United Kingdom
Related: About this forumAbout Prince Andrew "being in despair" regarding his lack of inheritance.
Depends on how one regards the situation. Yes, the Queen did it for tax reasons. But the Queen meted out a huge chunk of change for Andrew during her lifetime, including a royal payout to settle an embarrassing legal controversy regarding a minor (Jeffery Epstein) and her son. In estate law, that could be called an "Advancement," meaning that Andrew got his share before the Queen's death. He could have spent the money any way he wanted, including investing, but he didn't.
LetMyPeopleVote
(154,423 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(102,476 posts)who ignore a lot of rumour about the royal family. The first I saw was in this week's satirical Private Eye (which doesn't always tell you what's actually happened, just how to laugh at it). I'd be surprised at "for tax reasons", since the royals pretty much get their own laws on inheritance tax (which tends to boil down to "not paying it" . Unless there's actual fact being reported somewhere, I'd suspect that if she didn't give him much, it may show that she felt he got enough while she was alive, as you say.
Chainfire
(17,757 posts)no_hypocrisy
(48,778 posts)She'll even support him with her third rate Barbara Cartland novel knock-off.
LeftishBrit
(41,303 posts)Prince Andrew is not really top of my sympathy list. He is what, if he were poor, would be called 'feckless'.