Why being single costs thousands more each year – and how it affects all of us

Published

5 months ago

February 14, 2025

admin

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.

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.

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.

“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.

Business

Trade war: Trump reveals first two nations to pay delayed ‘liberation day’ tariffs

Published

3 hours ago

July 7, 2025

admin

Trade war: Trump reveals first two nations to pay delayed 'liberation day' tariffs

Donald Trump has warned that all goods from Japan and South Korea will face tariffs of 25% from 1 August.

The announcement, via his Truth Social platform, marks the restart of the threatened “liberation day” escalation that was paused in April, for 90 days, to allow for negotiations to take place with all US trading partners.

The president showed off copies of letters to the leaders of both Japan and South Korea informing them of the tariff rates. Those duties will come on top of sector-specific tariffs – such as 50% rates covering steel – already in force.

Money latest: Retailers release images of ‘prolific shoplifters’

He warned the rates could be adjusted “upward or downward, depending on our relationship with your country”.

Country-specific tariffs had been due to take effect from Wednesday this week but Mr Trump had earlier revealed that nations would start to get letters instead, setting out the US position.

Duties would take effect from 1 August, without any subsequent deal being agreed, it was announced.

The letters sent to Japan and South Korea cited persistent trade imbalances for the rates and included the sentence: “We invite you to participate in the extraordinary Economy of the United States, the Number One Market in the World, by far.”

He ended both letters by saying, “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The European Union – the biggest single US trading partner – is among those set to get a letter in the coming days.

Mr Trump has also threatened an additional 10% tariff on any country aligning itself with the “anti-American policies” of BRICS nations – those are Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa and whose members also include Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates.

The UK, bar a massive shock U-turn, should be exempt.

The country was the first to be granted a trade deal, of sorts, in May and the Trump administration has claimed many others had been offering concessions since the clock ticked down to 9 July.

The UK is not expected to face any changes to its current 10% rate due to the trade truce, which came into effect last week.

While UK-made cars aerospace products face no duties under a new quota arrangement, it still remains to be seen whether 25% tariffs on UK-produced steel and aluminium will be cancelled.

They could, conceivably, even be raised to 50%, as is currently the case for America’s other trading partners, because no agreement on eliminating the rate was reached when the government struck its deal in May.

It all amounts to more uncertainty for the UK steel sector.

A No 10 spokesman said on Monday: “Our work with the US continues to get this deal implemented as soon as possible.

“That will remove the 25% tariff on UK steel and aluminium, making us the only country in the world to have tariffs removed on these products.

“The US agreed to remove tariffs on these products as part of our agreement on 8 May. It reiterated that again at the G7 last month. The discussions continue, and will continue to do so.”

China and Vietnam have also secured some US concessions.

The dollar strengthened but US stock markets lost ground in the wake of the letters to Japan and South Korea being made public, with the broad-based S&P 500 down by 1%.

Stock markets in both Japan and South Korea were closed for the day but US-traded shares of SK Telecom and LG Display were down 7.5% and 5.8% respectively.

Business

Tesla shares sink as Musk launches political party

Published

5 hours ago

July 7, 2025

admin

Tesla shares sink as Musk launches political party

Shares in Elon Musk’s Tesla have reversed sharply over renewed concerns about his focus on the company’s recovery as he plots against Donald Trump.

Shares in the electric car firm plunged by more than 7% at the start of trading on Wall Street – taking about $71bn (£52bn) off its market value.

The stock has often come under pressure since Musk started his association with the president, latterly helping bring down federal government costs through a new department known as DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency).

Money latest: Call centre worker’s tips for getting discounts

But it is now suffering as their political relationship has soured.

Musk has publicly opposed the so-called “big, beautiful bill” – Mr Trump’s flagship tax cut and spending plans that received Congressional approval last week – since he left his DOGE role.

Musk wrote in a post on his X platform on 30 June: “It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!”

Once the bill was passed, he created a poll on X, asking people if they would want him to launch the America Party.

He wrote on 4 July: “Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!”

The vote ended with 65.4% in favour of creating the party.

The formation of the America Party was announced the following day.

“By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with
waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.”

“Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom,” Musk posted.

Trump responded on his Truth Social account: “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.

“He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States –
The System seems not designed for them.”

Trump has previously threatened to go after Tesla‘s government subsidies and contracts through the DOGE department to save “big” as their relationship deteriorated.

Such threats have also pressured the share price at Tesla.

It has suffered throughout Trump 2.0 and, in fact, has trended lower since last December – shortly after Mr Trump’s election win was confirmed.

The possibility of tariff hits to the business, followed by actual tariff disruption, along with a consumer and investor backlash against Musk’s previous DOGE role have contributed to a 35% decline on the December peak.

The very absence of Tesla’s CEO dragged on the shares.

Tesla sales suffered globally as the trade war ramped up due to the imposition of tariffs by a government he supported, until the public row between him and the president began in early June.

Musk had only just renewed his 100% focus on Tesla and his other business interests by that time.

Tesla sales were down during the presidential election campaign last year and continued to decline, on a quarterly basis, during the first half of 2025.

Neil Wilson, UK investor strategist at Saxo Markets, said of the company’s share price woes: “Investors are worried about two things – one is more Trump ire affecting subsidies and the other more importantly is a distracted Musk.

“Investors had cheered Musk stepping back from frontline politics but are now worried he’s going to sucked back in and take his eye off Tesla.”

Business

Post Office scandal: Victims say government’s control of redress schemes should be taken away

Published

17 hours ago

July 7, 2025

admin

Post Office scandal: Victims say government's control of redress schemes should be taken away

Post Office scandal victims are calling for redress schemes to be taken away from the government completely, ahead of the public inquiry publishing its first findings.

Phase 1, which is due back on Tuesday, will report on the human impact of what happened as well as compensation schemes.

“Take (them) off the government completely,” says Jo Hamilton OBE, a high-profile campaigner and former sub-postmistress, who was convicted of stealing from her branch in 2008.

“It’s like the fox in charge of the hen house,” she adds, “because they were the only shareholders of Post Office“.

“So they’re in it up to their necks… So why should they be in charge of giving us financial redress?”

Jo and others are hoping Sir Wyn Williams, chairman of the public statutory inquiry, will make recommendations for an independent body to take control of redress schemes.

The inquiry has been examining the Post Office scandal which saw more than 700 people wrongfully convicted between 1999 and 2015.

Sub-postmasters were forced to pay back false accounting shortfalls because of the faulty IT system, Horizon.

At the moment, the Department for Business and Trade administers most of the redress schemes including the Horizon Conviction Redress Scheme and the Group Litigation Order (GLO) Scheme.

The Post Office is still responsible for the Horizon Shortfall scheme.

Lee Castleton OBE, another victim of the scandal, was bankrupted in 2007 when he lost his case in the civil courts representing himself against the Post Office.

The civil judgment against him, however, still stands.

“It’s the oddest thing in the world to be an OBE, fighting for justice, while still having the original case standing against me,” he tells Sky News.

While he has received an interim payment he has not applied to a redress scheme.

“The GLO scheme – that’s there on the table for me to do,” he says, “but I know that they would use my original case, still standing against me, in any form of redress.

“So they would still tell me repeatedly that the court found me to be liable and therefore they only acted on the court’s outcome.”

He agrees with other victims who want the inquiry this week to recommend “taking the bad piece out” of redress schemes.

“The bad piece is the company – Post Office Limited,” he continues, “and the government – they need to be outside.

“When somebody goes to court, even if it’s a case against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), when they go to court DBT do not decide what the outcome is.

“A judge decides, a third party decides, a right-minded individual a fair individual, that’s what needs to happen.”

Mr Castleton is also taking legal action against the Post Office and Fujitsu – the first individual victim to sue the organisations for compensation and “vindication” in court.

“I want to hear why it happened, to hear what I believe to be the truth, to hear what they believe to be the truth and let the judge decide.”

Neil Hudgell, a lawyer for victims, said he expects the first inquiry report this week may be “really rather damning” of the redress claim process describing “inconsistencies”, “bureaucracy” and “delays”.

“The over-lawyeringness of it,” he adds, “the minute analysis, micro-analysis of detail, the inability to give people fully the benefit of doubt.

“All those things I think are going to be part and parcel of what Sir Wynn says about compensation.

“And we would hope, not going to say expect because history’s not great, we would hope it’s a springboard to an acceleration, a meaningful acceleration of that process.”

A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said they were “grateful” for the inquiry’s work describing “the immeasurable suffering” victims endured.

Their statement continued: “This government has quadrupled the total amount paid to affected postmasters to provide them with full and fair redress, with more than £1bn having now been paid to thousands of claimants.

“We will also continue to work with the Post Office, who have already written to over 24,000 postmasters, to ensure that everyone who may be eligible for redress is given the opportunity to apply for it.”