King Charles Breaks Tradition by Not Living in Buckingham Palace Despite Major Renovations
Buckingham Palace, the official London residence of British monarchs since 1837, will no longer serve as King Charles III and Queen Camilla's primary home. Last month, it was reported that the royal couple will remain at Clarence House, where they have lived for over 20 years, breaking a nearly 200-year tradition started by Queen Victoria. The palace will continue to function as the administrative headquarters of the monarchy and host ceremonial events, including receptions for foreign dignitaries, according to a palace spokesperson.
Despite this, concerns have arisen that the absence of the royal family from Buckingham Palace could reduce the number of tourists visiting the iconic site daily. The decision comes even as the palace nears completion of a decade-long, £369 million renovation project addressing critical infrastructure updates such as replacing outdated cables, lead pipes, and boilers.
Historically, Buckingham Palace was purchased by King George III in 1761 and expanded into a palace by John Nash under King George IV. Queen Victoria was the first monarch to use it as an official residence and business center. However, previous monarchs, including Victoria herself and Queen Elizabeth II, often preferred other residences like Windsor Castle or Clarence House. Experts suggest the palace was never truly designed as a home but more as a state office, which contributes to its lack of appeal as a residence.
The decision has sparked criticism, including from republican groups who argue that taxpayers funded the expensive renovations only for the palace to remain underused. Meanwhile, King Charles and Queen Camilla have other residences available, such as Windsor Castle and Balmoral Castle in Scotland. King Charles also revealed last month that he is among the top 100 taxpayers in the UK, receiving an annual income of £25.2 million from the Duchy of Lancaster estate, which supports his official and private expenses.
