Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Archewell Foundation has rebranded to Archewell Philanthropies, sparking scrutiny over its operational structure and finances. Critics, including Perez Hilton, question the shift to a fiscal sponsor model and highlight a significant imbalance between expenses and grants awarded, raising concerns about transparency and the foundation’s charitable impact.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s philanthropic brand is once again under the spotlight, this time following a quiet but significant rebrand. On its fifth anniversary, the couple announced that the Archewell Foundation would now operate under the name Archewell Philanthropies. Although the Sussexes positioned the change as a natural extension of their family-run charity agenda, critics were quick to wonder what actually behind-the-scenes changed. It was further scrutinized when Perez Hilton came out publicly to question the structure, finances, and transparency of the foundation, stirring anew the controversy surrounding the manner in which celebrity-driven nonprofits are operated.
Why the Archewell Philanthropies rebrand is raising eyebrows beyond its new name
According to the foundation’s website, the rebrand is meant to allow Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and their children to “expand upon their global philanthropic endeavors as a family.” However, Hilton argued that the transformation goes deeper than branding. On his podcast, he revealed that Archewell has shifted to a fiscal sponsor model, which he believes fundamentally alters how the organization operates.“That sounds hella shady to me. If I was a really, really rich person, I would not be donating to Archewell Philanthropies,” Hilton said, adding, “What if there’s some nefarious going on?”While fiscal sponsorship is a legal and common nonprofit structure, Hilton questioned whether it truly aligns with the Sussexes’ public image of hands-on philanthropy. He further pointed to financial disclosures that show a sharp imbalance between spending and giving. “And here’s the shadiest part… They had expenses of over $5 million. They took in over $2.1 million in donations, and they only gave out $1.25 million in grants. The math ain’t mathing,” he said.Hilton also criticized reported layoffs and employee bonuses during what he described as a weak financial year, calling the rebrand “a disaster waiting to happen.” With public records showing a drastically reduced staff, critics argue the new name raises more questions than confidence, especially for a foundation tied so closely to global celebrity and influence.Also Read: “A horrible human being”: Perez Hilton accuses Nicki Minaj of getting a hefty paycheck after her praise of TPUSA AmFest
