarchs need to be deposed and overthrow .

    • Sam says:

      I hate Andrew like the plague (a well as the other members of the BRF), but I partly agree with him. That’s also one of the reasons why I’m an anti-monarchist. Inheritance law does not seem to apply to these people. Everyone should have inherited the same thing. These people are sick…

      • Concern Fae says:

        Inheritance law for the British aristocracy is primogeniture. Everything goes to the eldest son, with maybe enough for the younger ones to pay for college and a down payment on a house. This is how all of those giant houses and castles have “stayed in the family” for generations. Also why the big distinction between older and younger sons in Jane Austen and other British novels.

        Part of Chuck’s problems is that some of his “reforms” go against the way the whole aristocracy is set up. They ain’t going to be happy, and he needs them.

      • AnneL says:

        I think it’s sick, too. As an American I can’t begin to understand it. I know that is how things were done in the past, to keep the estate “intact.” But there is no reason it still has to be done that way. What’s more important, your younger children or your stupid country pile of a house? And if that latter means so much to you, just don’t have more than one or two kids!

        Concern Fae, as a youngest sister myself I’ve also noted that Austen is unkind to them in her books. In Pride & Prejudice, Jane and Lizzie are the two oldest and also the two prettiest, smartest, classiest, etc. Lydia and Kitty are troublemaking ditzes. In Sense & Sensibility, the youngest, Margaret, is an afterthought and is considered rather disappointing.

        I often wonder if Austen resented her younger siblings just as Charles does his.

      • Tacky says:

        Heaven forbid the BRF should pay some taxes. The queen screwed her favorite child because she was so f’n cheap.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        But it’s not that the law REQUIRES Charles to get everything, it just exempts whatever Charles gets from taxes. Elizabeth could have left large amounts of money to her other kids, but because the others are not the monarch, it would be subject to taxes. She left everything to Charles to avoid taxes. Charles will probably do the same with William, and William with George.

        The bigger outrage is how that country can pass a law exempting obscene amounts of money from inheritance taxes just because the royal family is “special”?

      • Wesley says:

        The Queen may well have left it to Charles, but given him instructions on what she wants done with it. Without seeing the Will, no one knows if there was a trust incorporated within it.
        Camilla may want as much money kept as possible, with an eye to increasing trusts for her family.

    • SarahFrancisco says:

      @Annel, in real life Jane Austen had to leave her childhood (and her only home in the neighborhood with friends and acquaintances she knew her entire life), bc when her youngest brother married, their father decided he, the son will have the house all to himself. That’s how Jane Austen ended up homeless, going from one small place her father pension could afford them to another. When he died they would’ve been on the streets if her other brother who owed several (!) houses the entire time finally hadn’t given them the smallest one in his portfolio. I don’t know how she felt about younger sisters, but I’d imagine she wasn’t thrilled about her brothers taking everything just bc they were men.

      • Duch says:

        Younger sisters generally? Because there were only her and Cassandra in the Austen family, and Jane was the younger sister!

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        I don’t know anything about Austen’s life, but in her works a family is poor if they are down to only two servants, so I have a hard time sympathizing.

    • BeanieBean says:

      He may be flabbergasted, but he can’t be surprised, no matter what this article states. Andrew was no kid in 1993 when that monarch to monarch law was passed, and he’s got to know his brother well enough by now to know that he’s not the generous sort. I will never feel sorry for this guy. He’s been a member of the richest family/institution for 60+ years now & he’s STILL scrambling for money? What a dope.

    • Kathleen says:

      I shudder to think of the Sussexes in the same boat as Andrew but with Prince Peggy holding the purse strings. Thank God they left when they did!

  2. Beana says:

    I’m sure Chucky is thrilled. All the money means all the power. Now any “Working Royal” is completely beholden to him – for food, clothing, a place to live, etc. It would be sad if they hadn’t displayed such a complete lack of empathy to Harry for being in that exact predicament three years ago.

    • Dee(2) says:

      Exactly. While I feel less than zero sympathy for Andrew it’s always “amusing” the editors of these papers can commission woe is me articles like this then pretend Harry is just being unreasonable and what he wanted was unfathomable. I imagine that had more to do with him being a workhorse and whatever they won’t say about William’s actual personality, but damn some consistency would be nice.

      • Bee says:

        William’s actual personality is going to come out sooner than later. Camzilla needs ammunition.

    • Ravensdaughter says:

      Yes, really, why didn’t Andrew see this coming? Charles started doing this when he was regent (in all but name), but I guess poor Andy was too busy with his legal woes to see the writing on the wall
      Maybe Chaz can carrot/stick him with $$$ to keep him from another disastrous interview or frivolous lawsuits defending his “honor”. That would be a worthwhile use of the King’s money.

    • The Recluse says:

      But you just know that whatever Camilla wants he’s going to give her.

  3. Snuffles says:

    “But I have a question – is Andrew upset that Charles hasn’t given him an inheritance “owed” to him by the terms of QEII’s will, or is Andrew upset that Charles hasn’t suddenly shared his largesse in general?”

    I’ve often wondered if the Queen left her other children and grandchildren any money in her will. Also, if she did, does Charles have the power to ignore it and do as he pleases.

    I read, that if one wants to leave an inheritance that can’t be taxed, you must put money in a trust that can’t be accessed for several years. Is it 7 years?

    I wonder if the Queen put money in trust funds for her children, grandchildren and great grandchildren that just can’t be accessed right now. Another thought- what if the Queen DID set aside money in place but put restrictions in place that it’s only to cover his cost of living and Charles is in charge of doling it out. Maybe Andrew thought he could get his hands on all of it and do as he pleases and just realized he can’t.

    • I think you are on to something. I don’t believe Andrew was ever good with money other than spending as fast as he could. Maybe the Queen did put some sort of limits on what he would be getting.

    • Christina says:

      Charles is a jerk, but did Andrew really need to brag that he was going to use his “war chest” windfall to relitigate, aka attack, Virginia Guiffre? She is a victim of rape, and she was more than able to prove her case. This is the first time I think Charles is doing something smart.

      Let Andrew give all the interviews he wants. Keeping him cash poor is the best decision Charles has made to date. Andrew is so dumb that anything that comes out if his mouth will just make him look even dumber. He’s done the damage he can do. Little bro is neutered, and I don’t care how unfair it seems. Andrew earned it.

  4. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    I’ve noticed that none of the British press are asking if the new “slimmed down monarchy” will result in a lower tax burden for British citizens. My understanding is that the sovereign grant amount is locked in and that the sovereign will never receive less than they received the prior year, even if that means diverting funds that would have gone to the NHS or to schools. If all of this is true then the “slimmed down monarchy” really means that more money goes into Charles privy purse, again why isn’t anyone talking about this?

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      “Slimmed down monarchy” apparently means the same amount of 💰 for fewer people. No one’s talking about it because it makes Charles look like the greedy bastard he is.

    • Christine says:

      I have the exact same question. There is no “slimmed down monarchy”, fewer of them are spending an amount that increases every year. That is not a bargain, I don’t know what these people are smoking.

    • Kathleen says:

      With the exception of WanK, the RF at the Commonwealth day service looked exactly like what they are; a bunch of geriatrics. Slimming down the monarchy will be achieved by the natural process of attrition as the older members die off. Charles does not look too good; neither does Camilla.

  5. ML says:

    If Paedrew is truly flabbergasted and upset, the chances are probably good that part of QE2’s will *will* be made public when he starts bitterly complaining to the press.

  6. Brassy Rebel says:

    On top of all the other perks, the royals are allowed to avoid inheritance tax. It’s all a giant scam of the British taxpayers. The monarchy needs to be abolished!

  7. Alice says:

    Andrew is beyond awful of course but Charles is so stupid. The Queen got that generosity won friends. She bankrolled her mother, Margaret, and all those cousins. Charles is creating two generations of money hungry relations who aren’t particularly fond of him anyway.

    Does he think this is going to go well?

    • Mel says:

      @Alice, I think he knows exactly what he’s doing. He’s taking petty revenge, evening the score and handling slights. He’s deluded and thinks the love and respect his Mother had would roll down to him. He’s about to F around and find out.

      PS- If I were Charles, I would do everything in my power to keep Andrew quiet. Andrew is the type to think “if I can’t, no one else can” and burn it all down to get some money and revenge. He and Charles don’t like each other and have always been rivals.

    • Lady D says:

      Who will be at Charles side when he is dying?

  8. pyritedigger says:

    Learn to code, Andrew

  9. Aud says:

    It sounds like she left everything to Charles to avoid taxes and then told him how to disperse funds. And he’s not giving Andrew what she promised him.

    Who knows if it’s true, this is obviously coming from Andrew.

    I do like the question of whether he’s supposed to go cap in hand to his brother when he needs money. As if he didn’t do with with QE for his entire life. He could get a job if he doesn’t want to mooch anymore. LOL

  10. Jais says:

    I’m more surprised that Andrew is surprised. Like you really thought Charles was going to share with anyone aside from Camilla. Aw sweetie.

    • Carty says:

      The way Charles has treated his own son should have made them aware he’ll do the same or worse to everyone else not tampon adjacent.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      He’s getting the “spare” treatment for the first time in his life.

      I’d say he should have known how his own brother would treat him, but I really don’t think any of them know each other well at all. Even spouses in that family tend to spend lots of time apart.

    • Lady D says:

      Tampon adjacent. LMAO

  11. Elizabeth says:

    Does Andrew not understand the idea of primogeniture which has been the backbone of the British aristocracy for centuries? The estate is always left to the eldest son or, in this case, the monarch. Yes, the Duchy of Lancaster is worth 652.8 million pounds but generates 24 million pounds annually. According to Wikipedia, “As the Duchy is an inalienable asset of the Crown held in trust for future sovereigns, the sovereign is not entitled to the portfolio’s capital or capital profit.” So KCIII can only touch the net income; he can’t split the money amongst his siblings. KCIII is already paying 3 million pounds yearly for Prince Andrew’s security even though he’s no longer a working royal. How much more does this idiot want?

    • Polo says:

      I mean are we sure this is actually Andrew thinking this or is it that royal reporters need to fill their pages with a royal story as Meghan said.
      I’m pretty sure Andrew would know the rules since they’ve been in place since the 90s. There’s been 2 deaths since then with inheritances having to be sorted out.
      I mean last week they were telling us that fergie would be presenting at the Oscar’s.
      At some point we have to realize that some of these stories are about pushing a narrative and may not be coming from his camp especially when they were just bragging about all the money he got a few weeks ago.
      Peace in the family doesn’t make money for the tabloids…chaos and disagreement does.

    • Prairiegirl says:

      I’m asking the same question, @Elizabeth. Is Andrew new to how male primogeniture works? Did he think that by being royal he’d be exempt from the fate of second sons (that is, second son gets nothing, that’s why noble families dumped them into the military and third sons into the church)? Either he – or the media reporting this ‘story’ – is truly, deeply stupid.

  12. Amy Bee says:

    Charles might have to bribe him to move to Frogmore Cottage so I’m sure Andrew will get his money soon.

  13. Mslove says:

    Are we supposed to feel sorry for this perv who was credibly accused of heinous crimes? And if Andrew really needs the cash, shouldn’t he go straight to Cowmilla? I thought she was running the show.

  14. Still In My Robe says:

    Watching literally just the first episode of Downton Abbey or the first five minutes of Sense and Sensibility is all it should take for Andrew to understand his position in life. By the very laws of his country, he is nothing and no one. And, yeah, that’s messed up and is why monarchies have been and should be abolished. But how he has not realized that and made something better for himself? That’s 100 percent on him.

  15. JCallas says:

    This is the future that royalists wanted for the Sussexes…

  16. Whyforthelove says:

    The inheritance laws favoring the oldest son really are awful, but in this case…if Andrew is upset I say GOOD

    • AnneL says:

      I don’t feel any sympathy for Andrew, but what about Anne and Edward? I’m not a fan of theirs either but I can’t say they’ve done anything to deserve being left out in the cold when it comes to family wealth. They both work/ed pretty hard for the “Firm,” especially Anne. It all just underscores what a shit Charles is and how horrible these rules are.

      • Aud says:

        Aren’t Anne and Edward considered working royals? They’d have an income from that.

      • Whyforthelove is says:

        Oh I agree. Apologies if I appeared otherwise. Charles is a horrible person and his treatment of his family is terrible, Especially Harry,Edward and Anne. I only specifically take pleasure in the irritation it causes the sex pest.

      • Duch says:

        Aud, I don’t think there’s income per se, like a salary – Harry didn’t seem to have any salary from how it’s described in Spare.

  17. Winnie Cooper’s Mom says:

    Harry was having to shop the bargain bins at TJ Maxx and didn’t own decent furniture. If Andrew was/is expecting millions from KCIII, he’s completely delusional and a true idiot.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Yep – esp when we know Catty was refurbishing KP (twice) and Amner on someone else’s money. Not to mention all the high end designer clothes in multiple colours she has and then there is all the money going oh face and hair. GF has been burning through that money for years. Lets also not forget William and his fleet of motor bikes and fancy sports cars.

    • Mel says:

      On a fashion website, they always used to laugh about him wearing the same brown suede shoes all the time with EVERYTHING. When I read the book I realized they were the only pair of shoes he had. They were literally keeping him like an orphan in the attic. If you keep the financially deprived, they stay beholden to you. What a mess.

      • Emily_C says:

        People really need to understand that the kids of rich parents are not rich themselves. And it can be even worse, because those rich parents can do what they like to you, and who would believe you? Would it matter even if people did believe you, considering the lawyers the rich parents can afford?

  18. Lili says:

    It seems Harry is no Dimwit after all, if queenie left them nothing , but I wonder if she didn’t give out something and Andrew just gave his share to Virginia! It also explains why Fergie is working so damn Hard to win over the states by saying positive things about the Sussexes

    • Mary Pester says:

      😂@LiLi, they all treated and portrayed Harry as a dimwit when in fact he is the brightest of the bunch. He became an adult before he went to war, and when he came back he thought stuff this. He had his salary from the army until the Queen asked him to start doing more Royal duties as he was leaving the army. YES, leaving because he was told that his next promotion (that he was in line for) would make him senior in rank to the HEIR, and of course bullyam couldn’t have that could he! Harry was wise to the sht storm that would arrive with the Queen’s passing and meghan arrived just in time. Harry met the love of his life and wasn’t going to let them destroy her or play their games. Now we have a financially set, independent , Happy, Harry that everyone can see, set against a back drop of a money hording, selfish, emotionally constipated father, a money grabbing selfish step mother, and her children, a rage monster Brother and a vapid, bland, throne hungry sister in law. Plus a dullard uncle who’s wife thinks she is superior to everyone but Charles and his wife. Andrew?? Yep uncle Andrew the nonce, who is now crying into his teddy’s arms “woe is me, I want more”. Now let’s see mmmm mm, and they tried to say Harry is dim 😂😂🤓

  19. Athena says:

    The queen made sure to take care of her sister, mother, cousins. I don’t understand the lack of provision for her children. She had 70 years to work with accountants, lawyers, investment advisors, estate planners to set up trusts for her children and grandchildren that would provide them income to support their lifestyles. For example, Instead of handing over money to Andrew the Queen should have purchased some commercial real estate in his name. He now would have had the income from those properties to live.

    The way the family handles its finances makes no sense in this day and age. Even Harry hinted at that, the expectation that you would be taken care off without guaranteeing themselves an income, a pension, a 401k. “Working royals” should have money put in a pension plan for them

    I bet Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet already have trust funds, Uniform gift to minor act accounts, 529 accounts, and just plain cash in savings accounts. While Charlotte and Louis will have to count on the generosity of George to help them through life because their parents are living in a different century.

    • Lionel says:

      I read somewhere (in a book I think) that the late Queen was not particularly savvy about money. That she would sit down annually with her checkbook and decide to give family members whatever amount popped into her head, with no rhyme or reason and without any conception of what things actually cost. If this is true then I can easily believe that she didn’t think to do any estate planning, and that nobody dared to suggest it to her.

  20. QuiteContrary says:

    The entitled nonce feels aggrieved. Shocker.

  21. RoyalBlue says:

    So Andrew has recklessly run through his Lancaster funding and was hoping for a lumpsum? Oh the entitlement of these Windsors.

  22. Maeve says:

    This is what happens in all British aristocratic families with large estates – the bulk goes to the eldest son, and the younger ones have to either earn or marry money.
    The minor royals – the Kents and Gloucesters – didn’t inherit much from their parents relatively speaking, because their parents didn’t inherit much from George V, so HM was subbing them in exchange for doing royal duties.
    It’s all about keeping the estate intact, not splitting it into ever smaller parcels – it’s why so much land is still in the hands of families like the Percys (Northumberland) and the Scotts (Buccleugh).

  23. TheCrankyFairy says:

    I wonder, with the rumors of Andrew’s paternity, if Phil left him anything at all and if That is one of the reasons his will was sealed.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment