An investigation into royal property finances has revealed several notable developments concerning rental arrangements within the British royal family. Among the findings is the revelation that the late Queen Elizabeth reversed an earlier decision requiring her cousin, Prince Michael of Kent, and his wife to pay rent for their residence at Kensington Palace.

In the early 2000s, controversy arose after it emerged that the non-working royal couple was paying just £69 a week to occupy a spacious five-bedroom, five-reception room apartment in the palace. Following pressure from Members of Parliament demanding they pay a fair market rent, the Queen initially agreed that the princely pair would begin covering their full rent from 2010 onward. However, this arrangement was never implemented. Instead, the late monarch continued to underwrite the annual rent of approximately £120,000, a responsibility now assumed by King Charles III. A palace insider described this as a “change of heart,” but expressed disappointment that the arrangement was not fully disclosed.

The inquiry also examined the financial affairs of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former Duke of York, shedding light on how he financed his lifestyle after publicly stepping back from royal duties. The National Audit Office’s review found that Andrew earned additional income by subletting cottages on the Royal Lodge estate in Windsor, despite paying only a nominal rent himself for two decades.

While the precise amounts involved remain undisclosed, sources suggest that the subletting arrangement was designed to be cost-neutral, with rental rates set to cover maintenance and staffing expenses. The rental payments were made directly to Andrew, even after he vacated the property following the public backlash over his association with Jeffrey Epstein. Although these payments have now ceased, the investigation did not clarify the exact sums or how much of the proceeds were reinvested into the upkeep of the properties.

Andrew’s financial situation has long been a subject of public speculation. His Windsor residence required costly maintenance, and he reportedly resisted curbing his lifestyle despite losing the official royal income. Officially, his only regular income was a modest £20,000 annual pension from his 22 years of service in the Royal Navy. Additional funds may have come from inheritance or private business engagements, but the rental income from the Royal Lodge estate presents a possible explanation for the source of his funding in recent years.

The inquiry highlights ongoing concerns about transparency and financial accountability related to royal property management and the allocation of taxpayer funds within the monarchy.