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.
Sir Keir Starmer was at home in Downing Street, watching Arsenal lose in the Champions League, when he got a call from Donald Trump that he thought presented the chance to snatch victory from the jaws of trading defeat.
The president’s call was a characteristic last-minute flex intended to squeeze a little more out of the prime minister.
It was enough to persuade Sir Keir and his business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, dining with industry bosses across London at Mansion House, that they had to seize the opportunity.
The result, hurriedly announced via presidential conference call, is not the broad trade deal of Brexiteer dreams, and is certainly not a free-trade agreement.
It’s a narrow agreement that secures immediate relief for a handful of sectors most threatened by Mr Trump’s swingeing tariffs, with a promise of a broader renegotiation of “reciprocal” 10% tariffs to come.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:51
‘A fantastic, historic day’
Most pressing was the car industry, which Mr Reynolds said was facing imminent announcements of “very difficult news” at Britain’s biggest brands, including Jaguar Land Rover, which sounds like code for redundancies.
In place of the 25% tariffs imposed last month, a 10% tariff will apply to a quota of 100,000 vehicles a year, less than the 111,000 exported to the US in 2024, but close enough for a deal.
It still leaves the car sector far worse off than it was before “liberation day”, but, with one in four exports crossing the Atlantic, ministers reason it’s better than no deal, and crucially offers more favourable terms than any major US trading partner can claim.
For steel and aluminium zero tariffs were secured, along with what sounds like a commitment to work with the US to prevent Chinese dumping. That is a clear win and fundamental for the ailing industries in Britain, though modest in broad terms, with US exports worth only around £400m a year.
Image: US and UK announced trade deal
In exchange, the UK has had to open up access to food and agricultural products, starting with beef and ethanol, used for fuel and food production.
In place of tariff quotas on beef that applied on either side (12% in the UK and 20% in America) 13,000 tonnes of beef can flow tariff-free in either direction, around 1.5% of the UK market.
The biggest wins
Crucially, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) production standards that apply to food and animal products, and prevent the sale of hormone-treated meat, will remain. Mr Trump even suggested the US was moving towards “no chemical” European standards.
This may be among the biggest wins, as it leaves open the prospect of an easing of SPS checks on trade with the European Union, a valuable reduction in red tape that is the UK’s priority in reset negotiations with Brussels.
Farmers also believe the US offers an opportunity for their high-quality, grass-fed beef, though there is concern that the near-doubling of ethanol quotas is a threat to domestic production.
Technology deals to come?
There were broad commitments to do deals on technology, AI and an “economic security blanket”, and much hope rests on the US’s promise of “preferential terms” when it comes to pharmaceuticals and other sectors.
There was no mention of proposed film tariffs, still unclear even in the Oval Office.
Taken together, officials describe these moves as “banking sectoral wins” while they continue to try and negotiate down the remaining tariffs.
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
The challenge from here is that Mr Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff is not reciprocal at all. As commerce secretary Howard Lutnick proudly pointed out in the Oval Office, tariffs on US trade have fallen to less than 2%, while the UK’s have risen to 10%.
As a consequence, UK exporters remain in a materially worse position than they were at the start of April, though better than it was before the president’s call, and for now, several British industries have secured concessions that no other country can claim.
From a protectionist, capricious president, this might well be the best deal on offer.
Quite what incentive Mr Trump will have to renegotiate the blanket tariff, and what the UK has left to give up by way of compromise, remains to be seen. Sir Keir will hope that, unlike the vanquished Arsenal, he can turn it round in the second leg.
Tens of thousands of household energy customers have secured payouts after a compliance review found they had been overcharged.
The industry regulator said that 10 suppliers had handed over compensation and goodwill payments to just over 34,000 customers. The total came to around £7m.
Ofgem said those affected, between January 2019 and September last year, had more than one electricity meter point at their property recording energy usage.
It explained that while suppliers were allowed to apply multiple standing charges for homes with multiple electricity meters, it meant that some were “erroneously charged more than is allowed under the price cap when combined with unit rates”.
The companies affected were revealed as E.ON Next, Ecotricity, EDF Energy, Octopus Energy, Outfox The Market, OVO Energy, Rebel Energy [no longer trading], So Energy, Tru Energy and Utility Warehouse.
Of those, Octopus Energy accounted for the majority of the customers hit.
More on Energy
Related Topics:
Ofgem said that the near-21,000 customers impacted had received compensation of £2.6m and goodwill payments of almost £550,000.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:35
Govt commits £300m to wind farms
The redress was revealed at a time when energy bills remain elevated and debts at record levels in the wake of the 2022 price shock caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Higher wholesale natural gas prices over the winter months meant that the price cap actually rose in April when a decline would normally be seen.
The latest forecasts suggest, however, that bills should start to decline for the foreseeable future.
Charlotte Friel, director of retail pricing and systems at Ofgem, said of its compliance operation: “Our duty is to protect energy consumers, and we set the price cap for that very reason so customers don’t pay a higher amount for their energy than they should.
“We expect all suppliers to have robust processes in place so they can bill their customers accurately. While it’s clear that on this occasion errors were made, thankfully, the issues were promptly resolved, and customers are being refunded.”
The watchdog added that all ten suppliers had updated their systems and processes to prevent the error occurring in future.
The Bank of England has cut interest rates from 4.5% to 4.25%, citing Donald Trump’s trade war as one of the key reasons for the reduction in borrowing costs.
In a decision taken shortly before the official confirmation of a trade deal between Britain and the United States, the Bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) voted to reduce borrowing costs in the UK, saying the economy would be slightly weaker and inflation lower in part as a result of higher tariffs.
However, it stopped short of predicting that the trade war would trigger a recession.
Further rate cuts are expected in the coming months, though there remains some uncertainty about how fast and how far the MPC will cut – since it was split three ways on this latest vote.
Two members of the nine-person MPC voted to reduce rates by even more today, taking them down to 4%. But another two on the committee voted not to cut them at all, leaving them instead at 4.5%.
In the event, five members voted for the quarter point cut – enough to tip the balance – with the accompanying minutes saying that while “the current impact of the global trade news should not be overstated, the news was sufficient for those members to judge that a reduction in Bank Rare was warranted.”
Even so, the Bank’s analysis suggests that while higher tariffs were likely to depress global and UK economic growth, and help push down inflation, the impact would be relatively minor, with growth only 0.3% lower and inflation only 0.2% lower.
Governor, Andrew Bailey, said: “Inflationary pressures have continued to ease, so we’ve been able to cut rates again today.
“The past few weeks have shown how unpredictable the global economy can be. That’s why we need to stick to a gradual and careful approach to further rate cuts. Ensuring low and stable inflation is our top priority.”
The Bank raised its forecast for UK economic growth this year from 0.75% to 1%, but said that was primarily because of unexpectedly strong output in the first quarter.
In fact, underlying economic growth remains weak at just 0.1% a quarter.
It said that while inflation was expected to rise further in the coming months, peaking at 3.5% in the third quarter, it would drop down thereafter, settling at just below 2% towards the end of next year.