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.
“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.”
More on Money
Related Topics:
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.
Image: 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.
Image: 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.
“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.
Talk to economists and they will tell you that the cost of living crisis is over.
They will point towards charts showing that while inflation is still above the Bank of England’s 2% target, it has come down considerably in recent years, and is now “only” hovering between 3% and 4%.
So why does the cost of living still feel like such a pressing issue for so many households? The short answer is because, depending on how you define it, it never ended.
Economists like to focus on the change in prices over the past year, and certainly on that measure inflation is down sharply, from double-digit levels in recent years.
But if you look over the past four years then the rate of change is at its highest since the early 1990s.
But even that understates the complexity of economic circumstances facing households around the country.
For if you want a sense of how current financial conditions really feel in people’s pockets, you really ought to offset inflation against wages, and then also take account of the impact of taxes.
More on Cost Of Living
Related Topics:
That is a complex exercise – in part because no two households’ experience is alike.
But recent research from the Resolution Foundation illustrates some of the dynamics going on beneath the surface, and underlines that for many households the cost of living crisis is still very real indeed.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:32
UK inflation slows to 3.4%
The place to begin here is to recall that perhaps the best measure of economic “feelgood factor” is to subtract inflation and taxes from people’s nominal pay.
You end up with a statistic showing your real household disposable income.
Consider the projected pattern over the coming years. For a household earning £50,000, earnings are expected to increase by 10% between 2024/25 and 2027/28.
Subtract inflation projected over that period and all of a sudden that 10% drops to 2.5%.
Now subtract the real increase in payments of National Insurance and taxes and it’s down to 0.2%.
Now subtract projected council tax increases and all of a sudden what began as a 10% increase is actually a 0.1% decrease.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:29
Will we see tax rises in next budget?
Of course, the degree of change in your circumstances can differ depending on all sorts of factors. Some earners (especially those close to tax thresholds, which in this case includes those on £50,000) feel the impact of tax changes more than others.
Pensioners and those who own their homes outright benefit from a comparatively lower increase in housing costs in the coming years than those paying mortgages and (especially) rent.
Nor is everyone’s experience of inflation the same. In general, lower-income households pay considerably more of their earnings on essentials, like housing costs, food and energy. Some of those costs are going up rapidly – indeed, the UK faces higher power costs than any other developed economy.
But the ultimate verdict provides some clear patterns. Pensioners can expect further increases in their take-home pay in the coming years. Those who own their homes outright and with mortgages can likely expect earnings to outpace extra costs. But others are less fortunate. Those who rent their homes privately are projected to see sharp falls in their household income – and children are likely to see further falls in their economic welfare too.
Britain’s biggest high street bank is in talks to buy Curve, the digital wallet provider, amid growing regulatory pressure on Apple to open its payment services to rivals.
Sky News has learnt that Lloyds Banking Group is in advanced discussions to acquire Curve for a price believed to be up to £120m.
City sources said this weekend that if the negotiations were successfully concluded, a deal could be announced by the end of September.
Curve was founded by Shachar Bialick, a former Israeli special forces soldier, in 2016.
Three years later, he told an interviewer: “In 10 years time we are going to be IPOed [listed on the public equity markets]… and hopefully worth around $50bn to $60bn.”
One insider said this weekend that Curve was being advised by KBW, part of the investment bank Stifel, on the discussions with Lloyds.
If a mooted price range of £100m-£120m turns out to be accurate, that would represent a lower valuation than the £133m Curve raised in its Series C funding round, which concluded in 2023.
More on Lloyds
Related Topics:
That round included backing from Britannia, IDC Ventures, Cercano Management – the venture arm of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen’s estate – and Outward VC.
It was also reported to have raised more than £40m last year, while reducing employee numbers and suspending its US expansion.
In total, the company has raised more than £200m in equity since it was founded.
Curve has been positioned as a rival to Apple Pay in recent years, having initially launched as an app enabling consumers to combine their debit and credit cards in a single wallet.
One source close to the prospective deal said that Lloyds had identified Curve as a strategically attractive bid target as it pushes deeper into payments infrastructure under chief executive Charlie Nunn.
Lloyds is also said to believe that Curve would be a financially rational asset to own because of the fees Apple charges consumers to use its Apple Pay service.
In March, the Financial Conduct Authority and Payment Systems Regulator began working with the Competition and Markets Authority to examine the implications of the growth of digital wallets owned by Apple and Google.
Lloyds owns stakes in a number of fintechs, including the banking-as-a-service platform ThoughtMachine, but has set expanding its tech capabilities as a key strategic objective.
The group employs more than 70,000 people and operates more than 750 branches across Britain.
Curve is chaired by Lord Fink, the former Man Group chief executive who has become a prolific investor in British technology start-ups.
When he was appointed to the role in January, he said: “Working alongside Curve as an investor, I have had a ringside seat to the company’s unassailable and well-earned rise.
“Beginning as a card which combines all your cards into one, to the all-encompassing digital wallet it has evolved into, Curve offers a transformative financial management experience to its users.
“I am proud to have been part of the journey so far, and welcome the chance to support the company through its next, very significant period of growth.”
IDC Ventures, one of the investors in Curve’s Series C funding round, said at the time of its last major fundraising: “Thanks to their unique technology…they have the capability to intercept the transaction and supercharge the customer experience, with its Double Dip Rewards, [and] eliminating nasty hidden fees.
“And they do it seamlessly, without any need for the customer to change the cards they pay with.”
News of the talks between Lloyds and Curve comes days before Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is expected to outline plans to bolster Britain’s fintech sector by endorsing a concierge service to match start-ups with investors.
Lord Fink declined to comment when contacted by Sky News on Saturday morning, while Curve did not respond to an enquiry sent by email.
Lloyds also declined to comment, while Stifel KBW could not be reached for comment.
The UK economy unexpectedly shrank in May, even after the worst of Donald Trump’s tariffs were paused, official figures showed.
A standard measure of economic growth, gross domestic product (GDP), contracted 0.1% in May, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Rather than a fall being anticipated, growth of 0.1% was forecast by economists polled by Reuters as big falls in production and construction were seen.
It followed a 0.3% contraction in April, when Mr Trump announced his country-specific tariffs and sparked a global trade war.
A 90-day pause on these import taxes, which has been extended, allowed more normality to resume.
This was borne out by other figures released by the ONS on Friday.
Exports to the United States rose £300m but “remained relatively low” following a “substantial decrease” in April, the data said.
More on Inflation
Related Topics:
Overall, there was a “large rise in goods imports and a fall in goods exports”.
A ‘disappointing’ but mixed picture
It’s “disappointing” news, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said. She and the government as a whole have repeatedly said growing the economy was their number one priority.
“I am determined to kickstart economic growth and deliver on that promise”, she added.
But the picture was not all bad.
Growth recorded in March was revised upwards, further indicating that companies invested to prepare for tariffs. Rather than GDP of 0.2%, the ONS said on Friday the figure was actually 0.4%.
It showed businesses moved forward activity to be ready for the extra taxes. Businesses were hit with higher employer national insurance contributions in April.
The expansion in March means the economy still grew when the three months are looked at together.
While an interest rate cut in August had already been expected, investors upped their bets of a 0.25 percentage point fall in the Bank of England’s base interest rate.
Such a cut would bring down the rate to 4% and make borrowing cheaper.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:09
Is Britain going bankrupt?
Analysts from economic research firm Pantheon Macro said the data was not as bad as it looked.
“The size of the manufacturing drop looks erratic to us and should partly unwind… There are signs that GDP growth can rebound in June”, said Pantheon’s chief UK economist, Rob Wood.
Why did the economy shrink?
The drops in manufacturing came mostly due to slowed car-making, less oil and gas extraction and the pharmaceutical industry.
The fall was not larger because the services industry – the largest part of the economy – expanded, with law firms and computer programmers having a good month.
It made up for a “very weak” month for retailers, the ONS said.