• Steve Jobs' widow, Laurene Powell Jobs, won't leave the $24 billion she inherited to her children.
• Bill Gates' children will receive less than 1% of his total fortune.
• Elton John and other celebrities have announced their plans to leave their fortunes to charity.

Everyone wants what's best for their kids, and for some high-profile business magnates, billionaires, and celebrities that means not handing their wealth to their children.

Laurene Powell Jobs told The New York Times in 2020 that she doesn't want to pass the $24 billion fortune she inherited from her late husband, Steve Jobs, to their children.

"I'm not interested in legacy wealth buildings, and my children know that," she told the Times. "If I live long enough, it ends with me."

Business Insider compiled a list of 12 high-profile millionaires and billionaires, including some the world's biggest business magnates, who won't be signing over their fortunes to their kids in their will. We ranked these wealthy parents in ascending order by their net worth.

Keep reading for a look at the 12 high-profile billionaires and millionaires who aren't leaving their fortunes to their children.

British celebrity chef Nigella Lawson wants her three children to have to work for financial security.

Nigella Lawson is a food writer, TV personality, and journalist. She was one of the pioneers behind the 21st-century celebrity-chef movement with her books including "Feast," "Nigella Express," and "How to Be a Domestic Goddess."

In 2014, The Guardian reported that Lawson's production company Pabulum Productions was producing a profit of nearly $4 million from her popular TV shows and cookbooks. According to Speakers Corner, which lists Lawson among its public speakers, she has sold more than 10 million cookbook copies worldwide. 

Lawson has two adult children from her first marriage and one step-daughter from her second marriage to advertising mogul Charles Saatchi, which ended in 2013.

"I am determined that my children should have no financial security," Lawson told British magazine My Weekly in 2008, as reported by the Daily Mail. "It ruins people not having to earn money."

Gordon Ramsay has said he won't leave his vast fortune to any of his six children.

Gordon Ramsay is one of the biggest names in the British restaurant industry with a net worth of $70 million, Forbes reported in 2020. He is the owner and operator of 35 restaurants worldwide, with seven Michelin stars between them, according to his company website, and the celebrity chef has a strong TV presence, hosting shows such as "MasterChef USA," "MasterChef Junior," and "Hell's Kitchen." 

The father of six, who has been married to wife Tana since 1996, has no intention of leaving their fortune to their children.

"[My fortune is] definitely not going to them," Ramsay told The Telegraph in 2017. "And that's not in a mean way; it's to not spoil them. The only thing I've agreed with Tana is they get 25% deposit on a flat, but not the whole flat."

"I've been super lucky, having that career for the last 15 years in the US," Ramsay said. "Seriously, it has earned a fortune and I've been very lucky, so I respect everything I've got."

Ashton Kutcher isn't even going to set up a trust fund for his children.

Kutcher and his wife, Mila Kunis, are both successful Hollywood actors and recently sold the first home they purchased together for a whopping $10.4 million, People reported in 2022.

On a 2019 episode of the Dax Shepard podcast "Armchair Expert," Kutcher said he wasn't creating trust funds for his two children with Kunis. He also said he'd hear out their business ideas but wouldn't give them special treatment over the other pitches he hears for his venture capital firm, A-Grade Investments.

"My kids are living a really privileged life, and they don't even know it," said Kutcher.

Sting said he plans to spend his money instead of leaving it to his six kids.

The father of six, best known as the front man of the rock band The Police, told The Daily Mail in 2014 that his children would not inherit a penny. Forbes estimated in 2023 that Sting's net worth was about $210 million.

"I told them there won't be much money left because [my wife and I] are spending it," Sting told the Daily Mail. "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," he continued. "They have to work. All my kids know that and they rarely ask me for anything, which I really respect and appreciate."

Elton John said it's "terrible to give kids a silver spoon" and won't leave his sons a massive inheritance.

With a career in music spanning four decades, Elton John's retirement tour earned a massive $939 million, according to Billboard, adding to his $81 million net worth, per Forbes' 2020 estimate.

John and his husband, David Furnish, have two sons — Zachary, 13, and Elijah, 11 — but the singer has no intentions of spoiling them with his vast fortune.

"The boys live the most incredible lives, they're not normal kids, and I'm not pretending they are," John told The Daily Mirror in 2016. "But you have to have some semblance of normality, some respect for money, some respect for work."

The couple borrows from the Warren Buffett school of inheritance.

"[Buffett] has a really cool model in that he leaves his children enough money so that they have a house, a car, and all their basic needs covered and cared for so they never need worry," John continued. "But it's not crazy, silly, go-wild money so that they could be buying Picassos or private jets."

Composer Andrew Lloyd Webber says it doesn't bother his kids that he wants to leave his fortune elsewhere.

Webber is the musical theater composer behind award-winning, long-running shows such as "The Phantom of the Opera," "Cats," and "Joseph and the Technicolor Dreamcoat." The composer — with seven Tonys, three Grammys, an Academy Award, and a knighthood — had a net worth of about $1.07 billion in 2018, Forbes reported.

The famed composer and father of five told The Daily Mirror in 2008 that he didn't plan to pass his vast fortune on to his children.

"I am not in favor of children suddenly finding a lot of money coming their way because then they have no incentive to work," he said.

Instead, Webber told the Daily Mirror that he wants to invest his fortunes into musical projects after his death, although he had no finite plans at the time. "It is extremely likely that my wife Madeleine will outlive me so I will leave the problem with her," Webber said.

"Star Wars" creator George Lucas plans to use his multibillion-dollar fortune to fund the education of other people's children.

Lucas, a father of four, saw his net worth rocket to $6.4 billion after selling the Star Wars franchise and his production company "Lucasfilm" — both of which Lucas owned 100% of the rights to — to The Walt Disney Company for $4.05 billion in 2012. Forbes estimates his 2024 net worth at $5.3 billion.

However, a spokesperson for Lucas told The Hollywood Reporter in 2012 that the majority of the funds made from the deal would go toward educational philanthropy projects.

Lucas founded the George Lucas Educational Foundation, also known as Edutopia. This foundation aims to research and improve educational practices in schools so that children gain the most from their education.

He has one adopted daughter from his first marriage, two further adopted children, and a daughter with his second wife, Mellody Hobson.

Laurene Powell Jobs said that her family's billionaire status "ends with me."

Laurene Powell Jobs inherited a multibillion-dollar fortune from her late husband, Apple cofounder Steve Jobs, after his death in 2011.

The 56-year-old billionaire is a formidable presence in the investing world and a full-time philanthropist. She is the founder of College Track, a nonprofit organization that helps prepare low-income students for higher education, and the "social change organization" the Emerson Collective.

Jobs has three children: Reed, 32; Erin, 28; and Eve, 25. Forbes estimates her and her family's net worth at $14.7 billion.

"It's not right for individuals to accumulate a massive amount of wealth that's equivalent to millions and millions of other people combined," Jobs told The New York Times in 2020. "There's nothing fair about that."

Michael Bloomberg also plans to give his fortune to charity instead of to his daughters.

Former presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg is the founder and CEO of software, data, and media company Bloomberg LP and is the 14th richest person in the world, with a fortune of $106 billion, according to Forbes.

The former mayor of New York City has publicly announced he hopes to give away his entire fortune before he dies, the majority of which will be donated to his philanthropic initiative, Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Bloomberg also plans to leave his company to Bloomberg Philanthropies upon his death, "if not sooner," Bloomberg spokesperson Ty Trippet told the Financial Times in 2023.

Bloomberg's two daughters, Georgina, 41, and Emma, 45, both work for philanthropic causes themselves.

Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan wrote in a Facebook post after their first daughter was born that they intend to leave their fortune to charity.

After welcoming his first daughter, Max, with his wife, Priscilla Chan, in December 2015, Zuckerberg publicized the child's birth by posting an announcement on Facebook.

In the post, Zuckerberg declared he and his wife would donate 99% of Max's inheritance to charity. According to Forbes, Zuckerberg has a net worth of about $182 billion and is the fourth-richest person in the world.

The announcement, addressed to Max, said, "We want you to grow up in a world better than ours today."

"We will do our part to make this happen, not only because we love you, but also because we have a moral responsibility to all children in the next generation," Zuckerberg continued.

The couple has since welcomed two more daughters, August and Aurelia. 

Warren Buffett is leaving much of his fortune to his best friend Bill Gates' foundation instead of to his children.

Warren Buffett made his name as an investor and serves as the CEO and chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, which owns or holds stakes in dozens of companies including Kraft Heinz, American Express, Duracell, and Apple.

Buffett has been named "one of the most successful investors of all time" and has a net worth of over $134 billion, according to Forbes.

Buffett is also a keen philanthropist who plans to donate 99% of his vast fortune to various charities when he dies, leaving nothing to his children. He is the cofounder of the Giving Pledge, an organization he launched with Bill Gates asking wealthy people to donate at least half of their fortune to charity, according to Forbes.

NBC News reported that rather than handing each of his three children money, Buffett has instead promised to give about $2.1 billion of Berkshire Hathaway stock to each of his children's charities as rewards for the foundations' success.

The majority of his fortune will go to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. He has already donated $56 billion to this foundation and his children's foundations, Forbes reported.

Bill Gates may be a multibillionaire, but his kids will "only" be millionaires.

Like many of the world's richest billionaires, Microsoft founder Bill Gates is a keen philanthropist and plans to pass on the vast majority of his fortune to charitable causes. He has a net worth of about $134.1 billion, according to Forbes.

Gates and his now ex-wife, Melinda, established the world's largest private charitable foundation, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which works to "help all people lead healthy, productive lives." Melinda has since stepped down from the foundation.

Bill Gates' three children have inherited their father's philanthropic gene and are reportedly happy not to be inheriting their father's fortune.

In a Reddit "Ask Me Anything," the Microsoft magnate said his children will inherit just $10 million each — equivalent to less than 1% of his fortune, the Huffington Post reported.

"I definitely think leaving kids massive amounts of money is not a favor to them," Gates said. "Warren Buffett was part of an article in Fortune talking about this in 1986 before I met him, and it made me think about it and decide he was right."

Bobbie Edsor, Marissa Perino, and Taylor Nicole Rogers contributed to an earlier version of this story.

• Many tech figures were less than impressed with Joe Biden after his debate with Trump.
• Venture capitalists queried Biden's fitness for office, while joking the country was in danger.
• Other responses ranged from sharp criticism to mockery and despair.

Several Silicon Valley figures have offered their thoughts on President Joe Biden's performance in Thursday's presidential debate — and it's not a pretty picture.

Many believe that the night simply could not have gone worse for the president.

The event triggered no shortage of hot takes from tech personalities and influencers, who took to social media to mock Biden's performance against Donald Trump.

Over the course of roughly 90 minutes, Biden's fitness for office was questioned as he fumbled several lines, appeared to forget what he was saying, and was dragged into a battle of vindictive personal attacks with his Republican nemesis.

"We have a 1,000 trillionaires in America — I mean billionaires in America," the sitting president said at one point while commenting on the country's tax system.

Some Silicon Valley figures have warmed up to Trump

Heading into Thursday's debate, the election was clearly splitting opinion among Silicon Valley figures.

Biden had earned public support in tech circles from the likes of LinkedIn cofounder Reid Hoffman and Vinod Khosla, a billionaire venture capitalist who hosted the president at his home for a fundraiser last month.

But he had also drawn sharp criticism from powerful tech figures like Elon Musk, who wrote on X in April that Biden "is just a tragic front for a far-left political machine" who "obviously barely knows what's going on."

After the debate, Musk chose to focus on the blizzard of memes that had been circulating rather than the candidates' performances.

Plenty of other tech figures did not hold back when discussing Biden's performance, however.

While there's been a deafening silence from Biden supporters like Hoffman and Khosla have shared a deafening silence following last night's broadcast, ardent Trump supporters were vocal.

David Sacks, an influential entrepreneur and investor who officially endorsed Trump this month, took to social media to lay into the president's blunders on live television.

"If Biden can't handle a debate, how can he handle the most dangerous foreign policy situation since the Cuban Missile Crisis? It's time to pull back from the brink," Sacks wrote on X in the aftermath of the debate.

Jason Calacanis, an angel investor who cohosts the "All In" podcast with Sacks, also took to X to comment that wrote on X that a "hot swap" is coming, suggesting that the Democrats were getting ready to replace the incumbent president as their candidate.

"This is unfair to Biden — let him retire and enjoy his twilight years," he said while adding during a live blog that "he objectively seems out of it."

It's notable, though, that he was not positive about Trump's performance either. He accused the former president of rambling and said the fact-checkers would likely "savage" his claims.

Some tech figures leaned into mockery. Nikita Bier, a Los Angeles-based founder, seemed to excoriate the president's performance, writing that "it's crazy that the entire future of the country was changed by a single intern forgetting to bring the Adderall to Atlanta."

Meanwhile, Shaun Maguire, general partner at venture capital firm Sequoia, said: "If Biden was that bad when maximally prepped," it's worth asking what America is getting "behind closed doors."

Others expressed their dismay more broadly.

Delian Asparouhov, partner at Founders Fund, a San Francisco-based venture capital firm, kept things more straightforward, writing: "Every American citizen tonight," alongside a screenshot of Ralph Wiggum from "The Simpsons" carrying the simple caption: "(chuckles) I'm in danger."

Startup investor Sarah Guo also lamented the situation, saying simply, "This is not the best America has to offer."

Still, others sounded positive notes for the Democrats as a whole. Y Combinator cofounder Paul Graham posted on X that "Biden bombing the debate" was good for the party as a better candidate would emerge.

While speculation swirls around whether the Democrats will indeed replace Biden as their nominee ahead of the election, it's clear that a growing percentage of Silicon Valley has decided who their preference is.

• Biden's debate performance has led to mounting pressure for him to bow out of the presidential race.
• Experts said it's not too late, but a decision to drop out could lead to chaos, like in 1968.
• Biden could say he's not running, resign as president, or face delegate defections.

Can the Democrats replace President Joe Biden at the top of the ticket?

Following the president's fumbled debate performance on Thursday, this question could be on many people's minds.

And as Business Insider has previously written, history can usually guide us on what could happen.

In 1968, when President Lyndon B. Johnson dropped out of the race, his vice president, Hubert Humphrey, entered the Democratic primary, but he was too late to get on some states' ballots.

Humphrey amassed a larger share of delegates than his rivals, Robert F. Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, but did not have the majority needed for the nomination.

This led to a contested Democratic National Convention in Chicago, marked by violent protests.

The nation, already facing upheaval with the Vietnam War and the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., had been thrown into shock and mourning when Kennedy, the younger brother of late President John F. Kennedy, was assassinated in Los Angeles.

Delegates eventually voted to name Humphrey the nominee, but he ultimately lost the election to former Vice President Richard Nixon.

Biden may choose not to stand, but it could lead to chaos

If Biden were to drop out of the race before August, when Democrats are scheduled to formally nominate a candidate in Chicago, there would likely be another contested convention.

Mitch Robertson, a lecturer in US modern political history at University College London, told BI that such a scenario would evoke the tumultuous events of 1968 — a comparison that he said was both apt and disheartening.

Robertson said that, like 1968, which was precipitated by Johnson announcing that he wouldn't run for president, Biden would need to make the decision to decline his party's nomination.

Like Johnson, he could also pledge to serve the rest of his term in office.

Still, it would kick off a contest to find his replacement, as there is no formal mechanism for Biden to automatically anoint his successor.

Robertson said that the process could be bad news for the Democrats.

"The lessons of 1968 and the convention of 1968 in particular have always loomed large in the Democratic mind and the US political history mind as an unmitigated disaster," he said.

In 1968, it led to chaos and an election loss, which Robertson said would be the Democrats' main fears of a contested convention, "that it would do the same thing all over again."

It takes a majority of the roughly 4,000 pledged delegates to win the party's nomination. In the primaries and caucuses, Biden won 3,900 delegates.

Thomas Gift, director of UCL's Center on US Politics, explained that if Biden bows out, and the DNC rules don't change, his pledged delegates would become uncommitted, potentially leading to lobbying and voting for a replacement.

"I think that is still quite unlikely, but it is more likely than it was before last night," he told BI.

Gift said a key challenge is that there is "no obvious heir apparent."

Typically, the vice president is the go-to individual, but Gift said Vice President Kamala Harris's approval ratings are too low for her to be a serious contender.

"I think a lot of individuals would want to throw their hat into the ring," he said. "I think it would have the potential to create a lot of disorder, chaos, and conflict within the party."

Mark Shanahan, an associate professor at the University of Surrey, whose research focuses on US presidential politics, said the "best bet" is that Biden throws his support behind a strong new candidate before the August convention.

Governors Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer, as well as Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, are seen as potential candidates.

Shanahan continued: "The worst-case scenario for the Democrats is there's no clear succession by the time of the convention, which becomes, in effect, an 'open convention' and who takes on Trump in November is decided through a divisive faction floor fight in Chicago."

Biden could resign, but Harris wouldn't automatically become the nominee

Biden could go one step further. Under intense pressure, he could resign as president.

It would make Harris the president, but not necessarily the nominee.

"Even if Kamala Harris is president, it still doesn't mean that Biden can say, 'All my delegates are now hers,'" Iwan Morgan, emeritus professor of US History at UCL's Institute of the Americas, told BI.

"The rules are very clear," he said. "You're committed to a particular person on the first ballot."

The delegates wouldn't automatically transfer to Harris, so she would still need to win a majority of delegates at the convention, which Morgan said would involve a lot of "horse-trading" and intense lobbying.

Delegates could defect

Another scenario, which the experts said is pretty unlikely, is that delegates could defect en masse.

"Unchartered waters doesn't even begin to describe it," Morgan said. "Yes, they could do that, but it would need to be coordinated."

While delegates aren't legally bound to their candidates, they are largely presumed to be loyal.

The current DNC rules read that "delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them."

Theoretically, this provides some wiggle room, but not much.

"The point is the DNC is under Biden's control," he said. "It's just a question of what kind of influence can be brought to bear on Biden."

It's not too late, but it wouldn't be easy

Morgan said the Democrats still have time because the election campaign "proper" doesn't typically start until Labor Day in September.

However, he added that for a smooth process, "the sooner they can move Biden, the more chance they have to prepare for the convention."

John Owens, a professor of US government and faculty fellow at the American University's Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, told BI via email that "given Biden's insistence on this early debate, there may be enough time for Democrats to turn this round."

But he said it's going to be a tall order and will depend on the flexibility of the party, as well as state rules and regulations making this possible.

Owens said one thing is clear to him: "Biden is toast, and if the Dems do not turn this around, US democratic procedures and culture may also be toast."

• Biden struggled in the first 2024 presidential debate.
• His weak performance, marked by slurred speech and gaffes, overshadowed his arguments.
• Trump appeared more confident and alert, despite making several inaccurate statements.

The first presidential debate of 2024 did not go well for President Joe Biden.

As he and former President Donald Trump sparred for an hour and a half on Thursday night, it became clear that Biden's style points — or lack thereof — would come to define the night.

Despite a few jabs at Trump, Biden spent much of the debate slurring through sentences and, at times, sounding incoherent.

"We finally beat Medicare," Biden said at one point, just one example of several major gaffes.

But the shortcomings of Biden's performance — which Business Insider's politics reporters called a "complete disaster" — went beyond his speaking segments.

BI spoke to a public-speaking coach and an executive coach, both of whom said Biden's conduct while listening to Trump speak also hurt his image.

'It wasn't the president's finest hour'

When it was Trump's turn to speak, Biden sometimes looked toward the ground as though drifting from the conversation. At various points, Biden held an intense yet vacant stare with his mouth ajar and brows furrowed.

"It wasn't the President's finest hour. He primarily played into his opponent's accusations of weakness, and people often view a leader's speaking performance as shorthand for their leadership style," Paul Falzon, a Singapore-based public speaking and presentation coach with 20 years of experience, told BI.

"I believe he spoke too quickly," Falzon added. "He couldn't enunciate and emphasize keywords effectively, something compounded by the raspy quality of his voice."

Biden's occasional habit of averting eye contact and looking down indicates he was listening carefully and preparing rebuttals, Falzon said. Still, it made him seem "somewhat cowed," Falzon said.

"I don't think Biden's base can put a positive spin on his first debate performance," Falzon said.

Adriana Giotta, a clinical psychologist and executive coach, shared a similar critique of Biden's reactions during the debate.

"Too many stunned, sarcastic, or disconnected facial expressions as a reaction to the speaker do not convey professionalism and equanimity, instead exuding weakness," Giotta told BI about Biden's demeanor.

"I would instead recommend always maintaining a strong posture with the head raised and the gaze looking ahead to keep the facial expression as neutral as possible," she added.

The age of TikTok isn't being kind to Biden

Trump has often used Biden's age to argue that Biden is unfit for office. Biden is 81. Trump is 78.

To be sure, Biden's reactions during the debate can't be taken as absolute indicators that he wasn't paying attention to the conversation or is unfit for office.

But politicians' gaffes land badly in the age of TikTok and Instagram Reels. In Biden's case, social media is filled with clips of him appearing to hobble away during leadership meetings or having to be ushered off-stage by other politicians.

The White House has disputed these clips, saying many were edited or cropped in bad faith to portray Biden as feeble or forgetful.

The damage, however, is not so easily reversed — especially when considering how young voters get their news.

Google recently found that Gen Zers, 41 million of whom are eligible to vote in the US this year, tend not to consume long articles or research, choosing instead to view headlines or watch videos before going straight to social media comments sections.

And Thursday's debate will likely serve up fodder for those who want to portray Biden as a senile man, even if some of his arguments were logical and factual.

Trump, for his part, repeatedly lied about or mischaracterized Biden's policies during the debate, hurling several false statements on immigration and economic growth.

But demeanor-wise, he appeared active and alert. The public-speaking experts BI spoke to agreed that Trump seemed more confident and exuded more conviction.

Trump's body language demonstrated "more assurance, leadership abilities, and reliability to the audience," Giotta said.

Falzon echoed this idea.

"His gestures were more expressive and less aggressive than his debates in 2020, and this gave him the aura of confidence," Falzon said about Trump.

"However, I don't think we should confuse his confidence with substance," Falzon added.

In many moments, the dichotomy between his composure and Biden's was painfully apparent.

And the Trump campaign knows it. Hours after the debate wrapped, it emailed supporters lauding a "split-screen for the ages."

"A strong, focused, and powerful performance from President Donald J. Trump and an incoherent, humiliating, and embarrassing display of Crooked Joe Biden's weakness and decline," it said.

The Trump and Biden campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment from BI.