Sting’s six kids won’t inherit any of his $300 million: ‘trust funds are albatrosses’


Did you know that Sting has six kids? I did not know that. I guess I thought he probably had a few, here and there, but he has SIX: Eliot Paulina, Joe, Mickey, Jake, Fuchsia and Giacomo. Yes, some of those names sound like dog-names. But it’s fine. Anyway, I think all of Sting’s kids are legally adults at this point…checking that… yes, the youngest kid, Giacomo, is 18 years old now and he’ll be 19 in December. They all have their own careers to varying degrees, and it seems like most of them gravitated towards music and art. Sting has an estimated wealth of $306 million, and he’s now saying that his children will inherit very little of it:

Former Police lead singer and musician Sting has today said he will not be passing on any of his £180million fortune to his children because he wants them to earn their money themselves.

He said: ‘I told them there won’t be much money left because we are spending it! We have a lot of commitments. What comes in, we spend, and there isn’t much left. I certainly don’t want to leave them trust funds that are albatrosses round their necks. They have to work. All my kids know that and they rarely ask me for anything, which I really respect and appreciate.’

‘Obviously, if they were in trouble I would help them, but I’ve never really had to do that. They have the work ethic that makes them want to succeed on their own merit.’

[From The Daily Mail]

I actually have mixed feelings about this, and I think it depends on the parent and the kid. I inherited a little bit of money from my dad, and I was grateful because it came to me a few years ago, when I already had a good job and life experiences and had already supported myself for a while. Now that inheritance is my nest egg, my rainy-day money, my in-case-of-emergency money. I think it’s asking for trouble if you give a teenager or a 21-year-old a huge trust fund or inheritance, but if you’ve raised your kids to respect money and to not be afraid of hard work, I don’t see how a modest inheritance well into adulthood hurts at all. Especially considering the fact that Sting’s kids have chosen the artsy-fartsy types of career paths, you know? It’s not like they’ve been raised to work in STEM fields.


Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

119 Responses to “Sting’s six kids won’t inherit any of his $300 million: ‘trust funds are albatrosses’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Miffy says:

    Nothing but respect here, fair play to him. Bill Gates did something similar, didn’t he? I’m not sure if it was Gates or someone else who said, ‘Give them enough to do something, not enough to do nothing.’

    • OhDear says:

      Think it was Warren Buffet.

    • Lizzie says:

      There was the rumour making the rounds years ago that Gates was giving his kids $10 million each and 1% of microsoft stock. Which….is fair. But maybe when you’ve grown up in a house that changes depending on your mood then 10 mil might seem a little small. haha.

      • BratB says:

        There is no way that I would make that kind of money and not leave my children the bulk of it. I guess if you raise them to be well rounded people who know the value of money, understanding that giving back is very important then it won’t be an issue. The problem is when these spoiled,entitled, ungrateful kids get even more money and treat other like crap, then I can see not giving them a dime!

    • emine says:

      Bill Gates said ”Teach them to catch the fish don’t give them the fish on a plate ”.

    • Ronia says:

      Totally agree. I love this man. Charities will benefit as per his usual commitments. He already gave his children a good education and support. From there they should walk alone. Respect to Sting.

  2. GiGi says:

    I’m hearing more and more of this these days. In fact, many of our clients are rehabing their homes on mom & dad’s money. Not on inheritance, mind you. No. The parents have said, “We’re not leaving you anything, but we want to enjoy this money with you while we’re here.” So I see older people taking their kids on vacation, paying for cars, etc. I keep telling my mom the same – she should be spending our “inheritance” not saving for us – I want her to enjoy herself with her earnings!

    We know that when my husband’s father dies, we will get some money. It will be a good amount, not millions, but a nice chunk. It’ll be a nice savings for us, but some of the siblings in the family are already spending against it. I think it really is up to the personality of the inheritor. We have another friend whose father passed suddenly and left a great fortune. It has almost crippled his children, they feel so guilty and sad, they don’t spend or enjoy the wealth at all!

    And I doubt they’re getting nothing. Even 100,000 is a lot of money and I’d be they’ll get more than that.

    • word says:

      I tell my mom the same thing. My dad always said he’d travel and enjoy his life when he retires. He died one day before his retirement. My mom inherited everything. I told her she should at least go out there and travel and enjoy her life as my dad never got to. Yet she keeps saying she wants to leave money for her kids. I tell her that money is hers and she should spend it. It is hard to spend inheritance because you think about the person and how hard they worked for that money. It’s hard to let go of.

    • Chris says:

      On the other hand a lot of parents use the promise of “the inheritance” as an excuse for choosing work over giving their kids their full attention. The job of a parent is to make kids feel loved by giving them attention and to make sure they’re equipped with the skills they’ll need to make it in the world. Ignoring them and thinking you can make up for it by giving them a chunk of money when you die is simply not good enough.

  3. Isa says:

    If my kids grow up to be irresponsible, ungrateful brats then I wouldn’t want to leave them anything. That doesn’t seem the case with his kids and I would definitely leave them money. But ultimately that’s his choice.

    • may234 says:

      Most parents think that their kids are responsible and grateful, even when it’s not the case. I wouldn’t rely on my judgment as a parent.

  4. Patricia says:

    I’d be like “sting-daddy, just leave me one million. One single million. I’ll be good with that”.
    Seriously. If I had $1 million I’d go to an island and paint for the rest of my life.

    • kri says:

      Dear Mr. Sting,
      I am a responsible, decent adult. I work 50 hours a week, and my car is so old it sounds like it has TB. I will do lots of good in the world. I will send Terry Richardson, R Kelly,and lots of other people to an island far away. I will take the ass implants out of all the Kardashians, and make them do volunteer work at homeless shelters. I will rescue animals (Gaga’s dog, hold on, I’m coming!) and I will share with my CB posters.
      Thanks, and here’s my account number,

    • Algernon says:

      You would run out of money in a couple years. The world we live in today, one million won’t support a life of leisure. The last time I saw statistics on this, Forbes estimated you needed at least $5 million to live a life of leisure (i.e., annual travel and a no-mortgage home, and not having to work) for twenty years, but that was four or five years ago. The baseline has probably gone up.

      • Wren33 says:

        Right, and if you have kids and need to send them to college, and plan to live for more than twenty years, it is much more. Now, of course $1 million will give you a ton of security if you plan on having a job that will earn you some income.

    • JustChristy says:

      Patricia, Kri, congrats on winning the internet for today 😀

  5. Liberty says:

    Anyone remember this blind about the cash-poor rock star’s wife unable to pay her Italian hotel bill after shopping like mad in Italy…

  6. Maria says:

    I get what he’s saying, let’s be real here tho, those artsy careers got started with help of bring Sting’s kids (I will gladly concede I’m sure they’ve proven themselves by now).

    He’ll leave his kids money of that I’m sure, it just won’t be to the point where they can early retire, and I respect him for this.

  7. eliza says:

    Trudi needs to throw that white dress in the trash and buy a bra.

    • Anonny says:

      And then she needs to stop spending their money on “facial maintenance.” Ahem.

      • MaiGirl says:

        Seriously. She creeps me out, and so does he when she is with him. Something is “off” with her.

  8. capepopsie says:

    I´ve also inherited a bit of Money from my dad, and I also see it as my “rescue for a rainy day”. Somehow I quite like that he wants them to work, and earn their own Money. When you keep getting things, you really don´t appreciated it properly. He might have a surprise install for them, though. Maybe he just doesn´t want them to rely on his Money?

    • Sabrine says:

      I would never do that to my own children. I want them to have good lives when I’m gone and I know they will appreciate anything I can leave them. Why doesn’t he set stipulations on money he might leave for them, so much per month? Even a few million each would help them a lot in life.

  9. original kay says:

    I’m not sure what I think about this.

    I agree that they need to make it on their own. However, you raise someone in a certain lifestyle, then pull it out from under them in a sink or swim mentality, that’s harder than it needs to be.

    So I hope the “we spend it as it comes in” means the money is going towards good causes. I don’t know much about Sting in that regard- contributions to charities, etc.

    I do know that the scene in Dune when he steps out in his underwear still hold up by today’s standards. ((grins))

    • Original Tessa says:

      I agree with this. He’s making it way harder than it has to be, and showing very little faith in his children’s character. A kid that knows nothing but luxury all of a sudden having to live on an artists budget is going to struggle far more than they have to.

    • Algernon says:

      We’re assuming he hasn’t been telling them this all along, though. I agree it’s pretty rough to just pull the rug out from under them upon his death, when they’re already traumatized, but if they’ve been raised their whole lives not to expect a huge inheritance, then that’s a bit different. If he’s raised them to believe they’re going to have to provide for themselves, I don’t see a problem with this. It’s basically saying, “I worked hard and you’ve had a very nice life as a result. I’ve given you the best of everything and set you up with first-class educations and all the connections you could ever need to start your own lives as adults. Now, you won’t be inheriting a substantial portion of money. You need to make your own way.” I’m okay with that. His family seems well-adjusted, so I assume they are, too.

  10. JessSaysNo says:

    I don’t pity those children. I’m sure he means that he will not leave each of them $50 mil in a trust fund, but will leave them each a mil or two when he dies. Even without one penny, those kids have his name and his legacy. They could do great things with their privilege and even artsy-fartsy careers, being attached to Sting is enormously valuable.

  11. Tiffany says:

    From reading that quote. How in the he’ll do you blow through 300 million in your lifetime.

  12. Original Tessa says:

    IMO if you’re an asshole, you’re going to be one with or without daddy’s money. If he thinks his kids are good hardworking people, allowing then to inherit his money shouldn’t be something to fear. If his kids work hard and can make their own ways, great, allow them to retire filthy rich and perhaps carry on whatever work or good deeds you’ve started. Don’t assume they’ll squander it. And if you do assume they’ll squander it, maybe your kids are assholes.

  13. L says:

    He didn’t say no money he said ” there won’t be much money left “-which by his definition prob means that the kids are getting 2 million instead of 15. Plus I believe all his kids are actors/musicians/artists-so clearly mom and dad have been helping out somehow.

    Sting’s also been saying this for years-so I’m sure his kids have known this from a very young age.

    • Original Tessa says:

      Yeah, you’re probably right. “You won’t be getting 50 million, so get that out of your head. You’ll be getting 10 million.” And people only worth 10 million in Sting’s circles are downright poor.

    • Denise says:

      Remember he probably expects he’ll be leaving a wife behind who will get most of it, then we she goes it’s 6 kids to split it amongst, probably some grandkids by then. Yes, I’m sure what his ‘little’ is is a fortune to us. But I doubt they’d be able to maintain the lifestyle they grew up with, they are probably treated to fantastic trips, etc. and if they want all that for their own families they have to provide it for themselves. Something tells me Trudie Styler would blow through it all herself anyway.

  14. Krista says:

    My neighbor growing up inherited a significant amount of money from her parents. But she couldn’t touch it until she was 50! As a result she became a very successful doctor and a lovely lady. If I had tons of money to give to my children, then that’s what I would do too.

    • MorticiansDoItDeader says:

      I have an acquaintance who claims her grandfather left her millions that she can’t collect until 59 1/2! She’s 32 and she’s counting down the days until she gets that money! She doesn’t work and has no education. I sometimes wonder if she’s being truthful about the money because 59 1/2 is such a random age and extremely late in life to be useful (meaning, it would be too late to pay for her children’s education and whatnot).

      • Denise says:

        That’s really interesting if that’s true. I can see the rationale; live your life as you would according to your own resourcefulness, then enjoy your retirement as a reward for making your own way. I think that’s actually a very caring thing to do, he wants to be sure he’s not denying her the chance to fulfill her own ambitions.

      • Embee says:

        Weird. That’s the age when you begin to take your RMD (required minimum distribution) from tax-deferred retirement accounts. Maybe he was thinking “you can have it when you retire so in the meantime GO TO WORK.”

  15. enya says:

    Effing cheapskate, as far as I’m concerned. I just find this mean–ha! In both senses of the word!

  16. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I see nothing wrong with leaving them a nice amount, but nothing extravagant. My brother married a woman who had inherited a huge fortune, and she can’t finish anything. If it gets hard, she quits, because she doesn’t “have” to finish. She quit college. She opens businesses, like an antique store and a pet boutique and charitable organizations, like a dog rescue, but as soon as the shiny new toy part wears off, and it gets a little complicated, she says “I don’t need this” and she quits. I think she has been hampered by her money.

  17. starrywonder says:

    It’s his right. It’s his money. Your children are not entitled to your wealth after you pass. It would be different if these were kids but all of them are adults and do not have any disabilities. You should be able to make a living and support yourself and not expect your parents to pay for you and let alone think that all of this money is coming to you so you can then spend against it one day.

    It sounds like he has charities and other things in mind which is his right. Warren Buffet, Bill and Melinda Gates, etc. are all devoted to giving away as much money as possible before the pass away and no one is accusing them of depriving their grown adult children.

    • cr says:

      And I believe that both Gates and Buffet have said publicly for years that the children will get some small percentage of the money but not all. But when your fortune is numbered in the billions, even a small percentage is a lot.
      So it’s not as if the children are being cast into a life of poverty.

  18. aenflex says:

    His choice. I would certainly want my child to have a solid work ethic and not a sense of entitlement. At the same time, I grew up poor, and when I have extra I like to spread it around.

  19. OhDear says:

    I get what he’s saying and it’s his money, he can do what he wants. It’s like the Cosby show scene where, after a kid complains how something wouldn’t have happened if they were rich, tells the kid that “[the kid] has nothing.”

    On an anecdotal note, I knew someone who grew up knowing/assuming that she was going to get an inheritance later in life. She was never motivated to do anything with her life because of it and assumed that the inheritance would solve all her problems. Granted, the parents were pushovers and that didn’t help, but I can see where Sting’s getting at. Having to earn what you have is motivating and character-building.

  20. Eileen says:

    In the article on the daily mail he says he has a staff of 100 people but I cannot fathom burning through that amount of money like he says he does

  21. Embee says:

    This is my field: I am an estate planning attorney.

    I have seen far more children of wealthy people ruined by their parents’ money than helped by it. We can draft around many different scenarios (and do) but ultimately, when people know that they don’t have to work they often don’t. On the other hand, some kids behave as though the money isn’t there. It’s very sad when a person doesn’t ever get the satisfaction of achieving because they lack the motivation because they have inherited money. You really cannot predict who will fall into this category and so I respect his decision to not take the risk.

    It is HIS money, after all.

    • NYC_girl says:

      Agreed. My parents are comfortable but nowhere near Sting’s level. I never assumed any of their money was mine. I’m in my 40s. I was laid off 3 years ago and thankfully had money saved and when they offered me $$ I wouldn’t take it. I finally got hired for a pt job and am scrounging by. My mother did give me money for an emergency root canal last year which I hope to pay back at some point!

      • sonalaceae (Nighty) says:

        Yeah, our parents’ money is not ours…. My dad bought me my first car 12 years ago, at the time, I needed a car because of work, and my paycheck was pretty low.. In the meantime, and because my finances became better, 4 years ago, they were the ones needing to buy a car, so I bought it for them…
        I supposed it was fair…

    • lmh says:

      I’m completely behind you on this. It’s a gamble and one not worth taking with your kids, imo. I applaud Sting. I live in Silicon Valley where there is a great deal of wealth. A few of my friends have even become billionaires and I’m telling you, the levels kids can get ‘screwed’ up is intense to witness. I think the difference and it’s harder to understand, are the people on this site, being left enough to supplement their income, to help put a down payment on house, to remodel, it very very different than the wealth we are talking about with Sting or in my neck of the woods. I was having dinner with a friend that inherited 500 million when he turned 18 ( CRAZY!) and while he’s actually pretty down to earth, I’m telling you, he’s screwed up on a LOT of levels. Nice guy, filled with generosity, but screwed up. Not to mention, Sting and others have had their own journey with wealth, and I’m quite certain have seen the seedy underbelly of it. Because money, while great, on big levels can be quite damaging to the psyche. Just my two cents.

  22. MorticiansDoItDeader says:

    It’s a good strategy to tell them you’re leaving them nothing. That way they have to make their own way.
    I’m sure they’ll be pleasantly surprised to find they’ll have more than enough to live comfortably; unlike Tori Spelling, who counted on her fathers fortune and was left with Aaron’s pocket change.

  23. roz says:

    My friend inherited a load when she was 21 and it was totally gone by the time she was 23. She did things like buy a car (which she totaled after a few years) and bum around Europe. We’ve never talked much about it but I do think she has regrets as she’s had some serious financial struggles since then.

    There was a blind item that people surmised was about the Stings and how they were broke due to crazy spending, to the point where the wife in the BI had to ask someone in the band for a loan. Hmmmm.

  24. A.Key says:


  25. Adrien says:

    Well at least leave them something to redress the damage caused by their given names. You know, for therapy.

  26. Jayna says:

    He said no trust funds and there won’t be much left when they die because they have a lot o money going out. He’s been working on that Broadway play. He himself probably invested a ton of money. “Not a lot left” to him is probably a lot to us, enough to have a cushion for his children. They just aren’t going to be walking around with 20 million apiece. People forget they have like five homes. When they die, those homes will be in the estate.

    But there is nothing wrong with wanting to leaveyour children enough to never have to worry as far as paying bills or illness. Financial security is important and financial problems, living month to month, no cushion, can cause health problems and stress and illness and divorce, suicide. What if one of his kids never makes much but works? Does he want them to struggle all their life? Nah. I hope not. It doesn’t mean they should live off of trust funds with massive wealth. I agree with him about having so much money from early on and no work ethic. Too much money from 18 on after moving out and there is no incentive, no pride to making your way in life. Those things build character. You see how Rod Stewart’s son turned out and others. They seem like good parents. I’m sure his kids will be comfortable when they die.

  27. ReturnoftheMac says:

    Ok so this is timely for me. I inherited a modest amount of money from my grandparents last fall. I’m 37 and because of a divorce several years ago the thought of owning a home again seemed completely out of reach. However with the inheritance I was able to make a down payment and reconstruction work on a modest house so that I could get a mortgage payment I could afford.

    I have honestly been floored by the vitriol from some people I know about my decision. I honestly feel like I did the smartest thing I could, investing on a purchase that is an investment in my future.


    • MorticiansDoItDeader says:

      Sounds like a sensible way to “spend” your money. In reality, you’re making an investment (and with the way the economy is, I’m sure you didn’t pay above market value and will be able to sell it for more than you paid). Those who are angry are probably jealous. I would steer clear of those people anyway. People who love you want to see you happy.

    • NYC_girl says:

      Congrats! Real estate is a great investment. What were these people hoping you would do, spend the money on clothes and trips?

      • ReturnoftheMac says:


        Actually I got it for WAY under market value because of some minor work that needed to be done.

        @ NYC, I know right?! People boggle my mind sometimes. :/

    • swack says:

      Why would anyone put you down for that? Had you gone out and spent if frivolously instead of helping yourself to get back on your feet, I could see it. You really did the right thing. Those making disparaging remarks were probably jealous.

    • BGirl81 says:

      Return, I feel you! I’m 32 and single. Without the trust I have from my grandparents, I would have been beyond screwed during the recession. SO. SCREWED. I’m an interior designer and was laid off three times in as many years. I guarantee you my parents would have had to start paying my rent! My grandparents were smart planners and we’re given a certain amount every month, but can ask for more in case of an actual emergency or a great investment opportunity. I live in Boston, where a brokedown hovel will run you about $650k, so owning a home would have been totally out of reach for me too!

      p.s. Congrats on the new home and feel free to hit me up for design advice anytime! 🙂

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I’m no investment counselor, but I think that was very smart. The stock market is so all over the place now, and you bought at a good price. Why do people object? I think it was a great thing to do. Congrats!

      • ReturnoftheMac says:

        The only thing I can think, is that it’s because I’m single. And maybe their rationale is “why does she need a house by herself?”. However, they neglect to factor in that my parents have both retired and since my brother passed away a couple of years ago they tend to spend a lot of time with me. I wanted to have a place that was comfortable for them to stay extended periods of time if they want. I had their bath fitted with handle bars and various things so as they age it won’t be an issue.

        Thanks y’all, your support makes my day 🙂

    • Tang says:

      You know, any time you get money, people will come out of the woodwork and will either be a) completely jealous or b) try to see if they can get some of your money for themselves. The jealousy of people in our society today is sickening. The fact is, life is unfair and sometimes people inherit or receive money they did not earn. We all have to get used to it.

      What do they expect you to do, turn down the inheritance? Seriously.

  28. Adrien says:

    I understand Sting. Maybe he met Tom Hanks and saw that too much money could give your kids a false sense of entitlement. He cannot raise another Chet Haze.

  29. Nikki says:

    Return of the Mac: why did anyone react with vitriol. It seems a great use of your inheritance to me; congrats! I inherited some money and went to the library and checked out a book about getting an inheritance. it warned against acting impulsively, since its most prople’s only chance to get a chunk of $. i stuck most of it in safe CD’s , because I know nothing about investments and didn’t want to blow it. It was 7 years ago, and I’ve only now come to terms both w/his death and my having some money to learn to invest some!

  30. Dog Obsessed Girl says:

    My friend set up funds (I’m not sure what they are called. That’s what I’m calling them.) for his children that allow them to withdraw as much money in one year as they earn. If in their jobs they earn $35,000 that year, they can withdraw up to $35,000 from their funds. If they earn $1200, they can remove up to $1200. He said it requires his children to work and to file taxes since their tax returns must be presented to the fund manager as proof for how much can be withdrawn. I find it an interesting way to give your kids some money.

    • swack says:

      Really interesting.

    • word says:

      Yeah but a lot of times finding a good job is just pure luck and it has nothing to do with effort. I know some people who slacked through college and ended up getting a really good job just because they knew someone or were in the right place at the right time. It had nothing to do with how hard they worked or how much effort they put into finding a good paying job.

      • Algernon says:

        $35,000 is entry level at most places. You could be a legal assistant at a law firm and make $35K to start. They don’t have to land some super cushy junior management gig straight out of college to take advantage of that deal. Just get any job and you’ll be fine. Even if you start at $25K, with that deal you’d be making $50K a year, which is comfortable if you’re single with no dependents. It’s not extravagant, but you could have a home, car, etc. To me that arrangement says, “Just do something, anything, with your life, and you will be rewarded.”

      • word says:

        Yeah but you do know how bad this economy is right? I’m just saying it seems unfair if one sibling just happens to get lucky and lands a job that pays $80 000 a year while the other siblings aren’t as lucky (even though they are trying). One sibling could easily eat up that fund very quickly. When you have children, you should try to keep things equal. I mean if you have an adult child that isn’t even trying and doesn’t care to make something of him/herself then by all means don’t reward them. I don’t know, just my opinion.

      • Algernon says:

        I get that point, and I do agree there’s a wide margin for unfairness inherit in this particular system. Just, generally, the idea behind it, I get. It seems to be saying, “Just do *something*.” Applying it in the real world, maybe the “fair” thing would be to set a limit or a baseline. Like, if you’re employed and earning a living wage (which is like $22K, I think), then you get $50K annually, or something like that. There could still be disparity if someone’s salary was substantially higher, but they’d at least be receiving the same “bonus”.

        I have a friend who has a trust fund (I don’t know how big it is, but I’m under the impression it’s fairly substantial), but his access to it is stipulated upon working. He doesn’t have to be earning a wage, per se, he just has to prove he’s working a minimum of thirty hours a week and he receives a monthly stipend. He doesn’t have an actual job, but he’s essentially a professional volunteer. He volunteers regularly at the animal rescue, the children’s hospital, legal aid office (just filing, but they need help, desperately), and stuff like that. He keeps busy with volunteer efforts, and frankly, sometimes he puts in more hours a week than I do. That seems like maybe a better approach than tying your trust to your salary. tie it to a work schedule.

      • word says:

        Yes I agree with your idea. There should be a baseline. Also, the idea of volunteering your time is great ! I really like that idea. This way the person is still active and others are being helped at the same time. It’s a win-win situation.

    • Embee says:

      Those are what we call “incentive trusts.” They can be drafted in all manner of ways, including the dollar-for-dollar or a simple “meaningfully engaged in work or philanthropic activities.” I’ve drafted plenty of them, but really it’s more of a message to the beneficiary about the settlor’s intent. A decent trustee wouldn’t make distributions to a spendthrift/ne’er do well!

  31. Anon says:

    He can say whatever he wants till the will is read. You never know.. He could be just setting them up to expect nothing and work hard for what you get and earn and show respect for it.. Wen they do get it they will know how to maintain it and respect it.

  32. S says:

    This isn’t terribly uncommon for the wealthy. Google George Mitchell- Texas oil/land billionaire that passed away last year. He was always heavily involved with charity and education and left the bulk of his money to those causes. His family got a very small inheritance (comparitively).

  33. J.Mo says:

    The only thing I don’t like about this is the fact that it takes a fair bit of luck to be a success as well as hard work and talent. Can he not attribute a bit of his success along the way to luck?

  34. Racer says:

    Good for him.

    It is his money, he worked for it. His children benefited as they were growing up and as adults they need to carve their own path.

    My blood boils when I hear people (mostly entitled children born in 1980 something) talk about other peoples money as if they have a right to spend it or live lavishly on the backs of others. No one cares how much money your family has, where they vacation, what they bought or how big their house is. What have YOU accomplished?

    I grew up very comfy. My mom retired at 50 and my dad still works, travels all the time, has expensive hobbies and is obsessed with watching his stocks. I do not expect ANYTHING from them- it is their life to live and their money to spend. The only thing I ask is to leave enough money for a decent funeral.

    If you want to live well and have nice things work hard and earn it yourself.

  35. Chickie Baby says:

    This story about Sting and Trudie reminds me of several years ago, when I saw an interview with George Lucas, who was uber–wealthy already at that point, and he mentioned that one of his kids had asked him one day, “Dad, are we rich?” and Mr. Lucas answered with something like, “No, WE are not rich…I am rich. I allow you a nice life and place to live, but I earned the money, so it is mine to spend. It is not yours.”

    Sting earned his wealth and the money is his to do with as he wishes. You never hear about his kids in the tabloids, so it seems like they are doing just fine on their own and probably love their dad for more than just his money, anyway. Sting and Trudie do a lot of good things in the world because they want to and have the means to do so. Good on them!

  36. Isadora says:

    To me it sounds a bit.. tight-fisted. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s absolutely necessary to raise your kids to have a good work ethic and a level head. If you think this is not possible with too much money around, then don’t let them frolick around in luxury while they grow up, yes. But his kids are adults and in the middle of building their life. Giving them no inheritance when you are as rich as Sting – this makes no sense to me. It’s not like he can’t have a very, very nice life or nothing would be left, there’s enough for everyone. And if his kids have such a strong work ethic as he says then a father should also trust them with his legacy – including his financial legacy. Because while they might not need the money to survive maybe the would do great things with it? Opening/financing art schools, starting big projects, invest in a cause etc.

    To me it makes much more sense to give this kind of money to my level-headed children so that it can do something worthwhile than to spend it on designer clothes and my wife’s hairdresser.

    But maybe I’m biased because I know someone who inherited in his early 20s a sh*tload of money and while yes, he has a nice house (also part of the inheritance) and drives a nice car, he is still very normal, smart and level headed. He works, he finished his education, he never took drugs and he is an overall nice and modest guy. It’s not necessarily money that corrupts and is responsible for stupid decisions – corrupt and stupid people are responsible for these.

  37. word says:

    I don’t know. These kids grew up rich. They are accustomed to a certain lifestyle. For instance, say two people get divorced. The husband makes a lot of money while the wife chose not to work. They don’t have a pre-nup. She gets to walk away with half and may also get spousal support on the grounds that she was accustomed to a certain lifestyle and wants to maintain that lifestyle. The court would rule in her favor. But when you have children, after 18 we are just supposed to chuck them out and cut them off? If you have a lot of money why not leave some for your kids so they don’t have to struggle? Especially if you’re filthy rich.

    • Algernon says:

      But we don’t know what they actually will inherit. He’s just saying no trust funds. There will be plenty of assets like homes, art, stock portfolios, etc, that the kids can liquidate and split up. They’re not going to be left empty-handed. Also, they got first-rate educations and every advantage in terms of connections and opportunity to begin their own careers. The older kids seem like they’re doing pretty well for themselves. Assuming the Sting children will be “struggling” because they don’t inherit $50 million a piece or whatever seems a bit…short sighted.

      • word says:

        The title of this story indicates “they won’t inherit ANY of his $300 million”. So I assumed that means he is leaving his kids nothing. I didn’t say his kids would struggle. I was saying in general, if anyone has money why not leave it to your kids. ? Not everyone has rich and famous parents who have connections. Inheritance can really help someone out who happens to be struggling.

      • Algernon says:

        Yes, in the general way, if you have some money, why not leave it to your kids? My parents will not be able to leave me and my siblings anything, and they actually apologize for this (kind of a lot, it’s getting weird). It’s okay, we’re all employed and doing well on our own and we’re more concerned that they’re able to have comfortable, secure lives as they age, but I know they see it as a failure that they don’t have anything to leave us (they lost their retirements in the economic collapse and had to go back to work).

        But this story isn’t about the philosophy of inheritance in general. it’s about Sting’s kids. They DO have famous parents, they DO have connections, they are NOT struggling. You can look his older kids up, they’re all established and seem to be doing well on their own. His inheritance would just be an indulgence. They don’t need it, he doesn’t want to give it to them, I’m not judging him for that choice.

    • Embee says:

      The equitable (50/50) division of marital property recognizes that the non-employed spouse also contributes to the functionality of the family unit, enabling the employed spouse to go out and work. Kids aren’t legally recognized as contributing anything to family productivity (and as anyone with a child will tell you, they do the opposite). Sometime child support is calculated by what the child has become accustomed to, but that’s only until they are 18.

      I’m guessing Sting and Trudie have given the kids lots of boosts over the years. They will be fine.

      • me says:

        What if they have maids, cooks, nannies to do all the work. What is the wife “contributing” to the household then? She would still get 50%. Plus, a lot of these “rich housewives” are a drain on their husbands wallets as well. All they do is shop. They get divorced and the judge feels it’s necessary to keep up their lifestyle, so the husband has to keep paying her bills even when they aren’t married. This is why pre-nups are so important. I think it’s more important to support your child because you are the one who brought them into this world. Mind you, if your child is a lazy piece of sh*t, don’t bother giving them any money. I don’t know what Sting’s wife does as a career…I’m assuming she earned part of that $300 million ?

      • Embee says:

        Yeah, it’s weird, but the presumption is that the non-working spouse contributed to the marital property even if she did nothing but shop. Remember women have historically been the employed spouse and men really got over “back in the day” because he could say “it was my money, she didn’t work” which was hugely unfair to the wife who stayed home raising kids and doing all the cooking and housework. Now the presumption is that she was half the value of the marriage. I would imagine that’s a rebuttable presumption but maybe not. Trudie Styler works as an acotr and producer and is heavily involved with environmental philanthropy.

        But yes, pre-nups can be very helpful in setting the expectations of a non-employed spouse. Unfortunately most people don’t think prenup when they should!

  38. starrywonder says:

    Example of why your kids thinking that they are going to inherit a shit ton of money is not a good thing = Tori Spelling.

  39. serena says:

    Well I kinda get his point. Look at the Willis sisters, or at lots of famous celebrities children, they have huge (?) trust funds and they do nothing all day except being wasted/who-knows-what.. they have occasional jobs but I don’t think they could live with that only. So, yeah, maybe he’s saying that but he’ll give them some ’emergency funds’ later in life.

  40. Tulip says:

    It’s money he worked for and it’s good he’s upfront. Nothing worse than having a parent dangle something in front of you and try to manipulate you into living a life they think you should live. And it happens more often than you might think. Be upfront and (like an earlier poster said) it would be extremely nice if the deceased left enough money to cover the funeral costs.

  41. Kori says:

    There’s the old saying ‘It’s my money, not your inheritance’. I’ve nothing against people spending their hard earned money in the golden years rather than feeling it somehow is obligated to the future generations. My mother-in-law tries to play some games (not that she would be leaving us much anyway) along the lines of ‘don’t count on inheriting much if anything from me’ just to see the reaction. She pulled it on my husband and he was like ‘go ahead’ because he believes in the old adage. If she leaves us something, great; if not, fine too. No one in future generations is entitled to someone else’s money–especially when they are middle-aged themselves and perfectly capable of earning their own living.

  42. Jo says:

    I could never do that to my Daughter in a million years! Who knows what may happen to your children once you are dead and gone. Just because they’ll be adults, doesn’t mean that they won’t fall on hard times. You don’t have to hand them $300 million on a silver platter but you also don’t have to leave them with nothing. There is a such thing as a happy medium.

  43. Raelee says:

    I think it’s awesome that he would lock his assets. I mean, wouldn’t it be more logical that way than to just give them all their share of the money. A lot of young, rich people tend to spend their money in a very wasteful manner but what really hurts the most is that they do nothing to earn it. It creates people who make power out of money and creates slave drivers who want maids to do all the work for them.

    Money can kill, remember that.

  44. CS(g)E says:

    My husbands family have a similar situation on a much smaller scale. They are like vultures waiting for them to die-it’s really sad. The grandparents are divorced and while the grandfather is older he has a lady friend that is a companion (they hate-she’s lovely but they think she’s going to get $$$) he’s not easily manipulated. His grandmother on the other hand is a widow and they squeeze her for everything they can and are so disrespectful and rude (even though she’s a mean old cuss).

  45. chloe says:

    Good for him, it’s his money not his children’s, though I hope he is donating most of it to charities. We just inherited a little chunk of change from my husbands Grandma last year, I was shocked of how his siblings and cousins fought over the money, we stayed out of it, and I am kind of thankful my family has always been to poor to have anything but love to give, because I have complete lack of respect for any of his family members anymore. I told my parents to enjoy what they have, and don’t worry about me.

  46. yoyo says:

    oh please. His kids ARE currently a money drain let’s be honest. His oldest is nearly 40 and has been in unknown bands forever.
    None of them have real jobs as far as I know, they are all in artsy fartsy careers. “work for it”?! Non sense.
    There is NO WAY they are not living on daddy’s dime right now. Which is fine, have a rich dad might as well take advantage of it but spare us the lies and nonsense. They’re using up the money now,all of them. And in the end if they end up with 10Mil each that is more that anyone would ever need in a lifetime.

    So yeah, as usual I would have to tell Sting to sit down and shut up, he just spews non sense all the time.

    • idk says:

      That’s just it. His kids had the priviledge to go after their dreams and not worry about getting a “normal” job to make ends meet. They knew their dad had connections. It would be great to get to follow your dreams knowing you had a safety net (rich father). Most of us settle for jobs we don’t like because we don’t have a choice.

  47. A.Key says:

    “Especially considering the fact that Sting’s kids have chosen the artsy-fartsy types of career paths, you know? It’s not like they’ve been raised to work in STEM fields.”

    Well neither was he. His mom was a hairdresser and his dad a milkman. There were 6 of them in that family. What security and trust fund did he have as a young man in this world? None. He still turned out alright, didn’t he. He worked as a bus conductor, building laborer, tax officer and teacher. No one handed him cash and told him “go sit all day and sing songs”.
    And I bet he never would’ve become who he is now if his parents had been upper class stinking rich.

  48. Gina says:

    Yeah, speaking as someone who had to support my indigent father and struggle to get out of my welfare childhood and crawl into the middle class, I have no idea what it’s like to have parents help you out at all much less leave you anything.

    I definitely appreciate it though and have saved all my life so I will have something to help my own kids with. Kids need help from their parents.

  49. Suzy from Ontario says:

    I’m with you Kaiser, I have mixed feelings about it. In some ways I completely agree because those trust fund kids that useless and do nothing with their lives are pathetic and it’s good to want your kids to have their own passions and work, but sometimes kids need help like with school or help with a first car or house. Don’t have to pay for all of it, or buy anything fancy, but sometimes a bit of help can really make a difference. Of course we don’t know how much he helps them out here and there. Some people may not leave much in terms of inheritance, but instead choose to help out with things like weddings or university or whatever.

  50. Sandra says:

    I have read that family wealth tends to disappear within 3 generations because of each generation working less and less to sustain it. Particularly I applaud his being up-front with his children about what they will not inherit – I have been told since I was a child about inheriting everything (which sounds quite grand, but we are normal people). When my father re-married, he was leaving me land and leaving his new wife his money (it made sense for tax reasons). Now that all has been taken away with him changing his mind, and everything will go to his new wife, and by extension her child. Intellectually, I know that it’s his to do with what he wants, but in my heart – I feel betrayed. When you have been told something for 30+ years, it’s a hard thing to swallow. The silly thing is, I don’t need it, I have always worked and am doing quite well. But it feels like a betrayal no matter how much I tell myself otherwise. I wish he had never talked about it. So kudos to Sting for letting them always know that they won’t be getting anything and not setting up expectations.

  51. Chris says:

    Good on him. I don’t believe in people inheriting wealth. It should all go to the government. There’s nothing worse than country club conservatives spouting off about how people should take personal responsibility and shouldn’t expect any government assistance.

  52. CInderella says:

    Funny this story would come out so soon after the blind item about a certain rocker being cash broke…

  53. ctkat1 says:

    I agree in leaving your offspring enough to give them some security, but not so much that they no longer have to work. I’m lucky that my grandfather left me some money- I used a chunk for a down payment on my house and invested the rest. It’s my safety net now, and once I have a baby it will be my child’s college fund. It’s not enough to stop working, or to take crazy career risks, and for that I’m grateful.

  54. Kelly says:

    STING should reconsider leaving his fortune to his kids all six of them I just don’t get why he would not. But, if he chose, not then why not consider helping a homeless family like this lady whose page I found on facebook- “Does Anyone know how to reach him? Heck I need help too….LOL

  55. Word Girl says:

    If I were mega rich & had offspring, my whole purpose of procreating, other than enjoying being a parent, would be so that I could leave my money to my kids. If I were worth $300 million, I’d give each of my six kids at least $20 million. As far as me being afraid that my kids will grow up to be “selfish, spoiled brats,” I would have to consciously manage my own behaviors and values that I teach my children. A child’s behavior is a direct reflection of the parent’s behavior. If you raise your child to be integral and decent human beings by being a decent, integral role model for them, then the apple won’t fall far from the tree. Also, rich folks aught to teach their kids to be financially conscious by showing them how to budget money. Teach them that necessities come first, and that one must always pay their debts. Don’t just tell them that. Physically show them what you do to keep your finances in order. I believe its harsh for a rich parent to pull the financial carpet from under their kid by not leaving them anything, especially when the affluent parent have made them accustomed to that lifestyle.

  56. Moi says:

    I really have mixed feelings about this. I have two life insurance polices (nowhere near the amount Sting is worth), and I understand his view of wanting his children to work hard and be successful in their own right. But….he can put conditions in regards to his inheritance.

    I highly doubt that over $300,000,000 is going away quickly. If he were to give the majority of his profits/worth towards charity, kudos. Otherwise, he needs to leave that money to his children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, on and on….under whatever certain circumstances he wishes. He can create an iron clad Will to his liking, but don’t be that way Mr. Sting.

  57. melain says:

    What a total double standard! Is the money such an albatross to him and his wife? They brag all the time about how much they spend. Why not just teach the children to manage it well and use it for good? Quality people typically use money to create advantage for their children. On the other hand, I’m sure sting has been close enough to ridiculously wealthy people to know first hand how extreme wealth can be ruinous. Do what you gotta do I guess. But this philosophy seems really selfish, controlling and flawed. Not to mention the double standard.

  58. MyLittlePony says:

    He just probably won’t give his children as much as he could. They’ll get some for sure, but just not as much as they could. Btw, am I the only one who thinks Sting is still hot?!!? Cannot stand Trudie, but Sting was always the one for me. My first ever super crush 🙂