Apparently the Financial Report for Renovations on Frogmore Cottage Was "Misleading"

The British taxpayer might not have paid for anything after all.

Uniform, Military officer, Military uniform, Fashion, Official, Headgear, Military person, Gesture, Fashion accessory, Police officer,
(Image credit: Max Mumby/Indigo)

Oh, this is really interesting. Part of the fan-related backlash over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle not releasing media photos of Archie Harrison's christening comes down to the idea that British citizens' taxes are used by the British royal family. So, basically, that would include the large-scale renovations on the previously "dilapidated" Frogmore Cottage—so fans think that Harry and Meghan should provide photos that the public absolutely wants to see. But the reality, according to Express, is reportedly more complicated than that. 

This is how it works, according to Express: "The money for the Frogmore renovation was provided to the Duke and Duchess from the Queen, out of funds from the Sovereign Grant, which replaced and streamlined the Civil List in 2011." If you remember, the renovations were listed to have cost £2.4 million, nearly $3 million.

Citing royal author Penny Junor, "The taxpayer doesn’t actually pay for the monarchy at all. It is paid for by the revenue that comes from the Crown Estates. The taxpayer doesn’t pay a penny." (Not everyone agrees with her—some say that the revenue belongs to the nation, not the royalty, but the point is the same).

Here's the thing, though. Even if the taxpayer had to cover the cost, it would have averaged to about four pence (six cents) per taxpayer. Meghan and Harry also covered a good chunk of renovations themselves, further ensuring that the cost remained lower than it could have been. When the report came out, royal reporter Rebecca English assessed that it looked the royals have also been decreasing their spending overall, looking at the past few years.

Property, House, Tree, Vegetation, Natural landscape, Home, Cottage, Fence, Rural area, Spring,

(Image credit: GOR)

totally get it: More baby photos are always preferable, and Archie is the cutest. But I also totally get that security is also a concern for the Sussexes—and they're still figuring things out, since Archie is their first child. So the argument that fans "deserve" to see the royal baby might actually be much more complex than all that.

For more stories like this, including celebrity news, beauty and fashion advice, savvy political commentary, and fascinating features, sign up for the Marie Claire newsletter.


Katherine J. Igoe

Katherine’s a Boston-based contributor at Marie Claire who covers fashion, culture, and lifestyle—from “Clueless” to Everlane to news about Lizzo. She’s been a freelancer for 11 years and has had roles with Cosmopolitan and Bustle, with bylines in Parents, Seventeen, and elsewhere. It’s “I go to dinner,” not “Her huge ego,” but she responds to both.