According to records obtained by the Guardian, the Queen successfully persuaded the government to alter a proposed legislation in the 1970s in order to hide her “embarrassing” private riches from the public.

Her Majesty’s attorneys are reported to have pushed ministers to change provisions in a proposed Companies Bill.

According to the newspaper, when the Queen intervened, the government changed the draft bill to add a new provision exempting companies employed by “heads of state”—including the monarch—from new transparency laws. This provision allegedly allowed the Queen to conceal her interests and shareholdings in a “state-backed shell corporation.”

A spokesperson at Buckingham Palace, however, denied that the Queen had interfered.

“Queen’s Consent is a parliamentary process, with the role of sovereign being purely formal,” she said.

“Consent is always granted by the monarch where requested by government. Any assertion that the sovereign has blocked legislation is simply incorrect.

“Whether Queen’s Consent is required is decided by Parliament, independently from the Royal Household, in matters that would affect Crown interests, including personal property and personal interests of the monarch.

“If consent is required, draft legislation is, by convention, put to the sovereign to grant solely on advice of ministers and as a matter of public record.”

Her actual net worth has never been revealed, although it is believed to be in the hundreds of millions of pounds.

On one hand, she is notoriously thrifty, staying warm with a £30 electric heater and using the same kind of £7.99 nail lacquer for decades. On the other hand, enormously rich, with a portfolio that includes everything from pieces of art and diamonds to wind farms and thoroughbred racing horses.

The Queen’s involvement was found when examining her use of a legislative process known as “Queen’s consent,” which “requires ministers to alert the Queen when legislation might affect either the royal prerogative or the private interests of the crown.” According to the publication, the Queen and her attorneys used the process to “secretly lobby” for modifications to draft legislation that might harm her.

According to the newspaper, at the time, a civil servant noted that the lawyer’s clients were “concerned” about the possibility of exposure to business directors, shareholders, and the general public, and that “disclosure to any person would be embarrassing”

Unlike the more well-known royal assent process, which marks the moment when a measure becomes law, the Queen’s consent is required before legislation can be passed by parliament.