In 2020, Buckingham Palace issued a firm statement barring Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from blending taxpayer-funded royal duties with private commercial activities, forcing their full exit from royal life.
This move sparked widespread debate about the monarchy’s rules, especially as Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie pursue private careers while making selective royal appearances—without public funding.
Royal Flexibility
Beatrice and Eugenie, daughters of the Duke of York, hold jobs in technology and art, respectively, and receive no Sovereign Grant support.
They participate in family events like garden parties and aid charities on an unpaid basis, despite their father’s scandals. This setup treats non-senior royals differently, prompting questions about whether standards are shifting or simply applied unevenly.
Monarchy Evolution
The British royal family has traditionally distinguished between core working royals, who receive public funding, and others.
Beatrice and Eugenie never held senior paid positions, even during Queen Elizabeth II’s reign, as they were never designated as working royals and therefore did not receive Sovereign Grant funding.
Under King Charles, with a reduced roster, they continue selective, private engagements, a practice that predates 2020 but draws new attention.
Mounting Scrutiny
Harry’s departure heightened focus on the York sisters’ hybrid model: retaining HRH titles alongside private work amid calls for a slimmer monarchy. Health challenges for key royals amplify pressures on Charles to define roles clearly. The arrangement creates an image of leniency unavailable to Harry, though it hinges on no taxpayer involvement.
“Half-In, Half Out” Revelation
Royal correspondent Simon Vigar described Beatrice and Eugenie as “sort of half in, half out,” phrasing that recalls the flexibility Harry requested in 2020 and was denied. The Palace ruled out combining official duties with commercial deals. Differences persist: Harry sought Sovereign Grant funding plus private income; the sisters rely solely on private employment.
Personal Struggles and Expert Views
Eugenie works at Hauser & Wirth gallery and is a mentor for The King’s Foundation’s 35 under 35 network. Beatrice serves in tech firms like Afiniti and was appointed deputy patron of groups such as Outward Bound. Royal expert Ingrid Seward said King Charles feels “responsible” for them after family scandals, giving purpose without full commitments or funding.
Commentators note support from William and Kate for title protections, as the sisters impose no costs, unlike funded royals. Letters Patent preserve their princess styles, integrating them without overshadowing the core family.
Broader Trends and Hidden Precedent
The monarchy is shrinking from 15 to around 10 funded working members. Beatrice and Eugenie help fill gaps through unpaid charity work, a model active before 2020. The Palace rejected Harry’s plan due to mixing funded duties with Sussex Royal ventures, but has long allowed private jobs with HRH titles—distinguishing private employment from commercial use of royal status.
Family Fallout and Leadership Shifts
In Britain, contrasts fuel media and public talk of favoritism, as the sisters quietly support causes amid their father’s issues. Harry faced permanent exclusion for seeking commercial ties to duties, not just private work. Insiders worried Sussex’s star power and deals would undermine neutrality.
Charles now encourages the sisters’ gentle, charitable roles through specific appointments, a more active approach than Queen Elizabeth’s, while maintaining the principle of no funding burdens. The Yorks back William’s future reign through more voluntary engagements, testing the slimmed model.
Skeptical Voices and Future Unclear
Experts like Tina Brown highlight a “Harry-shaped hole,” noting Sussex’s appeal abroad. Critics see hypocrisy in optics, as technical distinctions—no funding, no official duties, no ventures—elude public grasp. As William approaches the throne, questions linger: Will Beatrice and Eugenie formalize roles, echoing Harry’s aim? Or does perceived flexibility risk eroding trust? Clearer communication on funding could ease confusion, shaping the monarchy’s path amid evolving expectations.