Food bills on course to rise by £275 as prices jump
On average, UK households spend around £5,283 for a year on groceries but this could increase by £275 unless people change what they buy.Fraser McKevitt, head of retail and consumer insight at Worldpanel, formerly known as Kantar, said current food inflation brought to mind the sort of prices people were paying in supermarkets after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022.The cost of energy and commodities soared before easing in 2023. But Mr McKevitt said: "We're back up on that rollercoaster."Chocolate, butter and spreads as well as fresh meat recorded the sharpest rises in the four weeks to 17 July, according to the company, which monitors prices on 75,000 identical products.At the same time, the cost of dog food, sugar confectionery and laundry dropped. Mr McKevitt said most people have options when it comes to managing food costs such as buying more own-brands goods from supermarkets, looking for promotions or going to cheaper shops.
But Worldpanel said that around a fifth of households in the UK are "struggling" with grocery bills, with some of those in a situation where they can not cut food costs any more.The research firm, which follows the shopping habits of 30,000 households across the UK, said people are making simpler evening meals when trying to save money."Almost seven in 10 dinner plates include fewer than six components," said Worldpanel.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
38 minutes ago
- Times
If Kate and William upsize, will an old pile with a tennis court be a curse?
William and Kate are reported to be considering a move from their cosy four-bedroom home in the grounds of Windsor Castle for somewhere more expansive — and certainly grander. If it's true, they will be swapping their picturesque cottage for a gothic fort. Fort Belvedere, also in Windsor Great Park, and where King Edward VIII signed his abdication papers, has eight bedrooms, 59 acres, a swimming pool, tennis court and a walled garden. It's the upsizing equivalent of Mrs Tiggy-Winkle moving into Toad Hall. The idea makes sense on many levels. William is the future king, has three children, presumably a number of staff, and needs a house where you can find room to store ceremonial robes as well as boxes of Lego. The idea of more space for a young family will certainly be enticing. But some aspects of the move to somewhere much larger will be challenging too. And I know. I've done it. • Read more expert advice on property, interiors and home improvement Ten years ago, on a whim, I decided to sell my one-bedroom basement flat in north London for a grand eight-bedroom house with two staff cottages and an enormous walled garden set in 72 acres of Capability Brown parkland in Hertfordshire. We managed to get a hefty mortgage, some financial help from family, and a good price for my flat. Madness, of course, but the house and park, belonging to the youngest son of an earl, had fallen into slight disrepair, and my husband and I fancied a project. The house was so charming and so near London, had great potential, and was reached by a magical mile-long drive that took you into a stable-yard through the archway of a bell tower. Buying the property took every penny we had. There would be little spare each month to run and restore it. The immensity of the task ahead was very apparent the day we moved in. With all the previous owner's grand furniture and metres-high family portraits removed the house looked bleak, shabby and even larger than before. We couldn't afford a proper removal company so had hired some men with a lorry that we had found online. They got lost while trying to find the property and didn't arrive with my modest amount of furniture until 4am. When they had finished unloading our possessions I was dismayed to discover that everything we owned fitted into one small room of the house. Over the next few weeks I spent a lot of time on eBay searching for sofas and beds. When you upsize so dramatically it takes some time to adjust to the new proportions you now live within. A pretty three-seater sofa I bought online, which looked suitable in size and period for our Georgian house, appeared ridiculously small when I placed it in the drawing room, as if it had been stolen from a doll's house. Our bedroom was enormous too. It took about five minutes to cross it to reach the en suite bathroom. A few weeks after we moved in, the soles of my feet began to ache so much it hurt to walk. I went to see my GP because I thought I might have developed plantar fasciitis. The doctor asked me if I spent much time walking around in bare feet. Only to get to the bathroom each day, I told him. That was what had caused the problem. I would need to wear shoes to go for a wee in the future, he said. • Ten planning applications and £60,000: the torment of building a house Slowly, we managed to populate areas of the house and buy mattresses to go with the eight beds we now owned; paint the giant walls; sand the endless wooden floors; pull up stained carpets, restore rotten window frames and replace the 1970s kitchen units. It may still have looked more Bleak House than Downton Abbey, but it did at least look like people lived there. When you upsize so dramatically, it also takes a period of adjustment to use the extensive space you now have. We were used to living in an open-plan flat where everything was within easy reach of the sofa. So initially we tended to live within only three of the property's many rooms. It was hard to think of a reason to leave the sitting room you were in to sit in another sitting room instead just because you could. I became obsessed that it was a waste to have so many rooms that were unused, even unseen. So every evening when I got back from work I would wander round the house, and the two empty cottages, and peer into every room we owned. It seemed unappreciative not to do so. By the time I had done this each night it was time for bed. And, first world problem, I know, but losing your glasses or misplacing the house keys in a property this size is a monumental disaster. A whole weekend can be spent searching every room and garden bench to find them. Eventually, keys and spectacles were fixed with electronic trackers to help us locate them more speedily. And thank God for the Find My function on iPhones. Cash to cover his new home's running costs is unlikely to be a problem for the Prince of Wales. His income from the Duchy of Cornwall will more than cover the heating bills and the costs of a gardener or two at Fort Belvedere. We weren't quite so prosperous, so winters were chilly, parts of the house would effectively be closed until spring, and the walled garden looked a little underwhelming populated with only a couple of small vegetable beds and a row of dahlias. You needed a sat-nav to locate them they looked so minuscule. And it was three years before we could afford to renovate and use the overgrown tennis court. It looked more like an allotment than a Wimbledon lawn. • Babies or house: how would you rather spend half a million pounds? Eventually, we rented out the house for film and shoot locations to fund further renovations. Sometimes this was quite fun. We watched them film a scene from The Crown on our staircase (when Princess Margaret meets Antony Armstrong-Jones) and witnessed a gruesome murder take place in the cellar for a horror film. But it had it's drawbacks too: you would get shouted at for flushing the loo upstairs when they were filming an emotional scene downstairs; objects you cherished would never be seen again unless you watched the film they had been borrowed for; and sometimes I'd get home from work, desperate to flop in front of the TV, only to discover the sitting room had been turned into a bathroom and the sofa had been replaced by a bidet. One July evening I returned to find reindeer and snow in the garden and a bunch of small children running round a dining room laden with festive food and tinsel. A department store was filming its Christmas ad campaign at our house. After five years of extraordinary adventures, cashflow challenges and unforgettable house parties — one New Year's Eve all 32 guests stayed overnight with us — we were made an offer we couldn't refuse to sell the house. The family who brought it from us renovated it for seven years before moving in. In that time, we've already bought and sold three times. We now live in a four-bedroom farmhouse in Cumbria, a house more appropriate to the income I receive from the Duchy of Langmead. It's probably the house that I've been happiest in. I quite like being downwardly mobile. My upsize days are over. William and Kate's are only just beginning.
Times
38 minutes ago
- Times
How to make Great British Railways a success
Before Labour ministers choose slick slogans for their new state-run trains they should recall Henry Ford's words: 'Nothing happens until somebody sells something.' Contrary to what some in the rail sector and Whitehall seem to think, rail services cannot exist without their passengers — what they want and what they are prepared to pay. A herculean effort to win more customers from the airlines and road users is essential. Britain's railways are at a watershed. Under privatisation, passenger journeys almost doubled. By the 2010s, private franchises were running three times as many trains between London and Manchester as the old British Rail (BR) had in the early 1990s. During the two decades between privatisation and the pandemic, passenger journeys increased by 107 per cent and services by 32 per cent. Passenger satisfaction in Britain was higher than for any other major European railway. Revenue increased by 145 per cent in real terms, compared with only a 16 per cent rise in operating costs, and £14 billion of private investment went into improving the train fleet. • Ministers heading for union clash in bid for hi-tech rail travel Privatisation introduced innovations in marketing, ticketing and operational efficiency. The volume of rail travel in Britain rose to a level not seen since the 1930s, on a network half the size and with a very good safety record. The pandemic was devastating for rail. It wasn't just that train travel collapsed during the lockdowns, requiring subsidies of £20.5 billion in 2023-24 prices) to cover losses. People's travel and working behaviour changed, probably for ever. Traditional flows of revenue from business travel, first class and five-day commuter season tickets, particularly in London and the southeast, have fallen away. In the year to March only 13 per cent of journeys were made using season tickets, compared with 34 per cent before the pandemic. Even though passenger numbers are close to 100 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, revenue is still down by £1.4 billion, at 89.1 per cent. Passengers are paying less to travel outside the old peaks. The taxpayer continues to cover an unacceptably high annual subsidy of £12 billion for a sector that only delivers 2 per cent of all journeys taken by the public. Consequently, ministers must now prioritise growth as they prepare to introduce the bill to create the state-owned Great British Railways (GBR), almost 80 years after Clement Attlee first nationalised rail. Without a ruthless focus on what passengers want alongside a demand-led model, a spiral of decline — higher subsidy and fares — could easily take root. GBR risks being a solution in search of a problem and morphing into the ghost of BR unless ministers develop a viable long-term vision. New research from the Centre for Policy Studies highlights four key areas which, if supported, would deliver more passengers, more income and better services for passengers. • Great British Railways 'won't be run by civil servants' First, ministers should support a mixed model across the intercity high-speed network so GBR trains faces competition from non-subsidised 'open access' operators. For 25 years this model has successfully delivered passenger growth and satisfaction on the East Coast Main Line between London, the northeast and Scotland. It has meant better services, more routes, faster trains and cheaper tickets while also bringing more passengers to the route. This has led to new, popular rail operators entering the market, which has pushed the dominant, government-run train operator, LNER, to deliver better services for its customers. European railways that have copied this successful model have seen a 40 per cent increase in passengers and fare reductions of between 20 and 60 per cent. Second, GBR should not regulate itself, especially as the white paper proposes taking key sector powers away from the independent Office of Rail and Road. In no other regulated sector does the dominant market operator also control and deliver key elements of its own regulation, such as decisions on market access and charging. This could have huge implications for growth, open access and more rail freight. Only last week the environment secretary slammed the water companies for 'marking their own homework' and pledged to end 'operator self-monitoring'. But there is a risk that this will become the case on the railways. Third, GBR must adopt an unforgiving focus on making train travel as easy, cheap and user-friendly as possible, not least when designing a new GBR ticketing app to replace those of existing train companies. In addition to competing with popular ticketing sites it must be designed by the world's leading retail software companies rather than civil servants. GBR should deliver a 'Rail Miles' loyalty scheme, which is years overdue and could be linked with purchases made in the hospitality and retail sectors. • The Times View: Prejudice against private train operators is misguided Fourth, the vast 52,000-hectare railway estate can and must generate much more income. Commercial and residential development, renewable energy generation, light parcel freight, health hubs at stations alongside a higher-quality retail offer are all underused sources of income. We must learn from countries such as Japan, where railways earn at least one third of their revenue from non-ticket sources. Rail can and must be at the centre of Britain's industrial, employment, housing and regeneration strategies. The ghost of BR hangs over GBR. But if the passenger is put first and proven models are embraced then the future could be very different. Rail might not get another chance. Tony Lodge is a research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies and author of Rail's Last Chance, published today by the CPS
Times
39 minutes ago
- Times
Taxpayer appears to fund footballers' salaries for ‘R&D'
Taxpayers appear to have funded player salaries at a top-flight football club on the grounds they were working on cutting-edge research. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) demanded repayment from the Scottish Premier League team Dundee United last year after it claimed £1.27 million under the research and development tax credit scheme. The scheme, which is meant to support innovations for the public good in science and technology, has been subject to a high degree of fraud and error thanks to lax checks by the tax authority. Under HMRC's rules a company can apply for the public money only if it has attempted a genuine advance in science or technology to benefit the overall field, not just its own business. A report was prepared by Dundee United's tax consultant ZLX before the club's claim, which stated that its players spent 24 per cent of their time directly conducting research and development activities, across nutrition and data collection projects. This meant, the report claimed, this portion of their salaries could be partially recouped from the taxpayer as a research and development (R&D) tax credit under the scheme. The report also stated that 80 per cent of the club chef's time was spent on nutrition science research, which could also be used to make a tax credit claim. Eligible research under the scheme must deal with an issue of genuine scientific uncertainty, which an expert in the field would not easily be able to resolve. • HMRC overhaul: £8bn tax credit scheme faces reform For one of Dundee's projects, the document claimed that the eligible uncertainty was that 'league involvement, challenge in European competition, playing style and management are all likely to change'. Simon Brundish, a conditioning coach at Strength:Lab who has worked with Premier League football clubs as well as with the English and Belgian national teams, reviewed the details of the research projects set out in the document. 'There is nothing groundbreaking going on here,' he said. 'A radar profile for each player and each position using arbitrary thresholds created by coaches' 'expertise' is simply standard practice in professional team sport.' He said that if the club had been paying an external consultant large sums for these kinds of services on the grounds that it was revolutionary research, it was effectively 'buying snake oil'. The tax expert Dan Neidle said: 'Football players are not scientific researchers.' He added that if Dundee United had claimed a quarter of the players' salaries as R&D expenditure, it was a 'scandal'. 'It is no surprise HMRC are investigating,' he said. Stephen McCallion, the owner of ZLX, based in Glasgow, said that the claim briefing had not been submitted to HMRC and that ZLX had never been interviewed by HMRC in relation to the Dundee claim. When asked if he disputed that the Dundee claim included a claim for player salaries, he declined to comment, citing client confidentiality. • Specialist agents under scrutiny in crackdown on tax credit fraud There has been controversy around whether it is within the spirit of the scheme for football clubs to make large claims. In February The Times revealed that Premiership teams including Chelsea, Fulham and Nottingham Forest had made claims. After the story, disclosures under freedom of information by HMRC revealed that at least 33 professional football clubs were under investigation into whether £17 million had been wrongly claimed. Chelsea was paid more than £3 million in R&D tax relief and payments by HMRC between 2020 and last year, according to its accounts. Nottingham Forest claimed a tax credit of £607,000 in the 2021-22 financial year, while Fulham claimed £758,000 in credits between 2019 and 2024. After the reporting, it emerged that Brentford had also made a claim, worth more than £3 million. Chelsea, Nottingham Forest, Fulham and Brentford were asked if player salaries had been included in any way in their claims under the scheme. Brentford declined to comment. The other clubs were approached for comment. HMRC has not disclosed the identity of which 33 clubs were under investigation. Dundee separately declared HMRC's repayment demand in its most recent accounts. Concerns have also been raised about the role of tax advisers encouraging companies to make claims that skirt the border of eligibility, with at least one adviser promoting the scheme as 'free money from HMRC'. ZLX described itself on its website as having the 'know-how' to navigate R&D tax credits. It previously stated on its website that it could assist clubs in making claims under the scheme for research into 'stadiums-spectator interaction', 'media and multimedia' and 'Covid compliance measures'. The page including this information has been taken down from its website. The company was criticised in a recent Scottish court case for what the sheriff found was a proposal to make an R&D claim on behalf of a fruit and vegetable company for installing a fridge. HMRC has faced repeated criticisms for its handling of the R&D scheme as its cost ballooned from £1.1 billion in 2010 to £7.5 billion in 2023. Officials have been accused of failing properly to check claims being made, leading to a high rate of fraud and error, with resulting losses totalling £4.1 billion since 2020. Freedom of information litigation last year forced HMRC to reveal it had failed to take sustained action to crack down on misuse of the scheme for five years, despite being warned by officials as early as 2017 that the scheme was being extensively defrauded. McCallion has previously said that the sheriff repeated comments made by the defendant — which had not been taken seriously by the ZLX legal team — that it was 'not impossible for a football club to claim R&D tax credits'. He also said that 'those who have started this witch hunt on football clubs have little or no technical experience but instead are using this platform to further their own endeavours'. Dundee United was approached for comment. The club's accounts state that it is appealing against HMRC's repayment demand.
