‘James Bond’ actor Daniel Craig says his children won’t be receiving his multimillion-dollar fortune

Doobie Doo

Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
61,443
Reputation
24,321
Daps
397,873
Reppin
Raleigh, NC
‘James Bond’ actor Daniel Craig says his children won’t be receiving his multimillion-dollar fortune
Published Fri, Aug 20 20215:28 PM EDT

Nicolas Vega@ATNICKVEGA
SHARE
106930629-1629399630371-gettyimages-494691340-87856868.jpeg

Daniel Craig, who has played James Bond five times, is worth a reported $160 million.
Isa Foltin | German Select | Getty Images
Daniel Craig may command eight-figure Hollywood paychecks — including a reported $25 million to reprise the role of James Bond in the upcoming “No Time To Die” and a reported $100 million to appear in the sequels to 2019′s “Knives Out” — but the 53-year-old actor isn’t planning on sharing much of it with his children.

In the most recent issue of Candis Magazine, Craig detailed his philosophy on inheritance, saying he doesn’t plan to have much money left to give to his children by the time he dies.


“Isn’t there an old adage that if you die a rich person, you’ve failed?” Craig said in the interview, according to the Times of London. “I think Andrew Carnegie gave away what in today’s money would be about $11 billion, which shows how rich he was because I’ll bet he kept some of it, too.”

Craig says that he finds it “distasteful” to leave heirs massive amounts of money. He has two children, a 29-year-old daughter and a 2-year-old daughter. His wife, actor Rachel Weisz, also has a teenage son.

“My philosophy is get rid of it or give it away before you go,” Craig said.

A representative for Craig did not immediately respond to CNBC Make It’s request for comment.

The Hollywood star is far from the first person to publicly declare that their children would not be receiving a significant portion of their wealth. Investor Warren Buffett — whose fortune sits at more than $100 billionrecently reiterated his long-held belief that his “incomprehensible” net worth would be better spent going toward philanthropic causes than into his kids’ investment portfolios.


“After much observation of super-wealthy families, here’s my recommendation: Leave the children enough so that they can do anything, but not enough that they can do nothing,” he said in a note to shareholders, adding that his own adult children “pursue philanthropic efforts that involve both money and time.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/20/james-bond-actor-daniel-craig-on-inheritance.html
 

Afro

Student of life
Supporter
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
14,220
Reputation
7,232
Daps
56,243
The Hollywood star is far from the first person to publicly declare that their children would not be receiving a significant portion of their wealth. Investor Warren Buffett — whose fortune sits at more than $100 billionrecently reiterated his long-held belief that his “incomprehensible” net worth would be better spent going toward philanthropic causes than into his kids’ investment portfolios.

Thats a little different than Craig, they would get a decent piece and say good luck with the rest.

Craig is throwing bootstraps at his kids :mjlol:
 

Umoja

Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
16,086
Reputation
3,654
Daps
109,827
'My philosophy is get rid of it or give it away".

Yes, that is the most effective way of avoiding inheritance tax. Pointless waiting until your children are in their 50s/60s before giving them helping hand. Set them up whilst they're alive, put your money within a company so that when you transfer a controlling share of the company to them, it is exempt or benefits from reliefs.

Unfortunately, broke people will read what he has to say and think they shouldn't try to create generational wealth.
 

Amestafuu (Emeritus)

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
72,294
Reputation
14,528
Daps
305,584
Reppin
Toronto
they'll have the connects but it's stupid that people do this
it's really not stupid.

a lot of shyt we take for granted was gifted by wealthy people to the towns and cities we live in. a lot of these people understood the come up struggle and they don't see it in their descendants. all you are doing is padding the coffers of wealthy elite rather than leaving the world a better place.

i can only imagine what my city would look like without all the donated public lands that we use and take for granted because today you can't even get green space allocated without fighting greedy developers

i'm sure they are not leaving children destitute or anything close to needy. i like the philosophy. I'd do the same. I know grown adults who are literally wishing on their parents death to get bread and have never amounted to shyt themselves. waiting on free monies, houses and such. absolutely disgusting
 
Top