This is an honest question for all Brits and Commonwealth folks. Is the royal family considered an asset or just an embarassing relic of the past?
I think If you were to ask ten Brits this question, you would probably get twelve different answers.
Personally, I don’t see the Royal Family as a burden. Much of their businesses, property, and land were handed over to the government centuries ago. The government keeps the profits from that and finances the Royal Family with it. One example is Ascot Racecourse, founded by Queen Anne on land she owned in 1711.
The revenue from all of that goes to the "Crown Estate", which is surrendered to the government. A percentage of that goes into the "Sovereign Grant", which is used to pay the Royal Family. Last year, the Crown Estate made £1.15 billion in profits, and the Sovereign Grant paid £86.3 million to the royals.
Other costs exist too, such as security and local council expenses during royal visits. An anti-monarchy group has estimated the total cost of the Royal Family at £510 million per year, though this includes indirect and speculative expenses and is considered an exaggeration by others.
But even if we take that figure at face value, the Treasury receives £1.15 billion from the Crown Estate and pays out £0.51 billion (£510 million) to the royals. Financially, it seems to me that it's not a net loss to the country, far from it.
While I don’t see them as a burden, I do find some of them a national embarrassment -- perhaps even an international one in some circles.
...
...
... 
