6 Things About King Charles' Reign That Would Have Likely Horrified Queen Elizabeth

Queen Elizabeth II ruled for more than 70 years, and while she oversaw plenty of change, she also held firmly to traditions. Since her death, King Charles has taken the royal family in some noticeably different directions. Some of those changes may seem small, but others are so far removed from Elizabeth’s way of doing things that they would likely have shocked her.

Queen Elizabeth belonged to a royal generation that treated serious illness as something to be handled quietly behind palace walls. Her own reported cancer was never publicly disclosed while she was alive, disclosed only by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who revealed in his memoir after her death that the Queen had been suffering from bone cancer. However, Charles has taken a very different path when Buckingham Palace announced his cancer diagnosis in 2024. His daughter-in-law, Kate, followed in his footsteps by revealing her own cancer diagnosis in a deeply personal video. Royal editor Chris Ship told ABC, “There has been a generational shift [with] the current king sharing his cancer diagnosis, and Kate has told us that she's undergoing chemotherapy treatment." He continued, “The late Queen was someone who wanted to keep her medical condition as private as she possibly could.”

The late Queen agreed to voluntarily pay income tax in 1993, but the amount she paid was never made public. But Charles has seemingly taken things a step further. In June 2026, Buckingham Palace revealed his tax payments for 2024-25 and the year before, making him the first British monarch to publicly disclose his tax bill. But rather than simply putting the issue to rest, the disclosure has opened up even more questions. The Guardian wrote, “The royal finances have been described as shrouded in fog, and Thursday’s tax declaration does little to clear it… The amount payable has been declared for the first time this year, but very little else has been revealed.” In other words, Charles may have pulled back the curtain on royal finances, but he also opened a can of worms that the Queen had always refrained from.

Queen Elizabeth had already taken action against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor after his disastrous Newsnight interview and the fallout from his association with Jeffrey Epstein. In January 2022, she stripped him of his military affiliations and royal patronages and stopped him from using his HRH style in an official capacity. But even then, she did not go as far as removing his status as a prince, since he was born into it. However, Charles took a step further and formally removed his HRH style and princely title in October 2025. Royal commentators have often pointed out that the late Queen was particularly protective of the former Duke. Robert Lowie told James Fairclough, “She just had this blind spot with her son. It was ridiculous. He would be quoted as doing something with Epstein, and she would give him another honor or ask him to sit beside her at church.” So, for Elizabeth to see Mountbatten-Windsor lose his birthright under Charles would likely have been a shock.

Queen Elizabeth had a bigger pool of working royals doing the Crown's work alongside her. Her cousins, including the Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra, and the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, all carried out royal duties for years. She also offered Princess Anne’s husband a royal title, although he declined. However, Charles has followed through with his long-standing plan for a smaller group of working royals centered around the direct line of succession. Royal constitutional expert Robert Hazell warned in a blog that a smaller royal team means the public will see less of the monarchy. He said, “It’s the ceremonial side and the welfare side of the monarchy which matter to the public. Queen Elizabeth II famously said, ‘to be seen is to be believed.’ She fully understood that they needed to get out there.” So, if Queen Elizabeth were still here, a stripped-back version of the monarchy could have felt like a very different institution.

Just months after Queen Elizabeth passed away, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Netflix docuseries was released in December 2022. Harry’s bombshell memoir Spare also came out in January 2023. And both aired out the royal family's private affairs. The fallout has continued to unfold under Charles, particularly over the Duke’s security. In a 2025 BBC interview, Harry said, “I can only come to the UK safely if I'm invited... There is a lot of control and ability in my father's hands.” For Queen Elizabeth, who had spent decades keeping family disagreements largely behind palace doors, seeing this play out so publicly and for so long might have been hard to imagine.

Charles has also done things differently when it comes to handling royal homes. He and Queen Camilla decided not to make Buckingham Palace their main residence, choosing to stay at Clarence House instead. Furthermore, Charles opened up private rooms at Balmoral Castle to the public for tours for the first time in 2025. That would have been quite a change for Queen Elizabeth. Buckingham Palace was at the center of her working life, while Balmoral was her private escape. As per The Times, royal biographer Robert Hardman opined in his book, The Making of a King: King Charles III and the Modern Monarchy, “Balmoral is private property. However, it needs public footfall not just to help pay the bills but to bring benefits to the wider community and to remain in step with other stately homes.”