Prince Harry Allegedly Admits Meghan Markle's Latest Invictus Games Cash-In is 'Difficult to Defend'

Prince Harry is privately finding Meghan Markle's latest Invictus Games-linked money-making venture 'difficult to defend,' according to insiders, after the Duchess of Sussex began promoting outfits she wore to the veterans' sporting event through a fashion app that pays her commission.

Meghan, 44, was accused of 'cashing in' on a dress she wore to visit seriously ill children in hospital during the couple's Melbourne trip. For context, ahead of their tour of the West Coast in April, a spokesperson for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had been explicit that the visit would combine charity appearances with commercial engagements. What was less clearly signposted, critics say, was how closely those two worlds would be allowed to blur.

Invictus Games Row Puts Prince Harry And Meghan Markle On Collision Course

Earlier this year Meghan invested in an AI-driven fashion app, OneOff, which allows public figures to curate pages of their outfits. Fans can click through to buy similar items, with the 'seller' reportedly receiving between 10 and 20 per cent of the profit. Royal watchers were stunned when the dress Meghan wore to greet terminally ill children in Melbourne appeared on her page, using a photograph that included the children themselves. The image was later removed.

Royal author Tom Sykes described that move as 'sickening.' Another source told Heat magazine that, in their view, 'The idea that these terminally ill children have come out to greet you because you're a member of the royal family and hours later you're promoting your 'hospital look' for money... The Queen never would have imagined this could happen because it's just basic human decency.'

A spokesperson for Meghan pushed back, insisting the outfit was worn throughout the day, including at more informal moments in Sydney, and blaming the photograph choice on the way OneOff sometimes pulls images from Getty. 'Meghan's team has been working closely with them to make sure they're using approved photography and correcting as needed,' they said.

Whatever lessons were taken from that episode, they have not stopped Meghan expanding her page. This week it emerged that outfits she has worn to the Invictus Games are now being promoted on the same platform, complete with affiliate links. The Games, founded by Prince Harry and funded by host governments, sponsors and donations, are due to be staged in Birmingham next year, backed by UK taxpayers.

That timing is precisely what is causing unease. Meghan is said to be pocketing her commission while Harry, 41, is out front promoting an event designed to support wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women. One insider put it bluntly: 'She's blurring the lines between philanthropy and personal profit. If the money she made was going back to Invictus there'd be no questions asked, but the money is going into her account and that is absolutely raising eyebrows – it's seen as very bad form.'

They went further, noting that Invictus was created for veterans 'who have given these huge sacrifices and lost so much,' and arguing that many supporters see it as 'tone deaf' for Meghan to benefit financially, 'even tangentially.'

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle And A Clash Over 'Old Rules'

Harry is said to be deeply uncomfortable. The prince, who served in Afghanistan and has often spoken movingly about the impact of conflict, is described as torn between defending his wife and protecting the credibility of the Games that give him 'the most purpose' outside his children.

'Harry is always going to defend Meghan publicly but it's no secret this is making him deeply uncomfortable,' a source claimed. 'The last thing he needs is even a whiff of impropriety at such a sensitive time.' They added that Harry has spent his life being told that 'even the smallest conflict of interest is to be avoided at all cost,' and that the idea of Invictus being dragged into a row about Meghan's wardrobe is 'highly embarrassing.'

Meghan, by contrast, is portrayed as largely unfazed. Friends say she sees the Invictus affiliate links as no different to what 'every other celebrity and influencer is doing these days' and believes she is being held to a different standard. The insider said she views the outrage as 'manufactured' and part of an 'endless witch hunt,' and has decided it is not 'worth a moment's energy.'

Invictus supporters are not so quick to dismiss it. A Canadian backer of the 2025 Games in Vancouver, quoted in the report, voiced disbelief that 'It's a charity function, sponsored by the taxpayers of Canada and other donors for war veterans, and Meghan is making a dollar on the back of those veterans... Her husband is actively promoting a charity where she is profiting!'

The episode lands at an awkward moment for the Sussexes. Harry, born into a world where his royal role came with an allowance reportedly around $2 million, grace-and-favour accommodation and multi-million-dollar inheritances, never had to think much about commercial ventures until he stepped back from royal duties. Since moving to California, he and Meghan have leaned into high-profile deals with Oprah Winfrey, Netflix and Penguin, turning their break from the monarchy into a lucrative narrative.

Yet those close to Harry insist Invictus sits in a different category for him. One source said that aside from his children and his life with Meghan, leading the Games is the work he takes most personally, in part because it remains one of the few areas where he still enjoys broad goodwill.

Which is why this latest controversy feeds wider concerns in royal circles. Palace insiders have long been wary of the Sussexes 'commercialising' their titles, something Meghan has already been accused of with her lifestyle brand As Ever, billed as founded by the Duchess of Sussex and offering candles named after Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. After the Invictus wardrobe row, one royal source warned that senior royals 'literally cannot be seen with someone who will sell what they're wearing when meeting them, as it will look like they are helping use the monarchy to move merchandise.'

There is also the question of Harry's reported hope of revisiting a 'half in, half out' role within the family, the kind of hybrid position the late Queen is said to have firmly rejected. Any perception that his wife is monetising charitable or royal-adjacent appearances makes that already-fraught idea even harder to sell.

Those differences between husband and wife are not new. Insiders point to last year's reports that Harry 'panicked' over a photograph of the couple at Kris Jenner's 70th birthday party being posted on social media on the UK's Remembrance Day, creating what one source called a 'firestorm.' Meghan was said to be embarrassed by the fallout and has since vowed not to let critics dictate her behaviour. Harry, however, still has 'one foot in the old royal world' and a reflexive worry about optics that, on Invictus at least, he shows no sign of shaking.

Nothing in this ongoing dispute has been independently confirmed by the Sussexes' representatives, and many of the claims rely on unnamed sources, so all of it should be taken with a grain of salt.