The Cost of Retiring Alone Why Single Pensioners Need Far More Saved
By Matt Beck, Financial Planner at Smith & Pinching
If you’re planning for retirement on your own — whether through divorce, bereavement, or simply never having had a partner to plan alongside — the honest answer is that you need proportionally more saved than a couple, not less. It isn’t about spending more. It’s that a huge share of retirement costs don’t halve just because there’s one of you, while your income sources, tax allowances, and safety net very much do.
Quick takeaways:
• New research published in September 2026 shows single-pensioner poverty has risen sharply while poverty among pensioner couples has stayed broadly flat — the latest DWP-based figures put single pensioners at 19.8%, against 11.2% for couples.
• Two-thirds of single pensioners living in poverty are women, and the number of divorced pensioners has tripled since 2002.
• A single person can need roughly £225,000 more saved than a couple to reach the same “moderate” standard of living in retirement, according to analysis from Standard Life.
• Single retirees have only one Personal Allowance and one set of tax bands to work with, whereas a couple can often split income across two.
• There’s a genuine upside too — more freedom to make decisions quickly, without needing two people to agree.
Why this is in the news right now
A report from consultancy LCP, published in September 2026 using previously unpublished DWP data, found that overall pensioner poverty has been rising steadily for a decade — but almost entirely because of what’s happening to single pensioners. Poverty among couples has remained largely flat since 2012/13. Among single pensioners, it hasn’t: the most recent figures put the poverty rate at 19.8%, compared with 11.2% for couples — nearly double. The report also found that two-thirds of single pensioners living in poverty are women, and that the number of divorced pensioners in England and Wales has tripled since 2002, now standing at around 1.5 million.
This isn’t a fringe issue. It’s a growing and increasingly well-documented gap in UK retirement planning, and it’s one that generic, couple-focused retirement guidance simply doesn’t address.
There’s only one State Pension
It sounds obvious once you say it out loud, but it’s easy to overlook: a couple can potentially receive two full State Pensions, while a single person only ever has one. For 2026/27, the full new State Pension is £12,547 a year. For a couple where both partners qualify for the full amount, that’s a combined £25,094 forming the foundation of their retirement income. A single person is working from half that foundation, with everything else — private pensions, savings, investments — needing to fill a proportionally bigger gap.
Your costs don’t halve just because there’s one of you
This is the part that catches people out. Rent or mortgage, council tax, heating, insurance, broadband, a car — these costs are largely fixed whether one person lives in a property or two. A couple can split many of the same standing costs between them; a single person carries them alone.
The numbers bear this out clearly. According to Standard Life’s analysis of the official Retirement Living Standards, a single pensioner can need in the region of £225,000 more saved than a couple to achieve the same “moderate” standard of living — not because they’re spending more per person, but because they’re covering the same fixed costs from one income rather than two. Official figures reflect this too: for 2026/27, the “moderate” standard is set at £32,700 a year for a single person, but only £45,400 for a couple — considerably less than double.
The value of investments can go down as well as up. It isn’t guaranteed, so you may get back less than invested — a point that matters even more when there’s no second income or asset base to fall back on if a plan needs adjusting.
Only one set of tax allowances
This is a detail that often gets missed, and it can genuinely affect how much income you keep. A couple has two Personal Allowances and two sets of income tax bands between them — currently £12,570 tax-free each for 2026/27, with the basic rate band running up to £50,270 each. That means a couple can often structure how they draw retirement income between two people to keep more of it in the tax-free or basic-rate bands.
A single person only has one Personal Allowance and one set of bands to work with. There’s no ability to shift income to a lower-earning spouse to reduce the household’s overall tax bill, because there’s only one household member. This makes thoughtful, well-structured income planning genuinely more valuable for a single retiree, not less — every pound of unnecessary tax paid is a pound that can’t be replaced by splitting income elsewhere.
Later-life care costs land differently too
Care costs are a real risk for anyone in later retirement, but they tend to fall more heavily on people without a partner. A couple often has each other for day-to-day support in the earlier stages of needing help, which can delay or reduce the need for paid care. A single person is more likely to need to fund support earlier, and doesn’t have a partner’s income or assets to help absorb the cost if significant care becomes necessary. This is a real financial risk that deserves proper planning, not an assumption that “it probably won’t happen.”
The upside: more freedom, fewer decisions to align
It isn’t all harder. One thing worth genuinely valuing is that a single retiree isn’t waiting on a second person to agree before making a decision. Wanting to downsize, relocate, or move nearer family doesn’t require convincing a partner it’s the right call — you can act on your own judgement and timeline. Travel and lifestyle choices can be shaped entirely around what you want, not a compromise between two sets of preferences. For some clients, this genuinely changes what retirement looks like for the better, and it’s worth building a plan that makes the most of that flexibility rather than only focusing on the harder parts.
Why this calls for a genuinely personal plan
Given all of the above, we believe single retirees benefit more, not less, from a properly bespoke financial plan, for wealth management — one that starts from a detailed picture of actual expenditure, not a generic average. That means stress-testing the plan against real market drawdowns, so you can see how it holds up if markets fall early in your retirement. It means building in a realistic allowance for later-life care costs, rather than hoping they won’t arise. And it means looking specifically at how income is drawn and structured to make the most of the one set of tax allowances available, since there’s no second person’s allowance to lean on if the first isn’t used efficiently.
A worked example
Consider a client in her early 60s, divorced after a long marriage, with a mix of a modest workplace pension, some savings, and a share of the family home from the divorce settlement.
On paper, her assets don’t look dramatically different from many couples we work with — but her situation is genuinely different in the maths that matter: one State Pension rather than two, one set of tax allowances, and full responsibility for her own housing and care costs going forward. A cashflow plan built around her actual expenditure, tested against a market downturn in the first few years of retirement, gives her a realistic answer to how her money needs to work — rather than assuming a couple’s rule of thumb, halved, will do the job.
Frequently asked questions
Do single pensioners get less State Pension than couples?
Not less each, but less in total. Each person who qualifies gets the same full new State Pension (£12,547 a year for 2026/27) — a couple where both qualify simply receives two of them, while a single person only ever receives one.
How much more does a single person need to save for retirement?
Analysis from Standard Life suggests a single person can need around £225,000 more saved than a couple to reach the same “moderate” standard of living, largely because household running costs don’t halve with one person rather than two.
Are single pensioners more likely to face poverty in retirement?
Recent research shows single-pensioner poverty has risen sharply while poverty among couples has stayed broadly flat, with single pensioners now at roughly double the poverty rate of couples. Divorced and never-married pensioners, particularly women, have seen the steepest rises.
Can a single pensioner reduce tax on their retirement income?
There’s less flexibility than a couple has, since a single person only has one Personal Allowance and one set of tax bands. However, thoughtful planning around how and when income is drawn can still make a meaningful difference.
What happens with care costs if I don’t have a partner?
Care costs can land earlier and more heavily on single retirees, since there’s no partner to provide informal support or share the financial burden. This is worth planning for specifically, rather than assuming it won’t be needed.
A final thought
Retiring alone isn’t a lesser version of retiring as a couple — it’s a genuinely different set of maths, with its own risks and its own freedoms. The risks are real and worth planning for properly: less guaranteed income, less tax flexibility, and more exposure if care is needed. But so is the freedom to make your own decisions, on your own timeline, without needing anyone else’s agreement. A good plan takes both seriously.
Navigating retirement on your own? Matt Beck and the team at Smith & Pinching build genuinely personal plans for single retirees — with real expenditure, real stress-testing, and no assumptions borrowed from a couple’s rule of thumb.