Gordon Ramsay isn’t leaving his wealth to his kids: ‘it could ruin them’


Gordon Ramsay is worth about $140 million. What he wants his children to know is that he and their mother, Tana, are worth that – not them. If they want that kind of money, they can bloody well go out and earn it. Ramsay recently told the Telegraph that he expects his children to forge their own path in life and that he’s not leaving them anything. Ramsay has four children, Megan, 18, twins Jack and Holly, 17 and Matilda, 15. He’s also limiting his children’s access to wealth now. His kids don’t get to share any of his expensive perks – like traveling in the same class as their parents.

Celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay has revealed he won’t leave his massive fortune to his children — as he fears it could “ruin them.”

“It’s definitely not going to them, and that’s not in a mean way; it’s to not spoil them,” he said. “The only thing I’ve agreed with Tana is that they get a 25 percent deposit on a flat, but not the whole flat.”

Meanwhile, he added his children don’t sit with them in first class on family holidays as they “haven’t worked hard enough” to afford it yet.

He said: “I turn left with Tana and they turn right and I say to the chief stewardess, ‘Make sure those little f–kers don’t come anywhere near us, I want to sleep on this plane.’ I worked my f–king ass off to sit that close to the pilot and you appreciate it more when you’ve grafted for it.”

[From Fox News]

I have no problem with the philosophy that everyone should earn their own way. I don’t hold an opinion about giving kids inheritances. Certainly there are ways to raise children with proper priorities but still keep them in the will just as there are ways to ruin them by blocking them from family wealth. Personally, I simplified the whole matter by having nothing to leave my children – that’s just the selfless mother I am. Anyway, there’s some irony here because Matilda got her own cooking show at the age of 13. I’m sure she works hard, but Ramsay is kidding himself if he thinks his name didn’t give her that show. By most accounts, the kids are considered well-adjusted and they hold part time jobs. Megan is pursuing her education and running marathons for charity, Jack is considering joining the Marines. So I’m not knocking them, just acknowledging that money isn’t the only inheritance we receive from our folks. I don’t know about that First Class stuff, though. Where are the children staying once they arrive in their coach class seats? Hostels? Presumably these kids can’t afford the beautiful house Ramsay lives in and the expensive car he drives – do they have to run alongside as he motors down the road? Ramsay also doesn’t let his children eat at his restaurants because they couldn’t afford them. Their first meal at his Royal Hospital Road in Chelsea was for Megan’s 16th birthday. Even with my being a Ramsay apologist, that seems like overkill to me.

Among the other things Ramsay has promised to deny his kids – he and good buddy David Beckham have sworn their children may never date. They’ve determined the best way to keep peace among the families is to keep the kids the hell away from each other. As Ramsay said, “If Holly said: “Yeah, Brooklyn and I”… it would be: “No, Holly.”"  Whereas I have no desire to see a Ramsay/Beckham union per se, I would like to be a fly on the wall when Becks approaches Ramsay because one of the Beckham fold has asked Pops to renegotiate. “Yeah, Brooklyn had hoped… “ “No, Beckham,” only this time Ramsay has his best carving knife in hand.


Photo credit: WENN Photos and Getty Images

Related stories

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

34 Responses to “Gordon Ramsay isn’t leaving his wealth to his kids: ‘it could ruin them’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Nancy says:

    So………………………..where is the £140 million gonna go then? *hands out begging bowl* :)

    • SilverUnicorn says:

      Mine out too!! Lol

      I actually approve that, must be a thing for us who grow up in the professional kitchens.. I will never have that problem anyway, mostly because I have no money or kids who could inherit it either….

  2. Mia4s says:

    I’m not too sure about this (but it’s a problem I’m unlikely to ever have 😂)

    I think I’d want to give my kids a modest (by these standards) trust at age 25 which would give them a steady but not spectacular yearly income. Enough that they could live very modestly but would need to work to afford a higher lifestyle. And as long as they wanted to go to university or graduate school and were serious about education, I’d gladly pay for it in full. I guess I’m a softie!

    • Miffy says:

      I prefer Bill Gates approach ‘Give them enough to do something, don’t give them enough to do nothing.’

      • Lolotte says:

        Agree with u both. I find this “defendable” but nearly egoist to not give anything to your four childrens if you have a fortune by yourself. At their places, i’d rather give them a reasonnable amount of money to start in life. It gives the impression they do not fully understand how life works today The american dream of the entirely self made man is a tale of another time. Today poverty generate poverty as much as money generate more money for more entitled rich brats.
        I aint rich myself and i would never wich poverty to anyone and moreover for my childrens. This state of view make me think that this Ramsey guy dindn’t actually lived poor to begin with otherwise he would really understand that enriching yourself with nothing to begin with is the destiny of one man per million today, otherwise he’s thinking that 3/4 of people the on earth are just lazy ass.

  3. Sabrine says:

    I would leave them a million each and see what they do with it. If they invested it wisely, then that would really give them a step up in life. Leaving them nothing at all when you are rolling in money is not right. I would never do that to my children. Sure, an excess would spoil them, but cutting them off cold turkey makes me wonder why he bothered having children in the first place; they have nothing while he’s living a life of luxury seems unfair.

    • Alleycat says:

      It’s not like they’ll be living under a bridge. I’m sure he’ll be paying for their education, and that’s more than what I was given. He even said he’d pay for part of their first flat. It’s called being an adult.

      • holly hobby says:

        Yep he’s not exactly leaving them with nothing. Giving seed money toward a flat (let’s be honest they will probably have nicer living quarters than some of us) is already generous. Of course he wants them to pay off the flat themselves which is expected.

      • teacakes says:

        yeah, 25 percent of a London flat is not ‘nothing’! Those kids are going to have to work their behinds off to earn the rest 75 percent though, the way London real estate is going.

  4. Nicole says:

    I mean I guess the philosophy applies when he can apply it. Obviously they put a roof over their heads but maybe he’s not buying them a 6 figure car. I had a friend like that to the point i didn’t realize how wealthy she really was until i went to her house for the first time.
    And I assume that his money is going to charity. Chances are by the time he passes they WILL have set themselves up. And he may be saying this so they don’t rely on his money but in reality they are leaving them a modest sum

    • holly hobby says:

      Yes the worse thing he can do is say we’re leaving you everything! That means the kids will coast and not even try to make it themselves. By saying no money will be left for you, they have a fighting chance of making something of themselves.

      Look at Tori Spelling. She was counting on Aaron’s money and never wanted to work ever!

  5. Margo S. says:

    His son looks exactly like him!!!!

    I think that’s great. He does come from a working class background (I believe) so it makes sense that he would parent this way. I got a job when I was 11 (refereeing kids soccer!) And had been working up until 2012 when I started having children (I’m a stay at home mom now).

    I come from a working class family and wanted to own nice things and go out with my friends. My parents had no money to give me so I got a job. Same goes for my children. Heck yeah they are getting part time jobs as young teens. Teaches them responsibility.

  6. Turtle says:

    I assume he’s exaggerating to generate headlines to sell books or whatever. I’ve heard other rich people say this and it’s just silly. If you’re THAT wealthy, then it’s on YOU to raise your kids appropriately, with humility and generosity and empathy and a strong work ethic. I can see how you wouldn’t want to burden your kids with everything that comes along with that kind of wealth, but, as someone already suggested, a modest yearly stipend that covers basic expenses is the way to go.

    • Matomeda says:

      +1 I come from nothing (actually I have a lot of school debt), and we work hard to pay our way as barely middle class. If I made a ton, I’d give it to my kids in a smart way, like education accounts, some amount of living money (buying a house etc), childcare costs help/help funds to cover the rest of one parent stays home to raise children. I’d also structure it by age etc like others are saying

  7. chromeprincess says:

    My parents are very comfortable and they had my brother and I working when we were 14 at fast food places, we paid for our lemon cars, car insurance, any real extras (anything over $100.00), we paid for half our schooling, our own houses, weddings (we were given a cheque for in relation to what they have a very nominal amount). Their mentality was “You need to swim by yourself against the current but know we will never let you drown” (which is a great gift considering most parents would offer that if they could be in a position too) It did upset us throughout rough periods but it did make us responsible decent people who only have moments of douchebaggery so I feel it was a success and how myself and my husband (who are self made comfortable) raising our son.

  8. Eleonor says:

    I think he knows his name is opening doors for them, but the name isn’t enough: once you opened the door it’s all on their habilities. Look at Tory Spelling: she has the name and the connections and she did not menage to have a decent career. On the other side Pippa’s future husband was rich to start, and able to do more money.

  9. Tiffany says:

    Isn’t Tana pregnant with their 5th child as I thought he announced that recently. Just wondering.

  10. Jeesie says:

    I don’t really get this philosophy. I totally get not wanting to leave them a massive fortune, but I don’t see how it hurts to give/leave them enough of a cushion so that they can say, pursue a career they love that has little upward progression and not have to stress about it, or enough so they can have a child when it suits them and not have to risk waiting til they can finally afford it.

    If you can give your kids a good shot at happiness and fulfilment I don’t know why you wouldn’t. If they blow through it like spoiled brats then they’ll have to stand on their own two feet anyway, but at least you tried to give them their best life.

    • squeezeo'lime says:

      same here, to me this just screams resentment. i had to work hard, why do they get to get it for free!! if I had that kind of money the first thing I would do is put a couple million in a trust and buy a flat so my child never feels stuck in a life path they can’t get out of because they need to “take care of themselves”. Gordon comes from a different generation where buying a house wasn’t completely out of the question for 90% of us. Our generation is actively PUNISHED for trying to lead a happy life. Unless we are climbing upwards we’re sliding downwards..

    • teacakes says:

      He’s presumably paying for their educations and it says right in the article that he’s giving each kid 25 percent of what they need to buy a flat.

      And 25 percent of the value of an average London flat these days is a LOT. That’s basically the deposit and then some, I have friends who would kill to have that kind of financial help available.

  11. holly hobby says:

    You know I sort of agree with his philosophy. His and Jon Hamm’s (be a waiter to understand the world). We have so many special kids who inherited millions and got the job because of daddy (hi Trampkins!). They don’t qualify and they don’t work hard. Plus wealth never lasts more than 3 generations (where are the Vanderbilts – not Anderson and Gloria). He’s doing them a favor.

  12. Tracym says:

    I’d totally love to be ruined by Gordon and I don’t mean financially.

  13. LondonLozza says:

    As parents the Ramseys would have brought their children into the world not wanting for the basics (food, clean water, warmth, a safe home), probably provided them with excellent education opportunities, certainly a good work ethic, and by no means is a 25% deposit on a home something to sniff at. Some people would just be happy to have food on a plate and somewhere warm and safe to live.

    If he (they) earned that money, then they certainly have the right to dictate how they spend it.

  14. Tanya says:

    They’ve done studies that show that having money can reduce your sense of empathy, and I’ve seen it happen in real life. Maybe he doesn’t want to see that happen to his own kids.

  15. Molly says:

    Well, one would hope that by the time he dies, his kids will already have established themselves as self-sufficient human beings. So how would it spoil them to leave them some of his wealth? If they’ve done their job as parents and raised hard-working, decent, independent adults, they could probably leverage that inheritance for good. It seems like a pretty blunt philosophy that doesn’t give parents or kids much credit for legacy building.

  16. Anna says:

    This is such bullshit. I read the same article yesterday and then went to watch Matildas show…in the first episode they fly to LA for summer vacations…and well, they fly on first class/business whatever…as Matilda uses her camera to record themselves on plane. And they arrive to a huge beverly hills mansion :D Lol…+ I also read that his eldest got a car in LA when she came to the age when she can start learning driving…so what about not spoiling them and all?

    Its just publicity….

    Plus – where’s all that fortune gonna go? He worked so hard for it, in his words…hes gonna give it away? LOL

    • Jenn says:

      Well Some rich people bestow their all their money on a hospital, library, to research, or for scholarships and etc, what have you.

  17. margie says:

    As a person who had their trust stolen and gambled away by a family member, I hate to hear things like this. But I have a still bitter perspective on things. If I ever have enough to pass on, I will pass it on equally to kids and grandkids. No leaving it to parents to give to them eventually, b/c that is when trouble started for me. I think someone higher up the thread commented that it is very possible to raise kids who aren’t twats whether you have money or not; That’s the parenting part. I also think you only have these people around you for a finite amount of time- enjoy life and let them enjoy life with you. IDK.

  18. Jenn says:

    I think he’s very thoughtful about this .its nice when the rich donate to public institutions of various kinds.

    You truly can’t appreciate that which you don’t earn (at least from what I’ve seen) .

    It’s nice to see some extremely wealthy people think this way and don’t feel that this defrauds their children because I don’t think it does at all.
    Seed money for a flat (or down payment for a house or what have you) is in fact extremely generous and privileged.
    That and simply the hook up/name recognition they have plus education I’m sure Dad is helping hook up, will be quite enough to set them up.
    Good education = earning power.

  19. corporate stepsister says:

    I think on a whole, Gordon is right to do this. HI kids have GOT to learn that they need to think on their feet and learn to see a wider world out there. Kids who expect an inheritance also get mixed up with the wrong types and it’s statistically more likely that those who stand to inherit large fortunes end up getting mixed up with the wrong types and attract the wrong kind of attention.

  20. Lia says:

    Sorry, but this guy sounds like a real a$$hole. If he raised his children right, they would know how to be productive, kind, thoughtful and giving adults before the money made its way to them. Is he too “busy” and lazy to take the time to raise them properly? I can’t imagine having that kind of money and NOT sharing some of it with my children. What a jerk.