As I understand it. The clause is based on as a % of the income from the crown estates.
And as all income from the estates has been given to the government since Charles III. In exchange for the sovereign grant. With the fact that that grant is used to maintain the palaces.
It not being below 12% of the money earned from the land. Is hardly an onerous rule.
How many other land owning corperations pay a maximum of 88% tax and survive. Would be very different if the government was expected to fund maintainance from the non grant part.
As I understand it. The clause is based on as a % of the income from the crown estates.
And as all income from the estates has been given to the government since Charles III. In exchange for the sovereign grant. With the fact that that grant is used to maintain the palaces.
It not being below 12% of the money earned from the land. Is hardly an onerous rule.
How many other land owning corperations pay a maximum of 88% tax and survive. Would be very different if the government was expected to fund maintainance from the non grant part.
it’s worth noting that the crown estate is exempt from a lot of maintainence requirements normally imposed by law on normal landlords.
As i found out when the freehold for my flats building was in danger of falling into the crown estate portfolio.
How many other land owning corporations arent required to maintain the buildings they lease out?
Nods lots of dodgy stuff. But that is why I think it is very important to be accurate.
When folks refer to it as public land. And tax payer money. They are helping the royal family hide 8its power and wealth.