Prince Harry & Meghan’s Canadian security bill was $539K over five years

They’re inventing entirely new ways to scream and cry about how much the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “cost taxpayers.” Prince Harry and Meghan have not lived in the UK since early 2020. Since they married in 2018, they lived in Canada for a few months, but moved full-time to California by April 2020. They’ve lived in California ever since, paying for their own private security. But… what about back when Harry and Meghan first got together? Remember how Harry visited Meghan in Toronto a few times during their courtship? Well, as you can imagine, people are still mad about the security costs of a prince who was a working royal at the time.

Prince Harry racked up the highest taxpayer-funded security bill of any VIP visiting Canada over a five-year period – including $365,000 (£195,000) in 12 months while he was courting Meghan Markle, newly released figures revealed today.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) records show public spending on protection for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex was $539,000 (£286,686) between April 2015 and March 2020.

Canadian taxpayers may even have picked up a $10,586 (£5,642) bill for Mountie bodyguards during the Duchess of Sussex’s private three-day girls’ trip to Toronto with her former best friend Jessica Mulroney in 2018, it has emerged.

State broadcaster CBC has won a six-year freedom of information battle to uncover the true cost of protecting dignitaries visiting the country.

The $539,000 (£286,686) spent protecting Harry was the highest security bill for any VIP over the same five-year period – more than the Obamas, the Clintons and the Trumps.

Harry accounted for more than 10 per cent of the $5million (£2.66million) spent safeguarding around 100 royals, politicians, diplomats and their families while visiting Canada.

His annual security bill peaked at $364,859 in 2017-18, the year he proposed to Meghan, who was filming the final series of Suits in Toronto. In the 2016-17, the year they first met and began secretly dating, the cost to Canadian taxpayers was $106,000.

The amount spent protecting Harry, then a working member of the Royal Family, dwarfed the $178,584 bill for his father, then-Prince Charles, who visited Ontario and Quebec with Camilla in 2017.

The cost of protecting the Sussexes in Canada dropped sharply to $866 in 2018/19 and $904 in 2019/20 – when they spent most of their time in the UK after marrying – before rising again to $56,405 in 2019/20.

[From The Daily Mail]

“His annual security bill peaked at $364,859 in 2017-18” – how dare a working royal date an American living in Canada! Impeach!! Oh, wait, the reason the security costs were so high during that time period was because the 2017 Invictus Games were held in Toronto. He was in Canada for the better part of two weeks doing work around Invictus and attending public events around the competition he founded. The security bill spiked again in 2019-20 because the Sussexes lived in Vancouver Island for several months as they were disentangling themselves from the monarchy. Canada’s security agencies also informed the Sussexes that they couldn’t stay in the country because they wouldn’t get protection. So they left. Anyway, given the way people are carrying on, you would think that Harry’s security bill was eight figures. I think $539,000 over five years is perfectly reasonable for a public figure making frequent visits, especially when you consider the fact that the Invictus Games were in Toronto and the Sussexes lived on Vancouver Island for like four months.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

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

42 Responses to “Prince Harry & Meghan’s Canadian security bill was $539K over five years”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. GrnieWnie says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:04 am

    I mean, the obvious reason why his security costs so much – why he is so high profile – is because of the British press. If they didn’t write about him incessantly to create that profile, he’d be much less visible.

    Plus how much did the Invictus Games make for Canada? I imagine a great deal more than $500k.

    • MMRB says:
      August 14, 2026 at 5:27 pm

      first of all, this is OLD news – they are desperate for clicks: High-ranking visitors to Canada may require specific security measures, but there are no distinct “security payments” for them. Instead, they may be subject to enhanced security protocols and arrangements based on their status and the nature of their visit. Prince Harry’s security in Canada was paid for by the Canadian government, via security assistance provided by the RCMP/through the Public Safety Minister’s office. In 2020, Canada said it would stop funding their security after they changed status as senior royals. ERGO they would have funded their own security arrangements after that time.

      This is how it is for ANY high ranking official that visits our fine land.

      and for informational purposes.:
      Security Measures for High-Ranking Visitors to Canada
      High-ranking visitors to Canada do not have specific “security payments” associated with their visits. Instead, they may be subject to enhanced security protocols tailored to their status and the nature of their visit.
      Enhanced Security Protocols
      The security measures for high-ranking visitors typically include:
      – Increased Surveillance: Enhanced monitoring at venues and accommodations.
      – Personal Security Details: Provision of security personnel to ensure safety.
      – Restricted Access Areas: Limiting access to certain locations to protect the visitor.
      – Coordination with Local Authorities: Collaboration with law enforcement for additional support.

  2. Seaside says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:12 am

    These people – comparing apples and oranges as usual.
    One off visits vs continuous security over weeks and months.
    How many times did the Obamas visit Canada?
    They think very little of their readers don’t they?
    Anyway some Murdock newspaper/tabloid will pick up this foolishness and run with it.

    • Noo says:
      August 14, 2026 at 12:18 pm

      @Seaside – who do you mean by “these people”? I hope you’re referring to the Daily Mail…

      Because, in terms of “some Murdock newspaper/tabloid will pick up this foolishness and run with it” – that’s literally what happened here (Lord Rothermere – different guy, same ilk as Murdoch). This is a Britain-based Daily Fail rage bait (wow, it sure works) twisting of a totally reasonable CBC / Canadian public broadcaster analysis of security costs for VIPs investigation (which they do from time to time, this isn’t the first one).

      The original CBC article was published July 29th and is called “Security for Prince Harry’s visits to Canada topped all internationally protected persons.”

    • lucy10 says:
      August 14, 2026 at 1:47 pm

      Time for some genuine investigative reporter to do a deep dive into the cost of security for W & K for their measly amount of “work”, & for comparison the cost of security for eg. someone like ex-PM Boris Johnson & maybe some high profile celebrity like Tom Cruise.

    • Well Wisher says:
      August 14, 2026 at 7:11 pm

      This was probably obtained by the freedom of information act. The first time I heard of this was from the British rag.

  3. Dee(2) says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:17 am

    So they are complaining that he cost the government money when he was working as a government representative? They’ve already made them pay back renovation costs on a ” gift”, is this next? They need to pay back costs for security after the wedding? Harry needs to pay back rent for Nott Cott?

    Meanwhile two people who are probably not going to cross 100 engagements this year are on their umpteenth vacation of the year with full security, that NO ONE believes isn’t spread across two residences constantly.

    • Andrea says:
      August 14, 2026 at 10:37 am

      1000% agree. As a taxpayer I accept the costs of security for our elected leaders and their government officials AND the families. No matter how much I loathe Fauxlania her security costs do not offend me. Yet the costs which will go into perpetuity for the unelected head of state and their “royal” family would outrage me. Especially how little they do in return. Americans are entertained by the British royal family because we do not foot the bill but if they were our tax burden I believe the American taxpayers would revolt.

      • ChillinginDC says:
        August 14, 2026 at 11:47 am

        Noo nope. I will talk about whatever I want. And you all losing your mind over what was paid over 5 years and during that time he was full time working member of the RF and so was Meghan is when you all need to touch grass.

    • Noo says:
      August 14, 2026 at 11:25 am

      American commenters please touch grass before posting: this a *Canadian* story about Canadian taxpayer money and accountability – which our public broadcaster can and should investigate. (What the derangers do with the facts is an issue for them, not us – the Daily Mail in Britain does not speak for Canada)

      @Dee(2) CBC regularly does ATIA (Canadian FOIA) requests on security costs that we Canadian taxpayers cover. E.g., there was a big investigative piece on Pope Francis’ visit ($14M in costs).

    • Nic919 says:
      August 14, 2026 at 12:17 pm

      As a Canadian taxpayer I am fine with this because it’s obvious the one year it was high relates to Toronto hosting the Invictus games and still being considered part of the family.

      Now do I want to abolish the monarchy, hell yes but Canadians end up covering the costs of VIP security all the time. Including when Taylor Swift did a concert in Toronto and they cleared the roads for her tour bus.

      Security was also high for the recent FIFA World Cup too.

  4. Andrea says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:21 am

    As an American taxpayer the costs for VIP security is not something that concerns me. I’m sure security costs for our government representatives is astronomical but only occasionally I see backlash about Trumps costs to play golf etc. The American press and public accept this burden. The citizen of the Canada and the UK should complain to the tabloids and the “royal experts” since they are the main reason Harry and Meghan are at an elevated risk. But these costs are more Invictus related it seems.

  5. ChillinginDC says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:36 am

    This is the dumbest crap ever. And yes, I am sure the Derangers are going to demand he pay it back. All of this crap lately has really gotten loud since BP thwarted them for a photo and knowing the details of the high tea and meeting.

  6. SarahCS says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:38 am

    Now do WanKs holidays, all the time they are not ‘working’ in the UK and abroad.

    • Agreatreckoning says:
      August 14, 2026 at 11:56 pm

      Yes! What is the security cost for the WanK’s vacations anywhere? What was the security cost for Chuckles & Camzilla visits to Canada when they managed to offend people? This is just stupid. A high profile royal, who is also a military vet that served tours in Afghanistan, received security when travelling who also, probably, over the years, brought income to places he visited.

      Canada showed up for H&M when the BaRF didn’t.

  7. Fawsia says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:38 am

    While they were living in Vancouver they were working Royals and they agreed to leave their roles they moved to the STATES! I don’t know why you are mad about that?

  8. India says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:39 am

    This is article is so dumb. I have no eloquent way to put it. It’s just a bunch of numbers without context. The one exception is (of course) Meghan’s “three-day girls’ trip,” which may–or may NOT–have been covered by taxpayers. Good grief.

  9. Aimee says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:42 am

    And the annual estimated cost for the security of the Royal Family is between $150 and $200 million per year. Let’s talk about that!

    • lucy10 says:
      August 14, 2026 at 1:55 pm

      Would definitely like a breakdown on the costs of W&K to UK tax payers…including during their multiple holidays a year! The toxic press opened this pandora’s box, lets expose how much the lazy, workshy heir & his useless wife costs for doing practically doing sod all!

    • suoutdoors says:
      August 15, 2026 at 3:04 am

      Yes! Are there any journalists left in the UK? Would be a nice task for you to dig up the security costs for each working royal. Because these costs are NOT included in the souvereign grant, an obscene amount of money british taxpayers support one of the richest families in the world with. These costs add on top. Would be interesting to see how much is needed let’s say for Anne who does a lot of engagements but is probably on lower risk as WandK who are high risk but do not much (and no crowds gathering behind the fences). Their four to five international vacations a year must eat up a lot of money. Like a lot!

  10. Gail says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:44 am

    Canadian Taxpayer here. Proud we saw what others refused to and gave this couple the security they needed. Whilst they were on Vancouver Island they had their regular, British security team. That’s when it was pulled, and along with covid that’s why they left Canada. Conflating short term visits with the long term of Invictus is an insult to Canadian’ intelligence, and pisses me off. Apparently the rota and BaRF, alongside the MAGA and Maple MAGA crowds all think Canadians are stupid. I’m feeling very resentful right now; it’s a lie and is such an unfair, insulting take.

    • Nic919 says:
      August 14, 2026 at 12:32 pm

      Yes agree. I pay taxes for a lot of things I don’t agree with, but security for Harry and his family when his father (and the Queen) were failing their responsibilities isn’t one of those issues.

      Did we want them killed on Canadian soil? David foster didn’t send a bill to the government either.
      The actual cost for the time they were in Victoria was actually quite low for the several months they were there.

      Conflating the cost of Invictus is deceptive and par for the course for British tabloids.

  11. Jay says:
    August 14, 2026 at 10:49 am

    And? This protection was mandated because they represented the royal family at the time. We know the DM isn’t tallying up everyone’s security costs.

    Plus, at least in my opinion, Harry and Meghan represent a net benefit to Canada, whether it’s official appearances, Invictus events, or showcasing Canadian designers and places to visit.

    I can only speak for myself and Canadians I know, and most don’t care about the royals, but they don’t hate on the Sussexes, either. I believe it would be a mistake to assume that Canadians are going to be outraged or upset about this, and in fact focusing on the question of whether we should still be paying for a monarchy that doesn’t really benefit us might be a bit of an own goal.

  12. Lissen says:
    August 14, 2026 at 11:06 am

    The ones outraged about the cost of security for Harry & Meghan are mainly those who have been riled up by the Conservative Party. Their unpopular leader, instead of doing his job and providing constructive criticism of the Liberal gov’t, is grasping at any and all frivolous straws to stay in the public conversations.

    Sadly, our Canadian media have also been forced to the right.

    Derangers should also keep in mind that this is in Canadian dollars when frothing at the mouth.

  13. ORLY says:
    August 14, 2026 at 11:15 am

    DID THEY INCLUDE INVICTUS GAMES IN THIS SECURITY COST?

    Because Invictus Toronto was 2017.

  14. MikeB says:
    August 14, 2026 at 11:17 am

    Daily Mail needs to keep its nose out of Canada’s business and worry about what the royal family costs the UK for little return. We, in Canada, are quite capable of deciding what was and is best for the protection of H&M.

    • Noo says:
      August 14, 2026 at 11:45 am

      Yes @MikeB. Daily Fail doesn’t speak for Canadians and the original CBC source article “Security for Prince Harry’s visits to Canada topped all internationally protected persons” would have been a much better link for this article than the Daily Fail’s angry regurgitation of it.

  15. windyriver says:
    August 14, 2026 at 11:26 am

    Your timeline is a little off. The culmination of their move to step back was leaving Canada on March 14, on the Tyler Perry funded “freedom flight”. They were still working royals when they traveled to Canada for a break in November 2019, still working royals when they arrived back in the UK in early January 2020 to discuss their future and present their half in/half out proposal, and, despite the ultimate decision they would be fully stepping back, they were still working royals after the Sandringham summit, where they were originally given a year (with security) to transition to their new situation. In fact, the week before they left Canada, they were in the UK for multiple events where, in addition to the famous umbrella picture with Harry and Meghan in her blue VB dress, she also appeared in the caped green dress at the Commonwealth Day services – sitting next to the rest of the RF. That last appearance was on March 9. They’d been informed a very short time before that BP was reneging on the expected year of security, and by the end of that week, Harry and Meghan were out of Canada and at Perry’s house in LA.

  16. Amy Bee says:
    August 14, 2026 at 11:42 am

    Was the FOIA request done on behalf of the DM? The bulk of the funding was for the 2017 Invictus Games.

  17. Kasztanka says:
    August 14, 2026 at 12:04 pm

    Okay, let’s tally up the cost of security for the Royal Family during their separate, unsynchronized getaways:
    – Kate with the Middletons somewhere in the tropics;
    – William holding hands with Knauf in a different tropical location;
    plus:
    – two bodyguards at George’s school—one in the classroom, the other in the hallway—as if George were being educated in Red Square rather than at an elite school (I don’t know the situation with the other children);
    – an ambulance following George and parking wherever he happens to be—outside the school, the Middletons’ place, etc.
    To be clear, I wish George a long and healthy life, and naturally, he needs some protection given his background in a famous, wealthy family; but this is clearly excessive—as if George’s life determined the very survival of the planet.
    So, how much does all of that cost?

    • Nic919 says:
      August 14, 2026 at 12:38 pm

      They also send an ambulance wherever Kate stays because that’s how people in Buckleberry know when she’s not at Windsor, in particular during the missing months. And when William was in wales at the RAF in Anglesey, Kate wasn’t there because the ambulance was at Buckleberry.

      • Kasztanka says:
        August 14, 2026 at 4:02 pm

        NIC919
        That’s a good one. :)) I remember those stories about Kate moving to be closer to her husband—as if William ever dreamed of such a thing. It’s just like the tales about driving the kids to school—kids who, as it turned out, had long been living at boarding school 🤣.
        And by the way—looking at William’s “enthusiasm” for any kind of duty, I suspect he didn’t last long at that base either; after he lost his rifle and used a helicopter to nip out for beer, they were probably glad to get rid of him by simply signing off on the rest of his training—using his royal duties as a convenient excuse (duties he’d previously tried to dodge by citing his military training) 🤣.

      • Nic919 says:
        August 15, 2026 at 3:02 pm

        Kate did a whole photo op at the local Anglesey grocery store to “prove” she actually lived there full time even though it’s obvious she never did.
        And besides there was staff at the Anglesey home to do the cooking and cleaning so kate getting groceries was fake as hell.
        Kate was playing games from the outset of this marriage about the real story.

  18. Noo says:
    August 14, 2026 at 2:50 pm

    This post and some of the comments have me in my feelings. Disappointed that Daily Fail talking points pushed without context – but the source was CBC / Canadian public broadcaster (taxpayer-funded) ATIA (Canadian FOIA equivalent) investigation into security costs for all IPPs / Internationally Protected Persons.

    If you go back to the source (July 29th CBC) not the Daily Fail manipulation, you’ll see this was a fact-based and scrutinized (e.g., they call out the double counting of one ~C$50k expense for Prince Harry) accounting of security costs for the Sussexes – and many other IPPs.

    At a time when historical long-standing good relations between the US and Canada are so damaged, I’m very sensitive to Americans stepping into our sovereign business here – I encounter this all the time from left-leaning Americans on bsky who insert themselves into conversations between the Canadian electorate and our PM, and will not step out of a discussion intended for Canadian voters, even when you ask them very nicely. (I routinely get “you will not silence me!” in reply)

    I’m also sensitive after a year and a half of constant lies where my country is blamed for the US’ illegal guns, for starting the trade war, for fentanyl, for illegal immigration, wildfire smoke due to climate change, for being “nasty,” for being anti-American (honestly, we say so little about what is going on). From that place it depresses me to see this article which is a distortion with zero context, from Britain, about something very reasonable (government spending accountability) in Canada.

    As many Canadians in the comments noted, most of us (including me) have no issue with Sussex security costs. (my issue is with the costs for American current and former administration folks mentioned in the CBC article)

    However, it’s sure to become a bigger story now from here – and will be carried through our tragically US-owned news conglomerates like Post Media.

    • Eurydice says:
      August 14, 2026 at 4:34 pm

      Ok, I was confused because I didn’t go back to the source. I had no reason to, really, because this post was only about the Sussexes and the DM’s manufactured outrage over something that, as you say, even the Canadian public had no issue with. I sympathize with your distress and I’ll look for the continuation of this story.

      • Noo says:
        August 14, 2026 at 5:28 pm

        Thank you @Eurydice for lifting my spirits with your sensitivity and sanity.

        For the actual CBC news coverage, I tried to post the link previously but it didn’t take, should be easy to find with: CBC + July 29 + “Security for Prince Harry’s visits to Canada topped all internationally protected persons.”

        It was frustrating to see commenters assume the outrage was coming from Canada, and – even worse – to then see non-Canadians criticizing us for a simple government spending transparency investigation. (as I noted way up at the top, this type of ATIA request isn’t new for CBC, they did one a few years ago for the C$14M that went into security for Pope Francis’ visit…when he came to apologize for the Catholic Church’s role in killing and torture of Indigenous children)

        Thanks for putting a smile on my face and have a great weekend.

  19. bisynaptic says:
    August 14, 2026 at 6:16 pm

    Wonder how much money Harry and Meghan have made for Canada, what with Invictus and Suits and their various other activities.

  20. Thinking says:
    August 15, 2026 at 11:28 am

    I see that as simply a facts-based article. I don’t really see any complaining.

    • Agreatreckoning says:
      August 15, 2026 at 8:52 pm

      How so? A facts-based article by the DM/BM would have included the 2017 Invictus Game as being part of the expense. Instead, they focused on something else.

      Factual reporting would NOT include:

      “Canadian taxpayers MAY EVEN HAVE picked up a $10,586 (£5,642) bill for Mountie bodyguards during the Duchess of Sussex’s private three-day girls’ trip to Toronto with her former best friend Jessica Mulroney in 2018, IT HAS EMERGED.”

      It has emerged that something may even have happened doesn’t sound very facts-based.

      • Thinking says:
        August 16, 2026 at 1:18 pm

        I felt the excerpt sounded facts-based.

        I’m not sure if there is more editorializing in the article it links to (like someone screaming he shouldn’t have taken the security. Maybe that’s in the linked article? That’s what o would interpret as complaining about him).

        I already knew Canadian taxpayers paid for his security so I didn’t have a shocked reaction to this article or anything. I’m not sure if already having that knowledge influenced my reaction.

  21. Scamuppet says:
    August 15, 2026 at 11:13 pm

    “The total public cost for the 2016 royal tour of British Columbia and Yukon by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge exceeded $3.8 million. This included an estimated $2 million for RCMP policing…”