While the couple has frequently drawn parallels between themselves and Harry's late mother, Princess Diana, Scoffield believes there are notable distinctions. The constant stream of complaints, glossy Netflix billboards, and other elements of their branding set them apart from the legacy of Princess Diana. After departing from the UK, the Sussexes embarked on a journey to capitalize on their family drama. Besides other sources of income, they have been associated with charitable funding.
Recently, Meghan and Harry released a mission statement indicating their support for ethical journalism. However, concerns have arisen about their approach, given their limited involvement in charity work and the substantial salaries of their staff.
Notably, James Holt received a significantly elevated salary, amounting to a staggering 277% increase. This substantial increase in compensation was allegedly tied to his role in aiding Meghan and Harry in obfuscating a substantial sum of money, which Lady C contends was derived from charitable sources. She suggests that Prince Charles initially made substantial contributions as donations, with the funds subsequently being transferred to a holding account. This maneuver not only accrued interest but also facilitated tax benefits for the account holders.
Subsequently, the funds were redirected into the Archwell account. Lady C raised concerns about the income balance, noting the absence of interest income despite a substantial cash balance. This raised questions about how an organization could have $8 million in cash but only earn $4,149 in interest – a meager return on capital, especially in the context of a US charity.
Furthermore, Lady C questioned the staffing levels of three full-time employees, deeming it excessive based on the cited projects. Public donations totaling $91 also raised concerns, particularly when compared to Archwell's legal costs, which did not seem to align with the reported projects. Essentially, Lady C suggests that Meghan and Harry may be the primary source of the donations, allowing them to benefit from personal tax breaks. The alleged strategic movement of funds between accounts ultimately raises questions about their financial practices.
While these maneuvers may pass certain legal tests, they leave lingering doubts and ethical concerns in the eyes of some observers.
