King Charles Skips Living in Buckingham Palace After £369M Refurbishment
Is the palace's shake-up a bold modernization of the monarchy or a costly betrayal of public trust?
Above: King Charles III and Queen Camilla arrive at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on April 27, 2026, for their State Visit to the United States. Image credit: Chip Somodevilla/Staff/Getty Images
The Spin
Narrative A
King Charles choosing to stay at Clarence House instead of Buckingham Palace is a smart, forward-thinking move that puts public benefit first. Opening the palace to more visitors year-round maximizes a nationally funded landmark for everyone, not just the royals.
Narrative B
Taxpayers just spent £369 million renovating Buckingham Palace and now King Charles will never live there again — that's a staggering waste of public money with no real accountability. The palace must be fully open year-round with all ticket revenue going back to the Treasury.
