Something to cheer you all up, Buck house facelift

SWP's back said:
What have you ever done for the country?
Click to expand...
Paul Lake's Left Knee said:
Absolute rubbish, Buckingham Palace is packed with tourists, I remember being dragged around by family friends who are American, its all they wanted to do when they came over.
Click to expand...
Hang on a minute its a fuckin house get rid of her wouldn't make an iota of a difference. Perhaps if she and some of the hangers were making cups of tea and fancies well then that would be difference. My point in reference the tower of London packed to the rafters not had a monarch living there for donkeys year.
 
This should be paid for out of the Sovereign grant( 15 % of the crown estates profits), but because that's not enough the taxpayer has to fund the difference!
I'm not sure if this has to go to a vote in Parliament. If it does I hope they vote it down.
The Crown should pay this money or the Sovereign grant should be reduced in future years to meet the cost of this work.
Or open the Palace more often to visitors and increase revenue to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
Mike D said:
Hang on a minute its a fuckin house get rid of her wouldn't make an iota of a difference. Perhaps if she and some of the hangers were making cups of tea and fancies well then that would be difference. My point in reference the tower of London packed to the rafters not had a monarch living there for donkeys year.
Click to expand...
I thought your point was (incorrectly) suggesting that taxpayers are funding the reneovations and not spending the money on the NHS?

Just admit it, you're a treasonous little republican peasant and the stocks are far too good for the likes of you.
 
Len Rum said:
This should be paid for out of the Sovereign grant( 15 % of the crown estates profits), but because that's not enough the taxpayer has to fund the difference!
I'm not sure if this has to go to a vote in Parliament. If it does I hope they vote it down.
The Crown should pay this money or the Sovereign grant should be reduced in future years to meet the cost of this work.
Or open the Palace more often to visitors and increase revenue to pay for it.
Click to expand...
The Crown Estate is paying.

The taxpayer is funding fuck all. The Crown Estate is simply paying 75% tax on profits for the years as opposed to 85%.

But I'm sure you knew that.
 
aguero93:20 said:
Artists impression
sbc-105-lizard-obstacle-course-9.jpg
Click to expand...
"Scats"? My mate tells me that that is an unfortunate name for a company. Can't see why myself.
 
Len Rum said:
Only because the 15 % of the crown estates profit that goes to the Sovereign is being increased to 22% to pay for these repairs i.e less money from the crown estates is going to the Government.
In other words funded by the taxpayer.
Nice try.
Click to expand...
The income from the crown estate that goes to the treasury is not from the taxpayer. It's from the crown estate.
 
Len Rum said:
Only because the 15 % of the crown estates profit that goes to the Sovereign is being increased to 22% to pay for these repairs i.e less money from the crown estates is going to the Government.
In other words funded by the taxpayer.
Nice try.
Click to expand...
Not funded by the taxpayer at all. HMRC is simply receiving a smaller percentage and the Crown Estate is using its own money. So it doesn't go to HMRC in the first place.

If you fancy discussing taxes with me that's fine but do your homework first.

It's like a landlord using tax deductible expenses to renovate a property, nothing more.

HMRC may be receiving less, but it's not the tax payer paying.
 
west didsblue said:
The income from the crown estate that goes to the treasury is not from the taxpayer. It's from the crown estate.
Click to expand...
85% of the income from the crown estate is paid to the Government.
The remaining 15% is paid to the Sovereign to pay for things like the repairs to Buckingham Palace.
The 15% we are told is not enough to pay for the these repairs to the Palace and pay for all the other stuff and so the 15 % is being increased to 22% i.e. Only 78% of the Crown Estate profit is now going to the government which amounts to funding of these repairs by the taxpayer.
 
Mike D said:
Hang on a minute its a fuckin house get rid of her wouldn't make an iota of a difference. Perhaps if she and some of the hangers were making cups of tea and fancies well then that would be difference. My point in reference the tower of London packed to the rafters not had a monarch living there for donkeys year.
Click to expand...

Is that the Tower of London that is owned by the Queen as its part of the crown's estate?? So thats another attraction that is so popular because of its royal connections, even more reason to keep the fuckers on, Buckingham Palace is only so popular as a tourist attraction as its the queen's primary residence, take her away, its just another stately home and wouldnt attract anywhere near as many people from abroad. You really havent put up a very good argument for getting rid of them at all, they bring in so much money and you havent been able to prove otherwise at all. Also you completely ignored the point about the cost of replacing them and the fact it would result in a presidency that would mean even more **** politicians, exactly what this country doesnt need.
 
Len Rum said:
85% of the income from the crown estate is paid to the Government.
The remaining 15% is paid to the Sovereign to pay for things like the repairs to Buckingham Palace.
The 15% we are told is not enough to pay for the these repairs to the Palace and pay for all the other stuff and so the 15 % is being increased to 22% i.e. Only 78% of the Crown Estate profit is now going to the government which amounts to funding of these repairs by the taxpayer.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. It's a reduction in tax on the Crown Estate profits.

It's all Crown Estate money. Not a single tax payer's penny will go towards it.

You're not understanding this.
 
Len Rum said:
85% of the income from the crown estate is paid to the Government.
The remaining 15% is paid to the Sovereign to pay for things like the repairs to Buckingham Palace.
The 15% we are told is not enough to pay for the these repairs to the Palace and pay for all the other stuff and so the 15 % is being increased to 22% i.e. Only 78% of the Crown Estate profit is now going to the government which amounts to funding of these repairs by the taxpayer.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. The crown estate owns Buckingham Palace and it is only right that a property's owner pays for any major refurbishment. The crown estate is actually owned by the monarch although she is not at liberty to do anything with it. There will be a reduction in the income to the treasury but that doesn't mean the taxpayer is paying.
 
Paul Lake's Left Knee said:
Is that the Tower of London that is owned by the Queen as its part of the crown's estate?? So thats another attraction that is so popular because of its royal connections, even more reason to keep the fuckers on, Buckingham Palace is only so popular as a tourist attraction as its the queen's primary residence, take her away, its just another stately home and wouldnt attract anywhere near as many people from abroad. You really havent put up a very good argument for getting rid of them at all, they bring in so much money and you havent been able to prove otherwise at all. Also you completely ignored the point about the cost of replacing them and the fact it would result in a presidency that would mean even more **** politicians, exactly what this country doesnt need.
Click to expand...
The crown estate is officially owned by the monarch but there was an agreement years ago where its income goes to the treasury apart from 15% that becomes the civil list.
 
west didsblue said:
The crown estate is officially owned by the monarch but there was an agreement years ago where its income goes to the treasury apart from 15% that becomes the civil list.
Click to expand...

I knew that, also that point was made a long time ago in the thread.

Mike D is arguing to get rid of the monarchy, my point is they more than pay for themselves in many ways, the crown estate being just a part of it.
 
I bet there is absolutely no shenanigans whatsoever with the appointment of the building firms. £370m for a refurb.....!!
 
west didsblue said:
No it doesn't. The crown estate owns Buckingham Palace and it is only right that a property's owner pays for any major refurbishment. The crown estate is actually owned by the monarch although she is not at liberty to do anything with it. There will be a reduction in the income to the treasury but that doesn't mean the taxpayer is paying.
Click to expand...
It's best defined as a Landlord's tax deductible expense. The same as a buy to let landlord getting a tax deductible expense on capital expenditures such as rewiring and plumbing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top