Why being single costs thousands more each year – and how it affects all of us
Valentine’s Day might be a gift-giving occasion your wallet could do without, but it’s thousands of pounds cheaper than being alone.
Being single costs £2,533 more a year, Sky News can reveal. Suddenly, that box of chocolates doesn’t seem so expensive.
Single people are forced to spend 22% more on rent or mortgages, council tax and energy, 28% more on food and 32% more on broadband and phones.
This is according to Hargreaves Lansdown analysis shared exclusively with Sky News, which found singletons have just £42 left at the end of the month – £341 less than couples.
Read all the latest Money news here
“They just don’t have that extra money, so they’re making these huge compromises in every bit of their life,” said Sarah Coles, head of personal finance at the leading investment firm.
“And people who are in couples are lulled into a false sense of security and don’t think they have to worry about it.”
But be it via divorce or bereavement, everyone becomes single again if they live long enough, she said.
A single tax?
“It didn’t even enter my brain,” said Robert Macdonald, 56, from Swansea, whose relationship ended eight months ago.
“Definitely living a single life is a lot more expensive and people who haven’t done it probably don’t understand that.”
The refuse collector said everyday essentials have become dearer now he’s unable to split the likes of broadband and phone bills.
Communication devices cost singles £828 a year on average, while each partner in a couple pays £628, the data showed.
“The renting market out there is ridiculous,” added Robert, who has become one of 8.4 million people in England and Wales living alone.
Robert said it was ‘scary’ how fast rent was rising
He spends 41% of his £1,700 monthly salary on a one-bed flat, 11 percentage points more than what is considered affordable.
The average rent for a one-bed was £726 in 2015 – now it’s £1,095, according to estate agent Hamptons.
And there’s no one to help shoulder the burden of heating it either.
“Frightening” is how Hazel, 71, from London, described the price of keeping warm since her husband passed away.
“The costs of gas in this country are shameful,” said Hazel, who chose not to publish her surname.
“For the most part, I dress in 25 layers and I don’t put my heating on.”
Essential housing costs – rent or a mortgage, council tax and fuel – set single people back £7,974 a year on average, whereas couples spend £6,215 each, according to Hargreaves Lansdown.
This £1,759 bill dwarfs the 25% council tax discount available to people living alone.
‘Extortionate’ food bills
Food offers no respite to singletons, who can’t necessarily take advantage of bulk-buy discounts or get through family packs before the produce expires.
Steph, 30, from London, who chose not to publish her surname, said her weekly shop cost her £20 in 2015 – now it’s an “extortionate” £50, despite cutting out meat and fish to save money.
“In the past couple of years, being single is just so much more difficult than it used to be,” she said.
“I feel like I’m a bit forgotten.”
Food costs single people £574 more a year than each person in a couple.
Steph pays £1,300 in rent for a property almost identical to one that cost her £500 in 2015
Holidays are no break
The single tax doesn’t stop at the border.
Since her husband Hugh died, Hazel has continued to take the cruises they once shared together to escape the loneliness at home.
But she is often forced to pay a single-occupancy fee, a supplement that doubles the cost of a room, charging her the same amount as if Hugh were there.
“It’s fiendish,” the former travel agent said.
“Literally what I pay is what people next door pay for two of them. It’s horrible – and that’s the same for every single hotel.”
Death, love and savings
With higher outgoings and one income, singles find it more difficult to save for a house deposit – which they have to fork out for alone.
Lenders also typically consider a mortgage between four and five times a household’s annual salary, putting many properties out of reach for single people.
This can mean they’re left paying rent into retirement when couples have paid off their mortgage.
“It’s a very difficult situation for single people,” said Hargreaves Lansdown’s Sarah.
“You’re going to have to build a massive pension or you’re going to have to buy.”
Just 20% of people with a mortgage live alone, according to Hamptons, and building a “massive pension” is just not an option for people like Lisa McQuoid, 44, from Colchester.
Raising her 15-year-old son on one income – £1,300 a month plus £1,000 Universal Credit – has left the single mum unable to save.
Read more:
Reeves calls in bank chiefs for growth talks
Top chefs pick favourite cheap restaurants across every part of UK
“There’s no chance of me getting on the property ladder unless I find a boyfriend or my parents die,” said Lisa, who pays £950 a month in rent for the cheapest two-bed she could find.
“I can’t see life improving that much financially, you feel like you have to be in a couple.”
The average deposit in the UK is £24,543, Hamptons says, which would take a single person 11 years to raise if they put aside £185 a month.
Retirement
“Throughout retirement, the number of other people living on their own increases,” said Simon Sarkar, head of research at the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association.
“It is something that is widespread, that people do face these changes in circumstances that we all should really think about.”
The association estimates it costs singles £31,300 a year to enjoy a moderate living standard in retirement, compared to £21,550 per person in a couple.
Yet less than a third (31%) of singles are on track with their pension savings, compared to almost half of couples (44%), according to Hargreaves Lansdown.
Often overlooked are the costs of physical and health needs in older age, Simon said.
Singles may have to buy in services that a partner would otherwise help provide, from gardening and DIY to personal care.
“Because it’s not in your face, you might think that you’re getting by, but the lack of long-term resilience is a big deal,” said Ms Coles.
Emergency funds
The financial resilience of single people is tested throughout their lives, with 46% of them having failed to save enough to cover three months of essential spending, compared to 16% of couples.
It makes it harder to absorb the financial hits dished out by life’s unwanted surprises.
When Lisa first answered the phone to Sky News, she had just parked a car that broke down the week before, costing her £250.
When Robert picked up, he asked if the gas man was on the other end of the line, who was scheduled to fix his boiler for £170.
“Again, there you go, if two people were here it would be cheaper,” he said.
Regulators have proposed sweeping changes for the baby formula industry, saying high prices and branding are leading to “poor outcomes” for parents.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found many brands cost more than the weekly value of people’s benefits, leading some parents to forgo food to buy formula.
The report was released nearly two years after Sky News revealed how a black market for baby formula had evolved as desperate families struggled to feed their children.
Parents openly described having no choice but to steal products, no longer able to afford formula as prices soared above inflation.
Read more:
Desperate parents are stealing baby formula
Where to get help if you’re struggling to buy baby formula
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
From May 2023: Parents stealing formula
In its final report on surging prices in recent years, the CMA said parents could be saving £300 annually by switching to lower-priced brands that offered the same nutritional benefits.
The CMA said the NHS could have its own non-brand baby formula, in a bid to help drive prices down.
But the watchdog stopped short of recommending a price cap, which it had said it was looking into last year.
Moment of vindication for struggling families
This is a moment of vindication for every parent who has struggled to afford baby formula.
It’s the same for every charity that has picked up the pieces of a family in crisis because they can’t safely feed their baby. Their long-held suspicions that parents were getting a poor deal from the baby formula market were right.
The CMA has scrutinised the industry and recommended the biggest shake-up in decades. The changes they propose are far-reaching and could help end the stigma and shame that many families feel because of the difficulties of feeding their babies.
Better information, clearer labelling and greater efforts to empower parents are all long overdue.
Nobody should have to feel like their only option is to steal baby milk but that is exactly what Sky News found when our investigation started two years ago. It was described to us then as a “national scandal” that was putting the health and development of babies at risk.
Baby banks still report a never-ending demand from families needing help even though prices have started to come down and new budget formula milk brands are entering the market.
The measures recommended to ministers today represent a huge opportunity for change – it is down to governments and the industry itself to make it happen.
The CMA has previously reported a 25% increase in prices over the past two years, with just three companies – Nestle, Kendamil and Danone – controlling 90% of the market.
The watchdog had determined that the lack of manufacturers meant there was no incentive to compete on prices, which meant additional factory costs had been passed on “quickly” and in full to shoppers.
The CMA, which has no powers to bolster competition by increasing the number of formula producers, said its four main recommendations were aimed at delivering better outcomes for parents on both choice and price.
It said formula provided in hospitals should come in plain packaging to reduce brand influence while parents are in a “vulnerable” setting.
Formula sold in shops should display nutritional information and not carry any claims that cannot easily be checked by parents, it said.
It also recommended extending the ban on advertising to include follow-on formula, and allowing parents to use vouchers and loyalty points to buy infant formula.
Sarah Cardell, chief executive of the CMA, said many parents “pick a brand at a vulnerable moment, based on incomplete information, often believing that higher prices must mean better quality”.
“This is despite NHS advice stating that all brands will meet your baby’s nutritional needs, regardless of brand or price.”
Public health minister Ashley Dalton responded: “I welcome this report and would like to thank the Competition and Markets Authority for their thorough investigation.
“There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those families that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital that they can access formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies because of outdated regulation.
“As part of our Plan for Change, we’re determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. We will carefully consider these recommendations and respond fully in due course.”
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports11 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway