You mentioned that they might “opt for making public appearances.” That seems to assume that he has decided they are safe if he opted that.
I simply meant that it might be an option available to him. I don’t know, and since he’s not making that choice, I don’t think it matters.
Well, we don’t know what their plans are if they’re returning to the UK, such as whether they intend to resume public appearances. (Also it will be interesting to see what happens when Harry and his brother are in the same room; I think there is still quite a lot of animosity there.)
From the cited Guardian article:
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning to return to live in Britain, six years after leaving for the US, it is understood.
The couple and their two children, Prince Archie, seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, are expected to relocate later in August to a non-royal residence.
The property is believed to be outside London, and the children are enrolled to start school in September, the Daily Telegraph and the Sun have reported.
King Charles was reportedly informed on Sunday that his son and daughter-in-law would return to Britain.
It comes after the Sussexes, who have lived in California since 2020, had a reunion with the king last month at Highgrove in Gloucestershire.
The king is said to welcome the opportunity to see more of his family in a personal capacity but there will be no change in their status as private individuals after relinquishing their official working roles within the royal family.
The couple will not be offered a “half-in half-out” option, it is understood, with that having been firmly rejected by the late Queen Elizabeth II at the so-called Sandringham summit in 2020, which thrashed out the terms of their departure from the UK and resulted in them officially stepping down as senior royals and no longer using their HRH titles.
It all seems pretty clear to me.
Agreed. “Making public appearances in England” doesn’t necessarily mean “resuming royal duties” – they may well be considering making public appearances in their current role, as private citizens. And if that’s the case, I am skeptical that the British government will foot the bill for their security to any significant degree.
Heh. I provided that very CNN link ten posts earlier.
Nitpick: “The Firm.”
“By Grabthar’s hammer … what a savings.”
If they were still royals and accepted public appearances, would they have to turn over or at least share their fees with The Firm?
In any case, as NON-royals, they would certainly keep 100% of any speaking/attendance/ribbon-cutting/etc. fees.
AFAICT, the royal family does not charge fees, nor accept honorariums, for public appearances. Making such appearances is part of their job.
A BBC story today pointed out that Harry was coming up to renew his visa to stay in the US and that, apparently, there are significant tax implications to him staying longer.
I’m not a tax lawyer and they were coy about details, so that’s all I’ve got, but the implication was that might have weighed in on the decision…
Then it’s definitely more financially savvy to head back to the UK, where they are getting lots of media attention and they can pocket any fees.
Maybe Harry is worried about being sent to an ICE detention jail.
He shouldn’t be; he’s white.
What fees?
For speaking, public appearances, ribbon cuttings, opening schools, art galleries, maybe supermarkets, i.e., lending renting their celebrity sheen to people’s events. Did you think celebrities did that stuff for free?
My understanding is that members of “The Firm,” meaning the King, the Prince of Wales and other members of the family, make these appearances as a public service. If Harry and Meghan came back to the UK and started to ask for money for the same sort of appearances, it’s going to be very controversial. Again, that’s if they do so; we don’t know yet what they intend.
Yeah, that is what I was trying to say. I know Harry and Megan charge for certain public speaking appearances here in the USA, but in the UK?
Isn’t his wife an American citizen? She has to file taxes regardless of where she lives, and if they’re being honest with the IRS, probably pays quite a lot.
Yes, and they were Legal residents. This is a rather complex tax situation, however.
Since they’re not Royals any more, do the old rules apply? They probably wouldn’t blatantly demand fees, but if word got out discreetly… yeah, I’ll bet they’d take the money. As for controversy, in spite of disclaimers, they seem to thrive on controversy.
Like everyone else here, I’m just speculating and making this up.
More to the point, they do it as a royal duty. It’s one of the major reasons that the modern monarchy exists. They do hold substantial reserve powers but they’re rarely exercised – the symbolism is what’s most important in practical modern reality.
For Harry and Meghan to start charging fees for public appearances in the UK would seem to me to be a major embarrassment for all concerned, including their sponsors. The message would be “we couldn’t get actual royalty, so we paid these clowns to show up instead”. Not a good look for anyone.