I speculate Harry and Meghan are renouncing their royal assets, because Harry plans to divorce her. She probably didn’t like the royal restrictions, and Harry suggested a renunciation or went along with it, on the surface to have less restrictions, but with ulterior motive so that he could then divorce her. She would not get any of the royal assets in the divorce proceedings. Then he could rejoin the royal family and lay claim to the royal assets. This General Question is on what exactly are the legal nuances to this scheme? If they do the renunciation reported in the news, and then a divorce, can Harry then rejoin, and would he have again financial assets he would have lost in the divorce? And can Megahn then pull some legal karate on Harry after he rejoins?
There have been divorcees from the royal family before, and I don’t think any of them were able to lay any claim to any of the royal assets.
Have they said that they “are renouncing their royal assets”? I thought that it’s basically that they no longer want to do all of the public stuff related to being “senior members of the royal family” and want more of a private life.
That’s part of the question. There is another SDMB thread on this still “at the top” where posters pointed out certain financial things would be renounced. In this thread I want some legal experts to nail those details down along with the rest of my omnibus question.
Of course he could ask to go back to the job, and his father and grandmother could make what financial arrangement to support that as they thought desirable and acceptable to public opinion. But I doubt if the courts would ever re-open the financial settlement of a divorce simply because one party subsequently finds themselves an extra source of income. But this is wild speculation.
Sounds like he might have lower alimony payments if that’s true.
95% of their expenses are covered by money from his father’s duchy. I think that money is given voluntarily by Charles to Harry (and William also gets money as well). I don’t think that Harry needs to “renounce” that.
Plus, not that Harry has anything really, but I recall some discussion on a thread a while ago that things like titles and associated estates are not “personal property” to be split or disposed of by the owner or the courts. They essentially are an entity unto themselves and vest in whomever has the right by descent to hold that title. Plus, there are things like some palaces that the royals use but essentially belong to the state.
Meanwhile, Harry’s title as I understand it is made-up for convenience, not a long running hereditary title, and does not come with a plethora of revenue-generating estates. As others mentioned, Harry basically gets an allowance from Daddy and some expenses from the state. None of those are assets that can be claimed in a divorce.
Harry would have very little if anything to gain by pulling such a trick.
However, child support typically DOES get reopened if one party’s financial situation changes, and little Archie is now in the mix.
Like others before me, I would note that royals have gotten divorced before without needing to “renounce” anything beforehand. Harry’s own parents had quite a well-publicized breakup, for example, and Charles as the heir had access to vastly greater income than Harry himself does. Diana received a lump-sum settlement (a good chunk of what Harry has now is his inheritance from said settlement, and nothing indicates he plans to renounce that).
Andrew and Fergie, Anne and Mark, and Margaret and Tony all managed a divorce without renouncing royal status. This whole theory sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Unless it’s trying to throw shade on Megan, I don’t understand the “Look at the mess she has made! We’ve never had an unhappy royal marriage before!!!”
80% of the Queen’s immediate family as you mentioned above have divorced. Nothing suggests that Harry is trying to preserve assets in a divorce.
Nothing to renounce - that’s his money plain and simple and has no connection to the royals other than a lot of it originated from them decades ago from that settlement.
The fact is that Harry is mostly rich because his mother left him a shit-ton of money from a trust that was accumulating interest for many years before Harry came into it at 30. He does get a tidy sum from the royal assets, but he has lots of money in his own name. In any divorce there is no sheltering that, so renouncing royal income just for the sake of divorcing doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense.
Harry also has money from the queen’s mother. She left £14 million to William and Harry but Harry received more because William will eventually inherit the Duchy of Cornwall from his father and lots more when he becomes king.
Harry would have to have multiple personalities for it to be a conspiracy. The theory is that one person alone, Harry, has this in mind, and one person by definition cannot be a conspiracy.
conspiracy theory: an explanation of an event or situation that relies on malign motives ascribed to sinister and powerful actors, when other explanations are more probable
I don’t see how this helps him in any hypothetical divorce settlement and if you believe it will, please explain how.
Reading a bit between the lines, it seems that Harry is reasonably financially secure. He and his wife have good financial prospects as media darling celebrities. Participating in royal duties requires that he and his family cooperate with the immiserating British tabloid press pool. His wife is baselessly attacked by them and no one in his family seems to be taking any real steps to protect her from the abuse. In exchange for restraining himself and relenting to the unwarranted attacks on his wife, he gets a payment from official government sources equal to only 5% of his income. The money comes with lots of implied strings about how he and his wife must conduct themselves publicly and how they must deal with the press. It’s perfectly logical for them to drop the official duties, forgo that 5% of his income, move away from the people making him miserable, and seeking fortune and happiness on his own terms.
If what I’ve read is correct, the remaining 95% of his income comes from essentially discretionary gifts from his father. (Please correct me if I’m wrong here.) I understand that those payments aren’t explicitly tied to royal duties but given the reports of shock and surprise inside the palace about Harry’s announcement, perhaps Prince Charles will cut Harry’s salary a bit. If so, Harry and Meghan will have to make their own money. Harry isn’t poor having inherited money from both his mother and his great-grandmother. He and Meghan just have to restrain their spending and rely on these assets and any assets Meghan brings to the table until they ramp up their earnings over the next few years. Harry and Meghan will be less beloved public figures in North America than, let’s say, the Obamas, but they will be quite popular and will have plenty of opportunities for lucrative publishing deals, TV appearances, and corporate speaking engagements. They will do just fine even without the money they are foregoing by turning their backs on their royal duties.
As near as I can tell, Harry and Meghan are doing this to support each other and pursue a happier life for themselves. That doesn’t sound like a prelude to a divorce. I’m not saying they will never divorce; I just don’t think this action is any indication one is currently contemplated.
Actors plural. This is a silly side debate. You want to poo poo my brilliant deduction by labeling it with the pejorative “conspiracy theory” label. The whole reason people dismiss “conspiracy theories” is that it would be improbable for so many people to keep a secret. Here just Harry needs to keep a secret. And it is not really a secret, more accurately an ulterior motive. You are basically saying a theory is implausible if just one person needs to have an ulterior motive for it to be true. You are denying a person can have an ulterior motive. I don’t think you really go around being gullible like that. And Harry is not exercising any significant power here, to address the “power” stipulation in your definition.
Set-up for divorce: Hell no.
A flipping of the bird to the British press for their racist scumbaggery: Hell yes.
One thing I’m curious about is what “real steps” could they take? Telling the tabs “now, now, don’t be rude” isn’t exactly guaranteed to make them behave; shining a light on specific articles seems more likely to generate more attention (Streisand effect) than contrition. They do seem to respond to articles in the “serious” press, such as the recent Times report about William allegedly bullying Harry, but the nastiest remarks about Meghan aren’t generally in the serious press in the first place. The statement Harry issued in November 2016 certainly didn’t seem to help improve the situation. What would?
Well this is off topic, but I didn’t know the press was being racist. Can you point me to some articles?
Here’s a primer on the issue. Click through and check out the side by side pictures and headlines.