6 Famous Musicians Who Don't Want Their Kids To Inherit Millions

While some musicians may use their riches to establish cushy trust funds for their kids or arrange for a handsome inheritance one day down the line, it's worth noting that many have been opposed to the idea. And, far from keeping that particular detail under wraps, many of the stars who prefer to let their kids pay their own way have been very vocal about it. From Marie Osmond to the Rolling Stones and KISS, let's take a dive. 

Osmond has been working for the vast majority of her life, so it's fair to say she knows a thing or two about hard work, and she addressed the value of that on a 2020 episode of "The Talk." "I'm not leaving any money to my children ... Congratulations, kids," she quipped, before explaining the reason why (via Us Weekly). "I think you do a great disservice to your children to just hand them a fortune because you take away the one most important gift you can give your children, and that's the ability to work." The singer also said she had seen too many instances of the children of the rich and famous ending up in "trouble" because they had free rein, so there was also a protective element in her decision. 

A few years later, Osmond was still being asked about the inheritance, and she doubled down in an interview with Us Weekly, joking, "I worked hard and I'm gonna spend it all and have fun with my husband." Of course, she clarified that she'd also leave money to charity and added that while she was alive, if her kids needed help, she would step in from time to time. Even then, though, she said she had a policy of going halfsies with her children for the sake of their own self-worth. 

While Marie Osmond has said she plans to leave a lot of money to charity, Sting has pointed out that because of his massive expenses even now, there's a chance he might not have a ton of money to leave to anyone. Speaking to the Daily Mail in 2014, he explained that he'd been very forthcoming with his kids, telling them, "We have a lot of commitments. What comes in we spend, and there isn't much left." He added that he thought establishing trust funds would also do more harm than good, but like Osmond, if his children really needed money, he would chip in. However, he said, "They rarely ask me for anything, which I really respect and appreciate."

Another thing Sting has in common with Osmond is the fact that he's continued to be asked about the inheritance issue, and he's also doubled down. Speaking to "CBS Sunday Morning" in 2026, he said he believed massive inheritances and trust funds were actually "a form of abuse." He added that he saw working as a necessity and was pleased that his kids felt the same way. "All of my kids have been blessed with this extraordinary work ethic, whether it's the DNA of it or whether I've said to them, 'Guys, you've got to work. You know ... I'm spending our money,'" he said. The rockstar continued, "I'm paying for your education, you've got shoes on your feet, go. Go to work."

As for anyone who believed there was any meanness in that (after all, some publications called him "Stingy" for not sharing his money with his children), Sting clarified that he believed it was more loving to trust that they'd figure it out on their own.

Sticking with British music icons, Sir Elton John has also spoken plainly about the fact that he won't bequeath his kids millions in his will. Speaking to the Mirror, the singer lauded Sting's outlook on the matter. "I think what Sting said is very right, it's a good idea. I came from a very working class family and was born in a council estate house. I earned everything I did from hard work and that's the way they've got to do it as well," he told the outlet. 

Granted, John did say he and husband David Furnish would always ensure their sons were provided for. "Of course I want to leave my boys in a very sound financial state," he said. However, both he and Furnish agreed that that would cover the necessities, not luxuries. "Anything beyond the basic, they have to go out and earn it themselves. If they want a Picasso, they have to go out and earn it. I think there's real sensibility in that," Furnish said. He also added, "The greatest joys, everything Elton and I have created, have come from hard work and that's where your self-esteem comes from."

It is worth noting that despite not planning to leave ridiculous amounts of money to their kids, John was also not under any delusions that his sons were just like any other children, and there was no getting away from the fact that they'd have a lavish childhood. "The boys live the most incredible lives, they're not normal kids, and I'm not pretending they are," he stated. That said, he added, "You have to have some semblance of normality, some respect for money, some respect for work," noting that they had chores and star charts like other kids. 

Another knight who doesn't love the idea of hefty inheritances? The Rolling Stones' frontman, Sir Mick Jagger. 

While Jagger hasn't been quite as vocal about why he likely isn't leaving each of his kids a vast inheritance, he nonetheless made it clear he thought leaving them hundreds of millions would be ridiculous at best when he was asked about selling the Rolling Stones' music catalog. ICYMI, some stars have made extraordinary money by doing so, and during a 2023 interview with The Wall Street Journal, Jagger was asked if he'd follow suit. The singer replied that it wasn't something he was looking into, and made it clear the thought of setting up his kids (and probably even his grandchildren) for life wasn't enticing enough. "The children don't need $500 million to live well. Come on," he scoffed.  

Jagger would go on to reveal that if he did at any point decide to sell the catalog, the proceeds would in all likelihood go to charity. "You maybe do some good in the world," he mused. That wasn't exactly surprising. After all, Jagger has long used his net worth (believed to be around $600 million) to help others, whether by contributing to the music department of the high school he and Keith Richards attended together or donating handsomely to a school cricket charity. And, as for his own family, it doesn't seem as though they're fazed by the prospect of a smaller inheritance. After all, the large brood is incredibly close, with his daughter Jade Jagger even writing about their massive family hangouts in British Vogue back in 2021. Jade has also attended events for homeless organizations alongside her dad and volunteered with them, so it's safe to say giving back is a family trait.

Gene Simmons is said to be worth $400 million, but that doesn't mean his two kids are going to split it evenly. In a 2007 appearance on "Conversations with Michael Eisner," he declared, "They're gonna be taken care of, but they will never be rich off my money" (via contactmusic.com). As for how it would work, Gene said his son and daughter would each get an annual allowance to cover their basic needs, but the rest would be up to them. "I don't [want] them to say, 'Thanks, dad, for making me rich.' No, you wanna be able to stand on your own two feet and say, 'I did that,'" he said. 

It's worth noting that Simmons' stance on money isn't inheritance-specific. He was equally strict about things like pocket money when Nick Simmons and Sophie Simmons were little. "There was never any allowance. For what? For being alive? You're training losers," the rocker scoffed in a 2026 interview with Us Weekly. Simmons also told the outlet that when Nick or Sophie did ask for money, they'd have to earn it with both chores and negotiation, because he believed that would train them for the real world.  

It certainly seems to have worked for the Simmons family, with the KISS bassist gushing to Us Weekly about their successes. "Sophie is approaching 2 billion downloads of her songs. She writes and produces, does all that for other artists. ... She did that all by herself. Taught herself, never asked my opinion about, 'How should I write songs?' Self taught," the proud dad said. As for Nick, Simmons also hyped him up for his music, mentioning that it had been featured on "Ozark" and the perhaps aptly named "Prodigal Son." Tough love, but with results. 

Finally, Andrew Lloyd Webber, who spoke about his distaste for inheritance in a 2008 interview with the Mirror. The musician behind some of the world's best-loved musicals had similar concerns to many other stars, saying, "I don't believe in inherited money at all. I am not in favor of children suddenly finding a lot of money coming their way because then they have no incentive to work." 

Asked what he would like to happen with his lifelong earnings (per Celebrity Net Worth, that amounts to more than a billion dollars), he joked to the Mirror that it probably wouldn't be up to him. "It is extremely likely that my wife Madeleine will outlive me so I will leave the problem with her," he quipped. However, he added that they were both of the mind that it, as well as his company Really Useful Group, should be used to benefit a wider community. "I don't think it should be about having a whole load of rich children and grandchildren. I think it should be used in a way to encourage the arts," he said. Ultimately, Lloyd Webber explained, "We could use the royalties to encourage everything from bursaries to young artists and composers. I feel I owe a debt and that is very largely due to the success not only in Britain but also the rest of the world," he said. 

Luckily, Lloyd Webber's children weren't upset about it. In fact, he told the Mirror, "They aren't bothered. They don't think that way." Sure enough, each of Lloyd Webber's children, including his son Nicholas Lloyd Webber, who sadly passed away in 2023, has made their own way, oftentimes in the music business, too. Clearly, then, Lloyd Webber's stance worked out, as can be said for all the aforementioned stars.