Crown Estate profits remain at record high but windfarm boost set to fall back
This has helped bring returns to the Treasury to £5 billion over the past decade.
The Crown Estate is run as an independent business, but its profits are paid directly to the Treasury, which then hands on a small portion of the money to the monarchy, known as the Sovereign Grant, which supports the official duties of the royal family.
Earnings have spiked to record levels in the past two years thanks to option fees – payments made by companies to reserve a patch of the seabed to eventually build their wind turbines on.
But The Crown Estate said the so-called option fee uplift is expected to drop back significantly in the current financial year – down from £1.07 billion in 2024/25 to around £25 million a year from January 2026 as projects move into the construction phase.
This will see the net revenue profit 'normalise', according to The Crown Estate.
But it said underlying profits, stripping out the option fee boost, stood at £366 million in the year to the end of March and would continue to grow.
The Crown Estate owns the vast majority of Britain's seabed, stretching up to 12 nautical miles from the mainland, and leases part of it to wind farm operators.
It also has a 180,000-acre property holding across the UK, including much of London's Regent Street and St James's, and large swathes of arable land and forestry.
Dan Labbad, chief executive at The Crown Estate, said it had been a 'landmark year' for collection, but flagged a difficult backdrop in the wider economy.
He said: 'This year's results are set against significant global economic disturbance.
'This affects the UK and Crown Estate just as it affects countries and businesses.
'This has made for a more challenging period.'
The results showed the value of The Crown Estate's land and assets was £15 billion in 2024/25, down from £15.5 billion the previous year.
The drop came after gains in its urban and rural businesses were offset by a £1 billion fall in the valuation of its marine assets.
It said the valuation of the marine portfolio had jumped higher in anticipation of option fees, but that it reduced as this income was recognised, falling back to £3.4 billion from £4.4 billion in 2023/24.
The figures come after the new Crown Estate Bill was passed earlier this year, handing it more powers to invest and borrow.
The Treasury has said the changes will allow The Crown Estate to invest more in green energy and help the UK achieve net zero.
Recent investments by The Crown Estate include a joint venture announced in May with Lendlease for housing and science and innovation space across six projects.
It said this has the potential to deliver 100,000 jobs, 26,000 homes and have an overall value of up to £24 billion.
Mr Labbad said: 'Thanks to new legislation, we now have greater flexibility to invest across our portfolio, increasing our resilience and potential, and enabling us to create lasting benefits for the country and its finances.'
Under previous rules, The Crown Estate could not use its cash reserves to invest because it had to hold them against the prospect of future financial losses.
But greater ability to borrow will see it invest more in offshore wind.
The Government has also committed to doubling its onshore wind capacity by 2030 and Mr Labbad said The Crown Estate was reviewing its land portfolio to see if more onshore wind projects could be 'viable and relevant'.
It will report back later in 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Treasury criticises ‘unachievable' plan for underground nuclear waste dump in Cumbria
The UK's proposal for a new underground nuclear waste dump has been described as 'unachievable' in a Treasury assessment of the project. Ministers have put new nuclear power at the centre of their green energy revolution. But the problem of what to do with 700,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste – roughly the volume of 6,000 doubledecker buses – from the country's past nuclear programme, as well as future waste from nuclear expansion, has yet to be solved. The government is proposing the vast underground nuclear dump, known as a geological deposit facility (GDF), to safely deal with legacy waste and new nuclear material. No site has yet been confirmed for the dump and Lincolnshire county council recently pulled out of the process, leaving only two possible sites, both in Cumbria. A Treasury assessment this month, contained in the annual report of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (Nista), has now rated the project as 'red' – which means successful delivery appears to be 'unachievable'. A red rating states: 'There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project may need rescoping and/or its overall viability reassessed.' The report also suggested the cost could soar to up to £54bn. Richard Outram, secretary of Nuclear Free Local Authorities, said: 'The Nista red rating is hardly surprising. The GDF process is fraught with uncertainties and the GDF 'solution' remains unproven and costly. 'A single facility as estimated by government sources could cost the taxpayer between £20bn and £54bn. This being a nuclear project, it is much more likely to be the latter and beyond.' Most nuclear waste is currently stored at Sellafield in Cumbria, which the Office for Nuclear Regulation says is one of the most complex and hazardous nuclear sites in the world. The power stations that need decommissioning include 11 Magnox power stations built between the 1950s and 1970s, including Dungeness A in Kent, Hinkley Point A in Somerset and Trawsfynydd in north Wales, as well as seven advanced gas-cooled reactors built in the 1990s, including Dungeness B, Hinkley Point B and Heysham 1 and 2 in Lancashire. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion Waste from more recent nuclear facilities, including Sizewell B, a pressurised water reactor in Suffolk, and two new EDF pressurised water reactors – Hinkley C, which is under construction in Somerset, and Sizewell C, which is planned for construction in Suffolk – will also need to be deposited in a GDF. It is likely to take until 2150 to deposit the legacy waste into a GDF, if one is built. Only then would a GDF be able to take waste from new nuclear reactors. A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said: 'Constructing the UK's first geological disposal facility will provide an internationally recognised safe and permanent disposal of the most hazardous radioactive waste. 'Progress continues to be made in areas taking part in the siting process for this multi-billion-pound facility, which would bring thousands of skilled jobs and economic growth to the local area.'
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Fury among environmental groups as Rachel Reeves 'looks to strip back protections for bats and newts' in Labour's scramble for growth
is facing a backlash among green groups following claims she is ready to strip back environmental protections in a bid to speed up infrastructure projects. The Chancellor is said to be considering further planning reforms that would make it harder for concerns about nature to stop development. She has previously outlined action to reduce requirements on developers by saying they should 'focus on getting things built, and stop worrying about bats and newts'. According to The Times, the Treasury has begun preparing for another planning reform bill and is considering tearing up key parts of EU-derived environmental rules. It comes amid Ms Reeves' scramble to fire up the sluggish UK economy, with recent official figures having shown growth slowed in the second quarter of this year. The plans being considered by the Treasury are reported to include a smaller UK-only list of protected species. This would place less weight on wildlife, including types of newt, that is rare elsewhere in Europe but more common in Britain. Developers would also no longer have to prove that projects would have no impact on protected natural sites through the scrapping of the 'precautionary principle'. A new test would instead look at risks and benefits of potential projects, the newspaper reported. Ms Reeves is also said to be considering further curbs to judicial review in order to stop key projects being delayed by legal challenges from environmentalists. Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, who stood down as a Government minister in May, suggested Labur's Planning and Infrastructure Bill - which is currently going through Parliament - was 'insufficient' for speeding up major infrastructure projects. 'While I think the planning bill will work for housing, I don't think it is sufficiently focused on the major infrastructure projects,' the Labour peer said. 'So it is encouraging that the Treasury is going to have another look at whether we've really got this right. 'The Government has to face up to the tensions in the Habitat Regulations which are making it hard to build essential infrastructure and the reality is that at some point someone needs to make a hard decision and say 'on some things, you just have to press ahead'.' But Paul Miner, of the countryside charity CPRE, said watering down environmental rules would 'take us backwards rather than forwards on nature recovery'. 'We urge the Government to drop the worn-out 'builders versus blockers' narrative which wrongly frames climate and nature as being in conflict with economic growth,' he added. Becky Pullinger, of the Wildlife Trusts, said maintaining environmental standards was 'essential if we are to achieve targets to protect and restore the natural world which is suffering huge declines'. John Flesher, deputy director of the Conservative Environment Network, said: 'The planning system in the UK is currently failing to restore nature and to build the housing and infrastructure that we desperately need. 'Poorly designed and implemented regulations are holding back our economic potential, delaying major infrastructure projects and costing taxpayers, without protecting nature as intended. 'We don't need to choose between building more housing and infrastructure and restoring nature - we must do both. 'But this will require more fundamental reforms of legacy EU red tape than the government has pursued so far. 'Labour's approach so far will fail nature and growth. The government needs to stop tinkering around the edges and end its reliance on top-down solutions. 'We must harness our Brexit freedoms to deliver a new system, which empowers farmers and the private sector, gets Britain building, and properly protects our green and pleasant land.' Downing Street said the Government was focused on delivering the current 'radical' planning reforms. But the Prime Minister's official spokesman added: 'We'll always keep under review the measures needed to deliver our housing pledges and deliver on the infrastructure this country needs.'
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
What is the horse racing tax rise and why is the BHA going on strike?
THE UK Treasury has proposed to raise the taxes paid by bookies on racing profits from 15 to 21 per cent. This would bring the level of tax paid in line with online casinos — here's everything we know. 2 2 This is part of a broader Treasury proposal to replace the existing three-tax structure on remote gambling with a single unified tax rate. The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) and the horse racing industry view this change as potentially devastating. The BHA has responded by launching the Axe the Racing Tax campaign in opposition to the proposals. Their primary concern is that increasing the bookmaker's tax rate on horse racing betting by six percentage points could cause severe financial harm to British horse racing. Economic analysis commissioned by the BHA forecasts that this tax change could result in a £330 million revenue loss over five years and put approximately 2,752 jobs at risk within the first year. The tax increase might prompt betting operators to offset higher costs by raising prices, cutting bonuses and reducing advertising and marketing budgets, further straining the industry's financial health. Industrial action According to The Times, in opposition to the proposal the BHA has organised a strike, which could cost the industry around £700,000, The BHA claims that the proposed change would put up to 2,752 people out of a job and cost the sector £66million every year. While they also warned that it would send the sport spiralling into "irreversible decline". The proposed strike is set to take place on September 10, 2025 — just one day before the start of the St Leger Festival at Doncaster, which prime minister Keir Starmer attended alongside his wife last year. Four scheduled race meetings — at Carlisle, Uttoxeter, Lingfield and Kempton Park — have been cancelled. Chief executive of the BHA Brant Dunshea said: "This latest tax bombshell from the Government, if followed through, poses one of the gravest risks to horse racing the sport has ever seen. It is believed that bookies would most likely look to raise their prices if the proposal comes into effect. It's also claimed that bookies may cut their advertising and market budgets and turn their attention towards online gaming. David Menuisier, a trainer at Coombelands Racing Stables, told The Sun: 'Racing is much more than just a sport in this country. 'It brings fun and excitement to millions and is a major local employer, particularly here in West Sussex as we prepare for another fantastic year at Goodwood.'
