I'm not sure about the queen or prince phillip, but I know that the other members of the royal family are financed by the government through what is known as the "civil list" - that is, in exchange for doing their royal duties, they recieve a paycheck and their housing. Prince Charles is the exception - he, the Duchess of Cornwall and William and Harry get money through the Duchy of Cornwall- publically held lands (in other words, they don't own the lands-think of them as a public park. But the lands generate a good deal of income, and this is what they live on). I don't think Prince Charles is independenly wealthy-I think all his income comes from the Duchy of Cornwall. So in that respect, I think he is dependent on his title for his living. The reason I think this is just before William's 21st birthday, it was pointed out by the BBC that William was the first Prince of Wales to be independently wealthy for several generations. Both William and Harry inherited close to $50 million upon their mother's death (I might be wrong about the amount, but it was somewhere around that amount-what I do remember is Harry inherited more money because William would inherit so much when he became king). The reason the BBC was so interested in this point was the fact that William was the first Prince of Wales in a long time who was financially independent-neither he nor his brother depended on their titles, or the British government, for their money. Anyway, that's the short answer; the best place to look for a longer answer would be the BBC or THE GUARDIAN - both British - because I have read many articles on this topic at those sites. Hope this helps !!!

Just to add to and clarify this answer, Her Majesty also receives payment (Though minimal) through the Duchy of Lancaster which funds various Royal expenses and pays a small amount to other members of the Royal Family, with the exception of The Duke of Edinbrough, who as a Prince of Denmark and Greece, trust me, already has enough to take care of himself! The Civil List provides mostly for the expenses that Her Majesty carries out as Head of State. As such, when Her Majesty hosts a State Dinner for, oh, say the President of France, who is on a State Visit, the expenses are paid out by the Civil List. However, if Her Majesty simply had a few friends over for dinner, these expenses would come out of her own pocket. And don’t kid yourself; Her Majesty has DEEP pockets with out any help from the Civil List. The Prince of Wales himself actually has little (at least, comparatively speaking royally) in way of disposable funds. As a matter of fact, he had to borrow money from Her Majesty to meet his obligations after his divorce to Diana, Princess of Wales. The Civil List was created in 1760 as an agreement between the Crown and the Government. This arranges for the Crown to hand over most income of “Crown estates” This can be officially acknowledged as the beginning of the difference between “Crown Property” as in what the Monarch personally owns, and “Crown Property” as in what the “Crown” owns. (This showing that there is a difference between “The Crown” as a symbol and the person who wears the Crown as a person) While it is a bone of contention with many people not only in the U.K., but also those of us in the Commonwealth Realms (Mistakenly believing that citizens of the Commonwealth Realms have to support the Monarchy directly) the monies received from the Civil List are really just payment for the Government and People being allowed to use lands and resources that by all rights should belong to the Royal Family. To suggest otherwise is NO different that suggesting that the Kennedy’s should have to give back their fortune because it was largely gained by Bootlegging. And just as a point of being clear, HRH Prince William is NOT a “Prince of Wales”. He IS known as HRH Prince William *of* Wales, but the title Prince of Wales can only be held by one person at a time, and is always the eldest son of the reigning Monarch. Thusly to refer to HRH Prince William as “HRH Prince William, Prince of Wales” is utterly incorrect.

What Dano says is true, but there's more: Income from the Duchy of Lancaster is the Queen's personal income to use as she see's fit. Nearly all the "old-school" royals have been removed from the Civil List and are paid for from HM's personal income. Since its creation in 1337, this dukedom has been reserved for the son and heir apparent of the Sovereign... not the Prince/ss of Wales). If the Prince Charles were to die before he succeeded, William would become the Heir Apparent, but not become Duke of Cornwall, nor would he get the income... Also, if the Heir Presumptive is female, the income of the Duchy reverts to the Crown, not the heir. Also, the origination of the Crown Estates trade-off - in exchange for giving all the income from the Crown Estates to the government, HM and her family get income in the form of the Civil list. For years, the amount of income paid to the Royals is far less than the income from the civil list. The Crown Estate/Civil List deal comes up for renewal with succession of a new Sovereign. In theory, the Sovereign could refuse the deal, and take all the income from the Crown Estates to the Crown proper, but then Sovereign would have to also pay all the expenses of the government (not Parliment, just the government) - things like salaries for ministers and judges, building maintenance, law enforcement and prosecutors, prison expenses, etc... In the end.... the Sovereign gets a pretty good deal... Also, it has been determined that the cost of the civil list amounts to less than 1 pound per citizen every year - and the tourism generated by the Royal Family more than offsets that expense.

The Queen has free access to our tax, so technically she can have as much money as she wants plus she cant be sued immune to laws. and the government has zero power over the queen

Just to add some clarity to the last answer: Please bear in mind certain points of contention here. 1) The royals family has recently been granted a new private jet by parliment (27-10-08) If the royal families pockets are so apparently deep as the last answer suggests then why are we having to fund thier new private jet?? 2) The cost of the royal family from the civil list does not take into account certain aspects such as: Security (estimated to be in excess of £40,000,000.00 in 2007.) This cannot be confirmed as the information is not available due to the fact it is not properly monitered. But you do the maths: a simple day out round london for the queen includes several vehicles containing body gaurds usually ex special forces on daily hire many earning £1000 per day. Of this there will be at least usually 12 of these men "On close protection" (I.e actually near the queen) A support team of god know how many will be around in the local area as well the days before they will be employed in planning the route through the city as well as Int gathering.) The cars used will be bullet proof, bomb proof etc and cost a fortune. These are replaced annually to ensure integrity. On hand police: Officers taken off thier usual beat to add crowd control and protection. You've all seen pics of the queen on walk about and the sheer volume of police there. Also bear in mind that armed police cost a lot more to pay than the average policeman. An ambualnce is put on local standby in case anything does happen to the queen. (This vehicle is no longer available for use by the Public until the visit is over) Drains and manhole covers are searched and checked for devices as well as pins etc costing a small fortune. This is just the very surface of the cost the list is endless! All this is just for a walk around London. Can you imagine what an international visit costs! in 1994 Prince charles crashed the royal plane. Who picked up the bill? The queen with her apparently deep pockets?? err no its was us the taxpayer. The upkeep of estates such as Windsor Castle is part of the reason tax money is paid to the queen so these sites of heritage can be maintained. Thats sounds reasonable to me. So why do I then have to pay again if I want to go and look inside the castle. DO NOT BELIEVE WE NEED THEM FOR TOURISM! Without the royal family the castles and culture will still be there! Many People say to this "People only come to these sights to see the queen!" Well how many tourists actually so see the queen? Very few I can say. And also look at Paris. A far greater tourist trade than London but they have no royal family. People go to Paris for the architeture, the culture, the galleries. All the things London has in abundance. Hence why our tourist trade is unreliant on the queen.

Hmm! The estate takes care of the little things like running Buckingham Windsor etc etc!

The same way we support our president via our taxes. The Queen is a very wealthy woman and she has investments that pay well. They also have income property in Wales that Prince Charles gets. http://www.thisisinsider.com/where-does-the-royal-family-get-money-2017-1

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_transport_of_the_British_royal_family_and_government