查尔斯国王将从英国纳税人那里获得巨额加薪
正文翻译
(The Treasury’s announcement on funding for Charles and the rest of the royal family was described as ‘grossly misleading’.)
（财政部关于为查尔斯和其他王室成员提供资金的声明被描述为“严重误导”。）
新闻：
King Charles to receive huge pay rise from UK taxpayers
-Details published by Treasury show royal family’s grant is expected to increase from £86m to £125m in 2025
查尔斯国王将从英国纳税人那里获得巨额加薪
——财政部公布的细节显示，到2025年，王室的拨款预计将从8600万英镑增加到1.25亿英镑
-Details published by Treasury show royal family’s grant is expected to increase from £86m to £125m in 2025
查尔斯国王将从英国纳税人那里获得巨额加薪
——财政部公布的细节显示，到2025年，王室的拨款预计将从8600万英镑增加到1.25亿英镑
(The Treasury’s announcement on funding for Charles and the rest of the royal family was described as ‘grossly misleading’.)
（财政部关于为查尔斯和其他王室成员提供资金的声明被描述为“严重误导”。）
新闻：
King Charles III is to receive a huge pay rise from the UK taxpayer, according to government plans to boost public funding of the monarchy by 45% from 2025.
根据英国政府计划，从2025年起，王室的公共资金将增加45%，国王查尔斯三世将从纳税人那里获得大幅加薪。
根据英国政府计划，从2025年起，王室的公共资金将增加45%，国王查尔斯三世将从纳税人那里获得大幅加薪。
Details of the increase, which comes against the backdrop of a cost of living crisis, were contained in a review of royal funding published by the Treasury on Thursday. It revealed the royal family’s grant is due to increase from £86m to £125m.
在生活成本危机的背景下，英国财政部周四公布了一份对王室资金的审查报告，其中包含了这一增长的细节。据透露，王室的拨款将从8600万英镑增加到1.25亿英镑。
在生活成本危机的背景下，英国财政部周四公布了一份对王室资金的审查报告，其中包含了这一增长的细节。据透露，王室的拨款将从8600万英镑增加到1.25亿英镑。
The monarchy’s annual budget, known as the sovereign grant, is pegged against the profits from a national property portfolio called the crown estate.
王室的年度预算被称为“君主拨款”，与被称为“王室财产”的国家房地产投资组合的利润挂钩。
王室的年度预算被称为“君主拨款”，与被称为“王室财产”的国家房地产投资组合的利润挂钩。
The review of the royal funding settlement was heavily spun by the Treasury to give the impression that the king would be taking a pay cut so that crown estate funds could instead be spent on public services.
对王室资金解决方案的审查在很大程度上是由财政部操纵的，目的是给人一种印象，即“国王将减薪”，这样王室财产基金就可以用于公共服务了。
对王室资金解决方案的审查在很大程度上是由财政部操纵的，目的是给人一种印象，即“国王将减薪”，这样王室财产基金就可以用于公共服务了。
In fact, the report reveals the monarchy is due to receive a huge pay increase, although the rise will not kick in for another two years.
事实上，报告显示，王室将获得大幅加薪，尽管这一加薪要到两年后才会生效。
事实上，报告显示，王室将获得大幅加薪，尽管这一加薪要到两年后才会生效。
Next year, the sovereign grant will remain unchanged at £86.3m. However, in 2025, the king’s public funding will increase by a projected £38.5m, giving the monarchy an annual stipend of £124.8m. In 2026, it will be £126m.
明年，政府拨款将维持在8630万英镑不变。然而，到2025年，国王的公共资金预计将增加3850万英镑，使王室每年的津贴达到1.248亿英镑。到2026年，这个数字将达到1.26亿英镑。
明年，政府拨款将维持在8630万英镑不变。然而，到2025年，国王的公共资金预计将增加3850万英镑，使王室每年的津贴达到1.248亿英镑。到2026年，这个数字将达到1.26亿英镑。
Contacted by the Guardian, Buckingham Palace and the Treasury did not dispute that the sovereign grant was expected to significantly increase in the coming years.
在接受《卫报》采访时，白金汉宫和财政部对未来几年王室拨款预计将大幅增加的说法没有异议。
在接受《卫报》采访时，白金汉宫和财政部对未来几年王室拨款预计将大幅增加的说法没有异议。
Lord Turnbull, a former cabinet secretary, Whitehall’s most senior civil servant, who was involved in official discussions over royal financing, accused the Treasury of seeking to obfuscate how the monarchy was funded.
特恩布尔勋爵曾担任内阁大臣，是白厅级别最高的公务员，他参与了有关王室财务的官方讨论，他指责财政部试图混淆王室的融资方式。
特恩布尔勋爵曾担任内阁大臣，是白厅级别最高的公务员，他参与了有关王室财务的官方讨论，他指责财政部试图混淆王室的融资方式。
He said that lixing the royal finances to the profits of the crown estate was “silly” and was motivated by a desire to promote the idea that the king was paying for himself and was reducing the burden on the taxpayer.
他说，将王室财务与王室财产的利润挂钩是“愚蠢的”，其动机是想宣传这样一种观念，即“国王自负盈亏，减轻纳税人的负担”。
他说，将王室财务与王室财产的利润挂钩是“愚蠢的”，其动机是想宣传这样一种观念，即“国王自负盈亏，减轻纳税人的负担”。
“You get people writing in saying: ‘Isn’t it a good thing that the king is so sensitive to public opinion that he has waived some of the money he could have had?’ I think it’s bollocks. It is deliberate – that’s really what makes me so cross about it. It is a deliberate attempt to obfuscate how the thing works.”
“有人写信说：‘国王对公众舆论如此敏感，放弃了一些他本可以拥有的钱，这不是一件好事吗？’我认为这是扯淡。这是故意的——这才是真正让我生气的地方。这是一种故意混淆事物如何运作的企图。”
“有人写信说：‘国王对公众舆论如此敏感，放弃了一些他本可以拥有的钱，这不是一件好事吗？’我认为这是扯淡。这是故意的——这才是真正让我生气的地方。这是一种故意混淆事物如何运作的企图。”
The complicated formula used to determine the sovereign grant was introduced in 2011 by the then prime minister, David Cameron, and his chancellor, George Osborne. Removing parliament’s centuries-old control over royal funding, they created a new formula that tied the monarch’s funding to a percentage of the profits of the crown estate.
用于确定王室拨款的复杂公式是由时任首相戴维·卡梅伦和财政大臣乔治·奥斯本于2011年引入的。他们取消了议会几个世纪以来对王室资金的控制，创造了一个新的公式，将君主的资金与王室财产利润的一定比例相挂钩。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
用于确定王室拨款的复杂公式是由时任首相戴维·卡梅伦和财政大臣乔治·奥斯本于2011年引入的。他们取消了议会几个世纪以来对王室资金的控制，创造了一个新的公式，将君主的资金与王室财产利润的一定比例相挂钩。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Under the arrangement, that percentage is decided by the so-called royal trustees: the prime minister, chancellor and the king’s financial adviser. Since 2017, they have set the percentage at a rate of 25% of the estate’s net profits, resulting in a steady increase in funding for the monarchy as its profits increased.
在这种安排下，这一比例由所谓的王室受托人（首相、财政大臣和国王的财务顾问）决定。自2017年以来，他们将这一比例设定为王室净利润的25%，随着王室利润的增加，王室的资金也在稳步增加。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
在这种安排下，这一比例由所谓的王室受托人（首相、财政大臣和国王的财务顾问）决定。自2017年以来，他们将这一比例设定为王室净利润的25%，随着王室利润的增加，王室的资金也在稳步增加。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
However, Buckingham Palace and the Treasury have for months been wrestling with the dilemma of how to manage projections of an enormous increase to crown estate profits, resulting from the sale of leases for offshore windfarms by the estate.
然而，几个月来，白金汉宫和财政部一直在为如何管理王室地产利润大幅增长的预测而苦苦挣扎。王室地产出售海上风电场的租约将导致利润大幅增长。
然而，几个月来，白金汉宫和财政部一直在为如何管理王室地产利润大幅增长的预测而苦苦挣扎。王室地产出售海上风电场的租约将导致利润大幅增长。
The anticipated profits are forecast to more than double from £443m this year to more than £1bn next year.
预计利润将从今年的4.43亿英镑增加一倍以上，至明年的逾10亿英镑。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
预计利润将从今年的4.43亿英镑增加一倍以上，至明年的逾10亿英镑。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The trustees’ decision was announced on Thursday. The Treasury emphasised a reduction in the percentage of crown estate’s profits to which the king would be entitled, from 25% to 12%.
受托人的决定于周四宣布。财政部强调，国王有权享有的皇家财产利润比例将从25%降至12%。
受托人的决定于周四宣布。财政部强调，国王有权享有的皇家财产利润比例将从25%降至12%。
The government declared the royal household’s budget would be “£130m lower in both 2025 and 2026, than if the rate remained at 25%”. It added: “Cutting the rate to 12% is expected to reduce the sovereign grant by £24m in 2024-2025 … This money will instead be used to fund vital public services, for the benefit of the nation.
政府宣布：“如果比率保持在25%，那么2025年和2026年王室的预算都将增加1.3亿英镑”。它补充说：“将比率降至12%预计将使2024-2025年的王室拨款减少2400万英镑……这笔钱将用于资助重要的公共服务，以造福国家。”
政府宣布：“如果比率保持在25%，那么2025年和2026年王室的预算都将增加1.3亿英镑”。它补充说：“将比率降至12%预计将使2024-2025年的王室拨款减少2400万英镑……这笔钱将用于资助重要的公共服务，以造福国家。”
Missing entirely from the Treasury press release was any mention of how, by receiving a smaller slice of a much larger pie, the king was still in line for a huge pay rise.
财政部的新闻稿中完全没有提到，尽管国王在大蛋糕中分得了更小的一块，但他的薪水仍将大幅上涨。
财政部的新闻稿中完全没有提到，尽管国王在大蛋糕中分得了更小的一块，但他的薪水仍将大幅上涨。
Graham Smith, the chief executive of the anti-monarchy group Republic, who was arrested while attempting to peacefully protest at Charles’s coronation, described the Treasury’s announcement as “grossly misleading”.
“反君主制组织共和国”的首席执行官格雷厄姆·史密斯（之前在试图和平抗议查尔斯加冕时被捕）形容财政部的声明“严重误导”。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“反君主制组织共和国”的首席执行官格雷厄姆·史密斯（之前在试图和平抗议查尔斯加冕时被捕）形容财政部的声明“严重误导”。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Another prominent republican, Norman Baker, a former Liberal Democrat minister, condemned the massive net increase in funding going to the king.
另一位著名的共和派、前自由民主党大臣诺曼·贝克谴责了向国王拨款的大幅净增长。
另一位著名的共和派、前自由民主党大臣诺曼·贝克谴责了向国王拨款的大幅净增长。
“This is a time when people are having difficulty putting food on the tables,” he said. “We’re actually providing more largesse for the royal family, who are really bloated in terms of their money.”
他说：“这是一个人们难以养家糊口的时代。我们实际上是在为王室提供更多的慷慨，他们的钱真的太多了。”
他说：“这是一个人们难以养家糊口的时代。我们实际上是在为王室提供更多的慷慨，他们的钱真的太多了。”
Baker observed that Britain’s royal family was considerably more expensive than other European monarchies. “The royals always plead poverty,” he added. “They always say that any changes to the arrangements are beneficial for the taxpayer. They never are. The arrangements that are made are beneficial for the royal family. It’s always been the way.”
贝克注意到，英国王室比欧洲其他君主制国家的皇室要昂贵得多。“王室成员总是以贫穷为借口，”他补充说。“他们总是说，任何安排的改变都对纳税人有利。从来就没有。这样的安排对王室才是有利的。一直都是如此。”
贝克注意到，英国王室比欧洲其他君主制国家的皇室要昂贵得多。“王室成员总是以贫穷为借口，”他补充说。“他们总是说，任何安排的改变都对纳税人有利。从来就没有。这样的安排对王室才是有利的。一直都是如此。”
Asked for comment on whether it was appropriate for the king’s pay to increase so significantly amid the cost of living crisis, a Buckingham Palace spokesperson pointed out that the sovereign grant had remained flat at £86m for several years, which she said was a real-terms cut when considered against inflation.
当被问及在生活成本危机中如此大幅增加国王的薪酬是否合适时，白金汉宫的一位发言人指出，君主拨款多年来一直保持在8600万英镑的水平，她说，考虑到通货膨胀，这个涨幅实际上是一个削减。
当被问及在生活成本危机中如此大幅增加国王的薪酬是否合适时，白金汉宫的一位发言人指出，君主拨款多年来一直保持在8600万英镑的水平，她说，考虑到通货膨胀，这个涨幅实际上是一个削减。
The spokesperson did not dispute that the sovereign grant would be £124.8m from 2025. However, she said that the increase would be “temporary, only for the financial years of 2025-6 and 2026-7” and would be used to complete renovation works at Buckingham Palace.
这位发言人对政府拨款从2025年起将达到1.248亿英镑的说法没有异议。然而，她表示，这一增长将是“暂时的，仅适用于2025-6财政年度和2026-7财政年度”，并将用于完成白金汉宫的翻新工程。
这位发言人对政府拨款从2025年起将达到1.248亿英镑的说法没有异议。然而，她表示，这一增长将是“暂时的，仅适用于2025-6财政年度和2026-7财政年度”，并将用于完成白金汉宫的翻新工程。
The modernisation of the royal palace has long been used to justify increases in the sovereign grant, which was just £31m when it was first introduced in 2012-2013. Under a “golden ratchet” clause in the Sovereign Grant Act, the amount of money handed to the monarch can never fall, even if the crown estate’s profits decrease.
长期以来，王室宫殿的现代化改造一直被用来证明增加主权拨款的合理性。2012年至2013年首次引入主权拨款时，该拨款仅为3100万英镑。根据《君主拨款法案》中的“黄金棘轮”条款，即使王室财产的利润减少，交给君主的钱也永远不会减少。
长期以来，王室宫殿的现代化改造一直被用来证明增加主权拨款的合理性。2012年至2013年首次引入主权拨款时，该拨款仅为3100万英镑。根据《君主拨款法案》中的“黄金棘轮”条款，即使王室财产的利润减少，交给君主的钱也永远不会减少。
A Treasury spokesperson said: “The grant has been largely unchanged since 2020 and this temporary increase covers the remainder of the Buckingham Palace refurbishment. We will review the grant in 2026, expecting to bring it back down in 2027.”
一位财政部发言人表示：“自2020年以来，这笔拨款基本没有变化，这次临时增加的拨款都涵盖了白金汉宫翻新的其余部分。我们将在2026年审查这笔拨款，并预计在2027年将其降低。”
一位财政部发言人表示：“自2020年以来，这笔拨款基本没有变化，这次临时增加的拨款都涵盖了白金汉宫翻新的其余部分。我们将在2026年审查这笔拨款，并预计在2027年将其降低。”
评论翻译
shrapnel001
Lots of people defending this as misleading as it’sa ‘cut of the percentage income from the crown estate’.
I’m more of the mindset that if we get rid of them, we get 100% of the crown estate. WHY DO WE PAY THESE PEOPLE!?!
很多人认为这是一种误导，因为这“削减了皇家财产收入的百分比”。
但我更倾向于认为，如果我们摆脱了他们，我们就能得到100%的王室财产。我们干吗要付钱给这些人！？
Lots of people defending this as misleading as it’sa ‘cut of the percentage income from the crown estate’.
I’m more of the mindset that if we get rid of them, we get 100% of the crown estate. WHY DO WE PAY THESE PEOPLE!?!
很多人认为这是一种误导，因为这“削减了皇家财产收入的百分比”。
但我更倾向于认为，如果我们摆脱了他们，我们就能得到100%的王室财产。我们干吗要付钱给这些人！？
brendonmilligan
Not how that would work at all. If they were abolished then they absolutely would have a claim of ownership of all the property in the estate. It would be a lengthy legal battle and I can see them absolutely winning it in court
这根本行不通。就算他们被废除了，他们也绝对会对遗产中的所有财产拥有所有权。这将是一场漫长的法律战，我认为他们绝对会在法庭上获胜的
Not how that would work at all. If they were abolished then they absolutely would have a claim of ownership of all the property in the estate. It would be a lengthy legal battle and I can see them absolutely winning it in court
这根本行不通。就算他们被废除了，他们也绝对会对遗产中的所有财产拥有所有权。这将是一场漫长的法律战，我认为他们绝对会在法庭上获胜的
Mkwdr
The Crown Estate would belong to the U.K. state if there were no Monarchy.
如果没有君主制，皇家财产管理公司（译注：The Crown Estate，由英国君主成立的管理王室英国土地和财产集合的独家公司）将属于全英国。
The Crown Estate would belong to the U.K. state if there were no Monarchy.
如果没有君主制，皇家财产管理公司（译注：The Crown Estate，由英国君主成立的管理王室英国土地和财产集合的独家公司）将属于全英国。
Cumulus_Anarchistica
If the Crown Estate ever belonged to the U.K. state, the Tories would sell it off cheap to their 'business friends' before teatime.
如果皇家财产管理公司属于英国政府，保守党会在下午茶之前就把它贱卖给他们的“商界朋友”。
If the Crown Estate ever belonged to the U.K. state, the Tories would sell it off cheap to their 'business friends' before teatime.
如果皇家财产管理公司属于英国政府，保守党会在下午茶之前就把它贱卖给他们的“商界朋友”。
anschutz_shooter
The Crown Estate already de facto belongs to the UK State. The monarch in their role as the UK Head of State ("the Crown") is basically just a trustee for it. It doesn't belong to them personally, and they don't even really have any role in managing it. Without a monarchy it may just fall direct into Treasury management, or be in trust of the new Head of State (probably a president - whether Executive or Ceremonial).
In either case, we would still spend tens of millions of pounds maintaining the President and maintaining the historic royal buildings (those which remain with the state and aren't the Windsor's personal property - like Balmoral and Sandringham).
There's a valid ideological reason for dispensing with the monarchy, but let's not pretend it would "save the taxpayer money". Indeed, a President would probably be significantly less reserved in demanding more presidential "stuff" - jets, helicopters. I mean, Boris getting the RAF jet painted in that unx jack paint job was wildly overblown because it was getting repainted anyway, so it wasn't actually a million quid wasted. But you can expect to see more of that sort of thing under an elected/populist President "with a mandate".
皇家财产管理公司实际上已经属于英国政府了。作为英国国家元首（“王冠”）的君主基本上只是它的受托人。它不属于他们个人，他们甚至没有任何身份去管理它。如果没有君主制，它可能会直接落入财政部的管理之中，或者受到新的国家元首（可能是总统——无论是行政元首还是象征性元首）的管辖。
但无论哪种情况，我们仍然会花费数千万英镑来维护总统和历史悠久的皇家建筑（那些仍然属于国家而不再是温莎的个人财产，比如巴尔莫勒尔宫和桑德林厄姆宫）。
废除君主制有一个合理的意识形态理由，但我们不要假装它会“节省纳税人的钱”。事实上，总统在要求更多的总统“用品”——喷气式飞机、直升机——时，可能会更不加节制。我是说，炒作鲍里斯让英国皇家空军的飞机涂上英国国旗的漆样真是过于夸张了，因为它本来就在重新涂漆，所以这并没有浪费一百万英镑。但你可以期待在一个“有授权”的民选/民粹主义总统的领导下，看到更多这样的事情。
The Crown Estate already de facto belongs to the UK State. The monarch in their role as the UK Head of State ("the Crown") is basically just a trustee for it. It doesn't belong to them personally, and they don't even really have any role in managing it. Without a monarchy it may just fall direct into Treasury management, or be in trust of the new Head of State (probably a president - whether Executive or Ceremonial).
In either case, we would still spend tens of millions of pounds maintaining the President and maintaining the historic royal buildings (those which remain with the state and aren't the Windsor's personal property - like Balmoral and Sandringham).
There's a valid ideological reason for dispensing with the monarchy, but let's not pretend it would "save the taxpayer money". Indeed, a President would probably be significantly less reserved in demanding more presidential "stuff" - jets, helicopters. I mean, Boris getting the RAF jet painted in that unx jack paint job was wildly overblown because it was getting repainted anyway, so it wasn't actually a million quid wasted. But you can expect to see more of that sort of thing under an elected/populist President "with a mandate".
皇家财产管理公司实际上已经属于英国政府了。作为英国国家元首（“王冠”）的君主基本上只是它的受托人。它不属于他们个人，他们甚至没有任何身份去管理它。如果没有君主制，它可能会直接落入财政部的管理之中，或者受到新的国家元首（可能是总统——无论是行政元首还是象征性元首）的管辖。
但无论哪种情况，我们仍然会花费数千万英镑来维护总统和历史悠久的皇家建筑（那些仍然属于国家而不再是温莎的个人财产，比如巴尔莫勒尔宫和桑德林厄姆宫）。
废除君主制有一个合理的意识形态理由，但我们不要假装它会“节省纳税人的钱”。事实上，总统在要求更多的总统“用品”——喷气式飞机、直升机——时，可能会更不加节制。我是说，炒作鲍里斯让英国皇家空军的飞机涂上英国国旗的漆样真是过于夸张了，因为它本来就在重新涂漆，所以这并没有浪费一百万英镑。但你可以期待在一个“有授权”的民选/民粹主义总统的领导下，看到更多这样的事情。
Mkwdr
Well true enough and I wouldn’t necessarily bring up the save us money argument as being that significant, personally. But a lot depends on what you replace them with - though to be honest I’m never quite sure why exactly we need a figurehead head of state. Either way the cost of the office of the Irish Presidency is … £5 million? The article refers to around £90 million currently to the monarch form the Crown Estates. Guessing that the Irish President also pays income tax and inheritance tax?
好吧，确实如此，我个人不会把为我们会省钱的论点说得那么重要。但这在很大程度上取决于你用什么来取代他们——尽管说实话，我从来都不太确定我们到底为什么需要一个有名无实的国家元首。不管怎样，爱尔兰总统办公室的费用是……500万英镑？这篇报道提到，目前王室财产中约有9000万英镑属于女王。你猜爱尔兰总统是不是也要缴纳所得税和遗产税？
Well true enough and I wouldn’t necessarily bring up the save us money argument as being that significant, personally. But a lot depends on what you replace them with - though to be honest I’m never quite sure why exactly we need a figurehead head of state. Either way the cost of the office of the Irish Presidency is … £5 million? The article refers to around £90 million currently to the monarch form the Crown Estates. Guessing that the Irish President also pays income tax and inheritance tax?
好吧，确实如此，我个人不会把为我们会省钱的论点说得那么重要。但这在很大程度上取决于你用什么来取代他们——尽管说实话，我从来都不太确定我们到底为什么需要一个有名无实的国家元首。不管怎样，爱尔兰总统办公室的费用是……500万英镑？这篇报道提到，目前王室财产中约有9000万英镑属于女王。你猜爱尔兰总统是不是也要缴纳所得税和遗产税？
jj34589
No it wouldn’t necessarily. There is definitely an argument it or a good deal of it would become the private property of Mr Charles Windsor or whatever His Majesty would call himself in that event. Unless it was actually confiscated. The Crown Estate is currently a statutory corporation owned by the monarch in right of the Crown and has its profits turned over to the government by agreement to receive the Sovereign Grant.
If that agreement is broken then the Crown Estates return to the personal control and ownership of the monarch. It becomes once again personal property of the monarch as an individual and therefore the Crown Estate would not transfer to state ownership. Neither would the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall and all their incomes go to the government, but remain private property of Charles III and Prince William.
不，不一定属于全英国。有一种说法是，它或其中很大一部分将成为查尔斯·温莎“先生”（或者无论国王陛下在这件事上如何称呼自己）的私人财产。除非它真的被没收了。目前，皇家财产管理公司是由君主拥有的法定公司，其利润通过接受君主拨款的协议上缴给政府。
如果这一协议被打破，那么皇家财产管理公司将回到君主的个人控制和所有权状态。它再次成为君主的个人财产，因此皇家财产管理公司不会转移到国家所有制。兰开斯特和康沃尔公爵领地及其所有收入也不会归政府所有，而是保留为查理三世和威廉王子的私有财产。
No it wouldn’t necessarily. There is definitely an argument it or a good deal of it would become the private property of Mr Charles Windsor or whatever His Majesty would call himself in that event. Unless it was actually confiscated. The Crown Estate is currently a statutory corporation owned by the monarch in right of the Crown and has its profits turned over to the government by agreement to receive the Sovereign Grant.
If that agreement is broken then the Crown Estates return to the personal control and ownership of the monarch. It becomes once again personal property of the monarch as an individual and therefore the Crown Estate would not transfer to state ownership. Neither would the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall and all their incomes go to the government, but remain private property of Charles III and Prince William.
不，不一定属于全英国。有一种说法是，它或其中很大一部分将成为查尔斯·温莎“先生”（或者无论国王陛下在这件事上如何称呼自己）的私人财产。除非它真的被没收了。目前，皇家财产管理公司是由君主拥有的法定公司，其利润通过接受君主拨款的协议上缴给政府。
如果这一协议被打破，那么皇家财产管理公司将回到君主的个人控制和所有权状态。它再次成为君主的个人财产，因此皇家财产管理公司不会转移到国家所有制。兰开斯特和康沃尔公爵领地及其所有收入也不会归政府所有，而是保留为查理三世和威廉王子的私有财产。
Nikhilvoid
a good deal of it would become the private property of Mr Charles Windsor
Nope, it wouldn't. That would be theft from the UK state unless Mr. Windsor paid for it. That's how "privatization" happens.
The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property.
“它或其中很大一部分将成为查尔斯·温莎‘先生’的私人财产”
不，它不会。这将是对英国政府的盗窃，除非温莎“先生”付了钱。“私有化”就是这样发生的。
皇家财产管理公司一直都是公共财产，它们所筹集的收入也是公共收入。当乔治三世在18世纪放弃对皇家财产管理公司的控制时，它们就不再是他的私有财产了。
a good deal of it would become the private property of Mr Charles Windsor
Nope, it wouldn't. That would be theft from the UK state unless Mr. Windsor paid for it. That's how "privatization" happens.
The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property.
“它或其中很大一部分将成为查尔斯·温莎‘先生’的私人财产”
不，它不会。这将是对英国政府的盗窃，除非温莎“先生”付了钱。“私有化”就是这样发生的。
皇家财产管理公司一直都是公共财产，它们所筹集的收入也是公共收入。当乔治三世在18世纪放弃对皇家财产管理公司的控制时，它们就不再是他的私有财产了。
stroopwafel666
The royal family don’t personally own the Crown Estate. It’s not their private property, and if we abolished them then the entire thing would belong to us.
So no, our profit has increased, and we are giving the family more as a result.
王室并不拥有皇家财产管理公司。这不是他们的私有财产，如果我们废除了他们，那么整个东西就属于我们了。
所以，不，我们的利润增加了，然后我们正在给这个家族更多钱。
The royal family don’t personally own the Crown Estate. It’s not their private property, and if we abolished them then the entire thing would belong to us.
So no, our profit has increased, and we are giving the family more as a result.
王室并不拥有皇家财产管理公司。这不是他们的私有财产，如果我们废除了他们，那么整个东西就属于我们了。
所以，不，我们的利润增加了，然后我们正在给这个家族更多钱。
LondonCycling
I do wonder if the royal family compromise lies in the Danish model.
They have a royal family, which gets a much more 'modest' (relatively speaking) income, aren't allowed to earn other income, and have their main residences open to the public and generating revenue for the state. The Queen's children currently don't have royal titles, so the family is quite 'slim'. The crown jewels are passed between monarchs, rather than the British approach of spaffing huge sums of money on a new set for each monarch, not to mention the amount spent on coronations here.
Combine that with removing the Royal Assent, and not adopting immunity from prosecution.
I don't mind in principle having figurehead monarchs. I just wish that if we're going to bleat on about tourism income, we should open Buckingham Palace to the public, take 100% of the revenue from their properties, and remove the remaining few special privileges they retain.
Charles must know that opinion polling on the royal family as it stands is steadily decreasing. They need to do sometime to remain popular. I'd suggest extravagant pageantry isn't the way to do it.
我很想知道王室的妥协是否体现在丹麦模式中。
他们有一个王室，收入相对来说要“适度”得多，也不允许有其他收入，他们的主要住所向公众开放，为国家创造收入。目前，女王的孩子们没有王室头衔，所以这个家族相当“苗条”。皇冠上的珠宝是在君主之间传递的，而不是像英国那样，为每位君主花费巨额资金另行购买一套新珠宝，更不用说英国在加冕典礼上花费的资金了。
再加上取消御准，不适用起诉豁免。
原则上我不介意有名无实的君主。我只是希望，如果我们要抱怨旅游业的收入，那我们就应该向公众开放白金汉宫，从他们的财产中收取100%的营收，并取消他们保留的少数特权。
查尔斯必须知道，目前对王室的民意调查正在稳步下降。他们需要做些什么来保持受欢迎。我想说的是，奢华的盛况并不是解决问题的方法。
I do wonder if the royal family compromise lies in the Danish model.
They have a royal family, which gets a much more 'modest' (relatively speaking) income, aren't allowed to earn other income, and have their main residences open to the public and generating revenue for the state. The Queen's children currently don't have royal titles, so the family is quite 'slim'. The crown jewels are passed between monarchs, rather than the British approach of spaffing huge sums of money on a new set for each monarch, not to mention the amount spent on coronations here.
Combine that with removing the Royal Assent, and not adopting immunity from prosecution.
I don't mind in principle having figurehead monarchs. I just wish that if we're going to bleat on about tourism income, we should open Buckingham Palace to the public, take 100% of the revenue from their properties, and remove the remaining few special privileges they retain.
Charles must know that opinion polling on the royal family as it stands is steadily decreasing. They need to do sometime to remain popular. I'd suggest extravagant pageantry isn't the way to do it.
我很想知道王室的妥协是否体现在丹麦模式中。
他们有一个王室，收入相对来说要“适度”得多，也不允许有其他收入，他们的主要住所向公众开放，为国家创造收入。目前，女王的孩子们没有王室头衔，所以这个家族相当“苗条”。皇冠上的珠宝是在君主之间传递的，而不是像英国那样，为每位君主花费巨额资金另行购买一套新珠宝，更不用说英国在加冕典礼上花费的资金了。
再加上取消御准，不适用起诉豁免。
原则上我不介意有名无实的君主。我只是希望，如果我们要抱怨旅游业的收入，那我们就应该向公众开放白金汉宫，从他们的财产中收取100%的营收，并取消他们保留的少数特权。
查尔斯必须知道，目前对王室的民意调查正在稳步下降。他们需要做些什么来保持受欢迎。我想说的是，奢华的盛况并不是解决问题的方法。
Blue_winged_yoshi
Imagine using online time to advocate a 40% pay rise for the boy with the shiny hat whilst people go hungry. You know he wouldn’t do the same for you, right?
想象一下，当人们还在挨饿的时候，利用你的网络时间主张为戴着闪亮帽子的大男孩加薪40%。你知道他不会为你这么做的，对吧？
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Imagine using online time to advocate a 40% pay rise for the boy with the shiny hat whilst people go hungry. You know he wouldn’t do the same for you, right?
想象一下，当人们还在挨饿的时候，利用你的网络时间主张为戴着闪亮帽子的大男孩加薪40%。你知道他不会为你这么做的，对吧？
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Judge-Dredd_
You know he wouldn’t do the same for you, right?
The "boy with the shiny hat" set up the Princes Trust with his own money, and has put his own money into many social experiments to try and improve the status of the disadvantaged.
“你知道他不会为你这么做的，对吧？”
这位“戴着闪亮帽子的男孩”用自己的钱建立了王子信托基金，并将自己的钱投入到许多社会实验中，以试图改善弱势群体的地位。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
You know he wouldn’t do the same for you, right?
The "boy with the shiny hat" set up the Princes Trust with his own money, and has put his own money into many social experiments to try and improve the status of the disadvantaged.
“你知道他不会为你这么做的，对吧？”
这位“戴着闪亮帽子的男孩”用自己的钱建立了王子信托基金，并将自己的钱投入到许多社会实验中，以试图改善弱势群体的地位。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Blue_winged_yoshi
He’s a birth right head of state and billionaire. Oh look he set up a charity with a small percentage of ill plundered wealth isn’t a reason to give him more wealth, We could cut out the middle man and give all his 40% pay rise to those who need it. I think he’ll cope on £80m a year.
他生来就是国家元首和亿万富翁。哦，看哪，他用一小部分非法掠夺的财富建立了一个慈善机构，这不是给他更多财富的理由，我们可以省去中间人，直接把他40%的加薪全部给那些需要的人。我想一年八千万英镑就已经够他花了。
He’s a birth right head of state and billionaire. Oh look he set up a charity with a small percentage of ill plundered wealth isn’t a reason to give him more wealth, We could cut out the middle man and give all his 40% pay rise to those who need it. I think he’ll cope on £80m a year.
他生来就是国家元首和亿万富翁。哦，看哪，他用一小部分非法掠夺的财富建立了一个慈善机构，这不是给他更多财富的理由，我们可以省去中间人，直接把他40%的加薪全部给那些需要的人。我想一年八千万英镑就已经够他花了。
palishkoto
I mean, the Prince's Trust has done a huge amount of work in creating wealth as well from people who would never have had the money to start a business at all - not just small businesses but global British brands like Jimmy Choo. We're still getting more money from the CE than before.
我的意思是，王子信托基金也做了大量创造财富的工作，包括给那些本来根本没有钱创业的人提供机会——不仅仅是小企业，还有像Jimmy Choo这样的全球英国品牌都受益过。我们从皇家财产管理公司得到的钱也一直在增加。
I mean, the Prince's Trust has done a huge amount of work in creating wealth as well from people who would never have had the money to start a business at all - not just small businesses but global British brands like Jimmy Choo. We're still getting more money from the CE than before.
我的意思是，王子信托基金也做了大量创造财富的工作，包括给那些本来根本没有钱创业的人提供机会——不仅仅是小企业，还有像Jimmy Choo这样的全球英国品牌都受益过。我们从皇家财产管理公司得到的钱也一直在增加。
Blue_winged_yoshi
If the government wants to set up an enterprise scheme with the bonus £40m, great do that!!
I feel like people aren’t getting it, we don’t need give a billionaire another £40m for him to decide to give £5m to charity. Celebrating his “generosity” here is just a pathetic serf attitude. Are we a nation of mugs? Cos it looks like it!!
Just give the full £40m directly to a range of good causes and investments. Billionaire Charlie will cope with another £80m to see him through the year, and if he’s a really kind soul he might even still do some charity stuff given he’s a billionaire whose never had to have a real job in his life.
如果政府想设立一个企业计划，奖金是4000万英镑，那会很棒！！
我觉得人们没有搞明白——我们不需要再给一个亿万富翁4000万英镑，然后让他决定向慈善机构捐赠500万英镑。在这里庆祝他的“慷慨”只是一种可悲的农奴心态。我们是一个SB国家吗？因为看起来就是这样！！
只要把全部4000万英镑直接捐给一系列公益事业和投资就行了。亿万富翁查理还能用另外的8000万英镑来度过这一年，如果他真的很善良，他可能还会做一些慈善活动，考虑到他是一个从来没有真正自己工作过的亿万富翁。
If the government wants to set up an enterprise scheme with the bonus £40m, great do that!!
I feel like people aren’t getting it, we don’t need give a billionaire another £40m for him to decide to give £5m to charity. Celebrating his “generosity” here is just a pathetic serf attitude. Are we a nation of mugs? Cos it looks like it!!
Just give the full £40m directly to a range of good causes and investments. Billionaire Charlie will cope with another £80m to see him through the year, and if he’s a really kind soul he might even still do some charity stuff given he’s a billionaire whose never had to have a real job in his life.
如果政府想设立一个企业计划，奖金是4000万英镑，那会很棒！！
我觉得人们没有搞明白——我们不需要再给一个亿万富翁4000万英镑，然后让他决定向慈善机构捐赠500万英镑。在这里庆祝他的“慷慨”只是一种可悲的农奴心态。我们是一个SB国家吗？因为看起来就是这样！！
只要把全部4000万英镑直接捐给一系列公益事业和投资就行了。亿万富翁查理还能用另外的8000万英镑来度过这一年，如果他真的很善良，他可能还会做一些慈善活动，考虑到他是一个从来没有真正自己工作过的亿万富翁。
blamordeganis
Is the absolute amount of money the King is getting going up (in real terms) or not?
And if it is, why? Are the expenses of the job going up? Or are we worried that another country’s going to headhunt him and he’ll quit to go and be king there instead?
If neither of those apply, it seems a bit early to be talking about a raise (other than a cost-of-living increase), especially when everyone’s being asked to curb their wage expectations to avoid driving inflation up even higher.
Maybe we could revisit after a couple of performance-review cycles?
国王得到的绝对金额（按实际价值计算）是否在上升？
如果是，凭什么？这项工作的成本增加了吗？还是我们担心另一个国家会挖走他，而他会辞职去那里当国王？
如果这两项都不适用，那么谈论加薪（除了生活成本的增加）似乎有点为时过早，尤其是当每个人都被要求抑制他们的工资预期以避免推高通货膨胀的时候。
也许我们可以在几个绩效评估周期后再谈给他加薪的事？
Is the absolute amount of money the King is getting going up (in real terms) or not?
And if it is, why? Are the expenses of the job going up? Or are we worried that another country’s going to headhunt him and he’ll quit to go and be king there instead?
If neither of those apply, it seems a bit early to be talking about a raise (other than a cost-of-living increase), especially when everyone’s being asked to curb their wage expectations to avoid driving inflation up even higher.
Maybe we could revisit after a couple of performance-review cycles?
国王得到的绝对金额（按实际价值计算）是否在上升？
如果是，凭什么？这项工作的成本增加了吗？还是我们担心另一个国家会挖走他，而他会辞职去那里当国王？
如果这两项都不适用，那么谈论加薪（除了生活成本的增加）似乎有点为时过早，尤其是当每个人都被要求抑制他们的工资预期以避免推高通货膨胀的时候。
也许我们可以在几个绩效评估周期后再谈给他加薪的事？
LondonCycling
The crown estate is projected to generate higher profits.
The % of the profits the king is given is going to decrease.
But because the profits are projected to go up so much, the absolute amount he'll get is projected to increase.
I'm not really sure what it is about 2025 that leads the projected profits to increase so much though, and it's not detailed in the government report!
皇家财产管理公司预计将产生更高的利润。
而国王得到的利润百分比将会减少。
但是因为利润预计会增加这么多，所以他得到的绝对金额预计会增加。
我不太确定2025年是什么原因导致预计利润增长这么多，而且政府报告中也没有详细说明！
The crown estate is projected to generate higher profits.
The % of the profits the king is given is going to decrease.
But because the profits are projected to go up so much, the absolute amount he'll get is projected to increase.
I'm not really sure what it is about 2025 that leads the projected profits to increase so much though, and it's not detailed in the government report!
皇家财产管理公司预计将产生更高的利润。
而国王得到的利润百分比将会减少。
但是因为利润预计会增加这么多，所以他得到的绝对金额预计会增加。
我不太确定2025年是什么原因导致预计利润增长这么多，而且政府报告中也没有详细说明！
[dexed]
Sounds like we should focus our ire on the Crown Estate instead of the Royal Family. They could have dropped the percentage considerable more than they did and the royals wouldn't have even noticed the difference.
I don't blame Charles and co for taking what is given to them, I would do that if I was in their place, but I do think we should stop giving them so much stuff.
听起来我们应该把怒火集中在皇家财产管理公司而不是王室身上。他们本可以把这个比例降得更低，而王室成员甚至都不会注意到这种差异。
我不怪查尔斯和他的成员们接受别人给他们的东西，如果我是他们，我也会这么做，但我确实认为我们应该停止给他们这么多的东西。
Sounds like we should focus our ire on the Crown Estate instead of the Royal Family. They could have dropped the percentage considerable more than they did and the royals wouldn't have even noticed the difference.
I don't blame Charles and co for taking what is given to them, I would do that if I was in their place, but I do think we should stop giving them so much stuff.
听起来我们应该把怒火集中在皇家财产管理公司而不是王室身上。他们本可以把这个比例降得更低，而王室成员甚至都不会注意到这种差异。
我不怪查尔斯和他的成员们接受别人给他们的东西，如果我是他们，我也会这么做，但我确实认为我们应该停止给他们这么多的东西。
Nikhilvoid
Charles has been lobbying to get 100% of the Crown Estates revenues, and that's probably why royal funding is tied to the Crown Estates since 2012. We can blame him a little.
查尔斯一直在游说，希望获得皇家财产管理公司的100%收入，这可能就是自2012年以来王室资金与皇家财产管理公司挂钩的原因。这一点我们可以稍稍指责他。
Charles has been lobbying to get 100% of the Crown Estates revenues, and that's probably why royal funding is tied to the Crown Estates since 2012. We can blame him a little.
查尔斯一直在游说，希望获得皇家财产管理公司的100%收入，这可能就是自2012年以来王室资金与皇家财产管理公司挂钩的原因。这一点我们可以稍稍指责他。
Cynical_Classicist
And people wonder why the popularity of the monarchy is waning... While the country starves and suffers the unelected monarch is being given even more of our money!
就这人们还在困惑为什么君主制的受欢迎程度正在下降……当这个国家正在挨饿和受苦的时候，未经选举的君主却拿走了更多我们的钱！
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
And people wonder why the popularity of the monarchy is waning... While the country starves and suffers the unelected monarch is being given even more of our money!
就这人们还在困惑为什么君主制的受欢迎程度正在下降……当这个国家正在挨饿和受苦的时候，未经选举的君主却拿走了更多我们的钱！
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
cascadingtundra
while the rest of us are fighting over scraps... time for protests and riots guys.
当我们还在为残羹剩饭而战的时候…是时候抗议和暴动了。
while the rest of us are fighting over scraps... time for protests and riots guys.
当我们还在为残羹剩饭而战的时候…是时候抗议和暴动了。
Natus_est_in_Suht
Well, he has been promoted within the last year. Normally that bumps up a salary.
好吧，他在去年被提升了。通常这会提高薪水的。
Well, he has been promoted within the last year. Normally that bumps up a salary.
好吧，他在去年被提升了。通常这会提高薪水的。
PeachesGalore1
We should just stop giving any money to them. They're rich enough.
我们应该停止给他们钱。他们已经够有钱的了。
We should just stop giving any money to them. They're rich enough.
我们应该停止给他们钱。他们已经够有钱的了。
Holty12345
Now tbf, the man has finally been promoted after 50+ years of the grind.
A pay rise is well deserved
说实话，现在，经过50多年的苦干，这个人终于升职了。
所以加薪是理所应当的
Now tbf, the man has finally been promoted after 50+ years of the grind.
A pay rise is well deserved
说实话，现在，经过50多年的苦干，这个人终于升职了。
所以加薪是理所应当的
很赞 1
收藏