Share this @internewscast.com
Meghan Markle experienced a notable shift in her fashion choices during her brief period as an active member of the Royal Family.
Adapting to the royal dress code, the former actress transitioned from daring necklines to more conservative styles, favoring a palette of understated hues.
Embracing her role as Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan gravitated towards elegant midi-length pencil skirts and bespoke dresses from prestigious designers such as Dior, Ralph Lauren, and Givenchy.
Speculation arose that, in those initial years, Meghan may have been borrowing these high-end outfits to meet the royal wardrobe expectations and manage her extensive public duties.
This theory gained traction following her 2018 visit to Tonga, south of Fiji, alongside Prince Harry during their inaugural overseas tour as newlyweds.
Royal enthusiasts were intrigued when, upon disembarking from their flight, the label of Meghan’s stylish £380 Self-Portrait dress was seen flapping in the breeze, capturing attention as she descended the aircraft steps.
While many dismissed the incident as a lapse of judgement by a newly appointed Princess, others suggested that it may have been a rather deliberate move.
Over the years, royal onlookers and experts have suggested the faux-pas was the result of Meghan borrowing clothes from high-brow designers to keep up appearances.
In October 2018, the newlywed Duke and Duchess of Sussex touched down in the island of Tonga , south of Fiji , with Meghan debuting a striking £380 Self Portrait dress. But her otherwise impeccable outfit was slightly dampened by a fashion faux pas
While accepting free clothes as gifts is strictly forbidden, protocol allows for working royals to receive clothes on loan that are later returned.
Celebrity stylist Martine Alexander previously told the Daily Mail that this wouldn’t have been unlikely if Meghan was working with a stylist who ‘contacted PR companies or brands directly to ask if they can borrow pieces’ on her behalf.
The practice is common in the fashion industry, where influencers and actresses don these loaned ensembles before returning them.
The suggestion that the Duchess’ wardrobe comprised designer loans that are ‘not possible to alter’ has also been made by fashion experts.
Earlier this year, Meghan was seen in a £360 pair of trousers while attending a business summit in the Hamptons. She paired the beige linen trousers with a matching single-breasted waistcoat by Australian brand St Agni.
But when she posed for photos with makeup mogul Bobbi Brown and fashion designer Misha Nonoo, eagle-eyed onlookers couldn’t help but notice that the Duchess’ feet were entirely obscured by her long trousers.
For celebrity stylist Rochelle White, this was not a mere coincidence.
Speaking to the Daily Mail, she claimed that Meghan’s trousers were likely to be a sample pair from St Agni and therefore were impossible to alter to her 5ft 6in frame – either because they have to be returned or because they have been given to the stylist.
While many dismissed the incident as a lapse of judgement by a new Princess likely overwhelmed by Royal protocol, others suggested that it may have been a rather deliberate move
Meghan was seen donning a £360 pair of trousers while attending a business summit in the Hamptons earlier this year, with eagle-eyed onlookers noticing that her feet were entirely obscured by her trousers
Explaining the likelihood of Meghan’s outfit being a loan, Ms White said: ‘The Duchess could also be working with either a designer, fashion house, or stylist where it might not be possible to have alterations done so that they are more fitting to her leg length. So, as a result they are longer.’
Meanwhile, Ms Alexander explains that samples are intentionally made with ‘models in mind’, therefore those of an average height of 5ft 10in, while Meghan is much shorter at 5ft 6 in.
And while it is possible to make temporary alterations to these samples, a pair of trousers can be ‘more difficult as you would have to cut the length off’.
For fashion expert Jane Tippett to suggest that that particular dress Self Portrait dress had been loaned, she points towards Meghan’s minimal re-wearing of outfits as a possible indication that she could often call in her clothes from fashion houses.
Describing the tag incident as a ‘sloppy mistake’ and a ‘slip up’, she adds: ‘It was very much a sign that she was a new working Royal and she didn’t have her ducks in a row.
‘There was no pristine checking system, there should have been a dresser or Royal aide there to check that.’
She adds that while Princess Catherine has continually re-worn several of her favourite pieces over the years, Meghan is often only ever seen in an outfit once – a possible indication that her outfits are borrowed, rather than pieces that she owns herself.
For celebrity stylist Rochelle White, Meghan’s oversized outfits are not coincidental. She said: ‘The Duchess could also be working with either a designer, fashion house, or stylist where it might not be possible to have alterations done so that they are more fitting to her leg length’
During her short-lived period in the Firm, accepting freebie designer clothes would have been strictly forbidden, with protocol dictating that working Royal women are unable to accept gifts from designers
As celebrity stylist Martine Alexander previously told the Daily Mail, if Meghan is working with a stylist, they may well ‘have contacted PR companies or brands directly to ask if they can borrow pieces’
Ms Tippett explains: ‘I don’t think that Kate is leaning into loans, while Meghan has re-worn very few of her clothes. It’s very in keeping with her background as an American actress where she would have received loaned dresses before.
‘While her fashion looks better now and she dresses more herself, her outfits are often fitted towards the idea that she is 6ft 2in. But the long, oversized trousers are a style right now and Kate often wears similar trousers.’
Describing the loaning of clothes by the ex-Royal as ‘very smart’, she explains that if the Duchess is deliberately choosing to have her clothes called in from a fashion house, it serves as an ‘expedient and cost-effective way of fulfilling the demand’.
She adds: ‘In a sense, it’s a really smart way to deal with your clothing as it fits the necessary bill without Meghan having to purchase all of these clothes.
‘That’s a big difference between Kate and Meghan – Meghan is not going to have as many opportunities to re-wear these outfits as she won’t make as many public appearances’.
During the Sussexes’ 16-day trip across New Zealand , Australia, Fiji and Tonga, Meghan wore clothing worth a staggering £117,934.62 ($149,515.27).
But prior to her fairytale wedding to Prince Harry just a few months prior, she may well have received an abundance of free fashion items due to her high-profile career.
As fashion expert Giorgina Ramazzotti explains: ‘As a celebrity and actress before joining the royals, Meghan would have been very used to a world in which everything is given on loan for photoshoots, an appearance or borrowed from wardrobe as part of her character in Suits.
‘Celebrities rarely have to part with cold hard cash in exchange for fashion items.
‘Often items are given as gifts, given on loan for special events, or the star is given a heavy discount to shop the brand, and whilst Meghan wasn’t a well-known actress before meeting Prince Harry, she would still have been given freebies – albeit from smaller brands.
The dress Meghan donned during her first overseas tour with Harry may well, therefore, have been a loan called in by her stylist, therefore helping to explain for the seemingly bizarre dress label on show
For fashion expert Jane Tippett, while the tag disaster alone may not be enough to suggest that that particular dress Self Portrait dress had been loaned, she points towards Meghan’s minimal re-wearing of outfits as a possible indication that she may not own all of her outfits
But once she married into the Firm, this gift-giving process would have immediately ceased.
Instead, Ms Ramazzotti adds that Meghan would ‘no doubt have been given an allowance to dress – something I’m sure she was glad to throw out of the window when she left the royal fold’.
The dress Meghan donned during her first overseas tour with Harry may well, therefore, have been a loan called in by her stylist, therefore helping to explain for the seemingly bizarre dress label on show.
Meanwhile, insiders have previously claimed that Meghan had initially clashed with royal aides after being informed that she would be unable to keep her fashion freebies after marrying into the Firm.
One source told The Sun: ‘As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels.
‘But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.’
Following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s sensational exit from the Monarchy in early 2020, later dubbed ‘Megxit’, Meghan would likely have embraced the newly presented opportunity to accept clothes from luxury fashion brands.
But as Ms Ramazzotti claims, the Duchess, who has previously been seen wearing Dior and Givenchy, could now be deemed too ‘controversial’ a figure to obtain free samples from some of the world’s biggest fashion houses.
She explained: ‘Meghan rarely wears big designer brands such as the French fashion houses Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Saint Laurent etc.
Meghan is not the first Royal to have borrowed luxury items of clothing during her time in the Palace. According to Vogue Australia, Princess Catherine’s stylist, Natasha Archer (pictured right), ‘will often call in designer items on loan but they will then be returned’
‘These brands are very careful with their image and getting loans from them for lesser or controversial stars (as Meghan, in some circles, now is) is like getting blood from a stone.’
In June 2023, French fashion house Dior denied that they had signed a ‘megabucks’ deal with the Duchess, who was rumoured to become the face of the brand.
It had been speculated any deal could be worth as much as £15million to the couple.
Yet despite speculation that Meghan’s oversized and longer outfits may have been as a result of her clothes being called in from fashion houses, Ms White also states that ‘wide leg trousers are in fashion and trend piece right now’.
She adds: ‘They have been dominating Instagram and runways, so I think she likes the style.’
Meanwhile, for marketing and branding expert Estelle Keeber, Meghan’s decision to borrow clothes ‘allows her to maintain a polished, high-end image while also strengthening relationships with designers’.
Describing the decision as a ‘win-win’ scenario, she adds: ‘Designers gain exposure and she gets to champion sustainable fashion by re-wearing or borrowing instead of constantly buying new pieces.
‘Continuing to borrow or partner with designers positions her as someone conscious, selective and modern.’
And Meghan is not the first Royal to have borrowed luxury items of clothing during her time in the Palace.
According to Vogue Australia, Kate’s stylist, Natasha Archer, ‘will often call in designer items on loan but they will then be returned’.
Ms Archer, who has been assisting Kate for several years, was first seen in 2013 entering the Lindo Wing at St Mary’s Hospital in Paddington after the birth of Prince George.
Since parting ways with the Monarchy, Meghan’s pricey wardrobe has caused quite a stir – with experts questioning whether the eye-watering price tags of her outfits may have fuelled accusations that she is unrelatable and out of touch
She likely had a hand in selecting Kate’s famed Jenny Packham polka dot dress that she chose for her departure from the hospital.
Since then, the stylist has curated several show-stopping tour wardrobes, including those for New Zealand and Canada, helping Kate evolve from a girl-next-door to a Queen-in-waiting.
Sample collections are typically produced in a standard size 8, and with her height of 5ft 9in, Kate can effortlessly wear dresses designed for models.
This practice aligns with royal protocol, which prohibits members of the Royal Family from accepting gifted clothing.
But that isn’t to say that Kate doesn’t own any of her wardrobe.
Indeed, if the Princess is besotted by a particular item of clothing, she can then purchase the item using funds provided by King Charles through the Duchy of Cornwall.
So, while Kate debuted new clothing and accessories worth a reported £162,040.28 in 2023, it’s unclear how many of those items she actually paid for.
For Meghan, since parting ways with the Monarchy, her pricey wardrobe has caused quite a stir – with experts questioning whether the eye-watering price tags of her outfits may have fuelled accusations that she is unrelatable and out of touch.
On both seasons of her Netflix cooking show, With Love, Meghan, she wore pricey clothing from a handful of designers.
The wardrobe included a $3,000 dress by Carolina Herrera, a $600 cotton poplin pinstripe shirt from CO and a $1,000 sleeveless silk gown from Ulla Johnson.
She was also seen donning Princess Diana’s Cartier Tank Française watch – worth more than $24,000, a $7,000, solid-gold Cartier Love bracelet, a $5,000 Jennifer Meyer mini bezel tennis bracelet and, of course, her $160,000 engagement ring.
According to Ryan McCormick, Managing Partner at Goldman McCormick PR, ‘Wearing that kind of expensive jewelry communicates, “I am in the upper class.” So we have two conflicting messages here, and that’s one of the reasons why it could be challenging for some members of the public to emotionally connect with her.’
McCormick added the eye-watering total price tag of Meghan’s weekend jewelry was the equivalent of ‘multiple times the average annual salary of most people.’
Meghan even linked her expensive pieces on her ShopMy store. However, she quietly shut the shop down earlier this month fuelling speculation that the Duchess may not have owned enough of her own clothes to successfully keep the online shop running
As Meghan appears to be slowly attempting to venture further into the world of fashion, making her debut at Paris Fashion Week to attend the glamorous Balenciaga show, one can’t help but question the role that fashion loans are playing in rebuilding her post-Royal image
‘This definitely makes it harder for the Duchess to be perceived as “one of us.”‘
‘Her habit of wearing hundreds of thousands of dollars in jewelry feels less like a play for an audience and more like a way of “keeping up with the Joneses” in Santa Barbara,’ Schofield said.
‘I simply think she’s competing with her very famous and very rich neighbors.’
Meghan even linked her expensive pieces on her ShopMy store (a platform where users pocket affiliate cash by recommending products) following the Spring 2025 premiere of the show’s first season.
She quietly shut the shop down in early September, which sold items such as a £20 ($26) grey t-shirts to £1,600 ($2,000) silk gowns, fuelling speculation that the Duchess may not have owned enough of her own clothes to successfully keep the online shop running.
No official explanation has been issued by Meghan or the Sussexes. The Daily Mail previously approached the Sussexes’ representative for comment.
As Meghan appears to be slowly attempting to venture further into the world of fashion, making her debut at Paris Fashion Week to attend the glamorous Balenciaga show, one can’t help but question the role that fashion loans are playing in rebuilding her post-Royal image.
The Duchess was seen at the Spring 2026 ready-to-wear draped in a stylish white oversized cape over a white button-down shirt and matching trousers, all designed by Balenciaga.
While she was among high-profile guests that included Vogue editor Anna Wintour and actress Anne Hathaway, it was later revealed that Meghan had texted creative director Pierpaolo Piccioli to ask for an invite.
But her future in the world of fashion seems to be rather unclear, with publicity expert Natalie Trice telling the Mail that she believes it us unlikely the Duchess would become the ‘face’ of any fashion label in the near future.
‘Meghan’s value and overall positioning is somewhat disjointed at the moment and where she really fits between fashion weeks and jam making is hard to tell,’ Trice said of any future luxury brand deals.
‘A brand like Dior or Armani want to be seen by global figures who embody substance and sophistication, so while she can check into red-carpet glamour in demand, the more Gap mom is also out there,’ she explained.
As Meghan attempts to rebrand her image following Megxit, perhaps her ongoing choice to loan designer items represents a deliberate shift in her transforming both her public image, alongside how she is perceived in the world of fashion.
