I ditched the UK & now I only need to work 13 hours a week – my food shop costs just £10 too
Emily Severn, 24, made the "life-changing" decision to leave her home in Nottingham for a
5
Emily ditched the UK to live in China
Credit: SWNS
5
She said her rent and bills are now much cheaper
Credit: SWNS
5
Her weekly food shop is now just £10
Credit: SWNS
The Brit now lives in Suzhou in the Jiangsu Province of Eastern China, where her monthly rent is just £323, a massive saving on the £850 she was paying back home.
Working as an teacher in both kindergarten and junior high schools, Emily normally works just 13 hours every week - teaching English to Chinese students - and is paid £20 per hour.
Noticing a huge difference in the amount she spends, Emily said that as well as cheaper rent and bills, the cost of days out is much cheaper too.
Discussing her decision to move to China, she said: "I think what drew me to it is it's so different to rainy England.
Read more world stories
"In Manchester the rent for a one-bed apartment, as my university accommodation, was £850 per month.
"The rent every month here has been costing me 2,200 yuan which at the moment is about £323 pounds.
"You can go to the market here and literally buy a full food shop for £5 and that can last you a few days."
And bills are much cheaper now for Emily than they were in the UK.
Most read in The Sun
"The utilities in China are 100 yen for the electricity per month and in British pounds that's about £10.15, that was costing me £37 in the UK", she explained.
We ditched the UK and bought a 200-year-old French village for just £22k
"My water bill is 100 yuan but we only really have to pay it every three months, so £10.15 every three months - compared to £37 in the UK."
Emily first began learning Chinese alongside her masters degree in Journalism - where she also met boyfriend Wei, 30.
After securing a job in Suzhou whilst completing her TESOL qualification - which stands for Teaching English to Speaker of Other Languages- the couple moved out to China together, where they now live in a one-bed apartment.
She said: "It was actually my Chinese teacher's old boss that was hiring teachers in China.
How easy is it to move abroad?
Brexit means British citizens now have to apply for visas to move to countries within the EU. While some countries residency restrictions are easier than others, here's what you need to do at home before moving:
Notify HMRC about your upcoming move.
Let your local authority know and provide a forwarding address.
Contact your mortgage and utility providers and bank before leaving.
If you have paid enough UK national insurance contributions, you can qualify for a state pension abroad - contact the
You can sign up to the Royal Mail's
If you have outstanding student loans, contact the
If you have children, give due notice to childcares and schools.
"Once I had my TESOL certificate they could start giving me my contract and work permit.
"Personally within the company I work in there is more of a work life balance.
"There's more flexibility than in the UK.
"I think I wanted to move to explore and see something new because a lot of the time in the UK there's not a lot that goes on.
"In
summer
in China there are a lot of light shows and concerts at parks.
"There's a hustle and bustle and a lot going on.
Emily explains most attractions - like water towns including Mudu, Nanxun and Zhouzhuang - cost as little as £1 for entry, and says she spends a lot of her time walking in the different parks on offer in her area.
Teaching a mixture of class based and one-to-one sessions, Emily is paid around £20 an hour, and estimates she earns £10,145 over the year.
Living in a one-bed apartment with a kitchen, bathroom, living area and mezzanine floor for their bedroom, the couple spend their weekends travelling to local "ancient towns".
Despite loving life in Suzhou, Emily can see herself returning to the UK at some point.
"I think it's more wanting to come back to family," she said.
"When you're in China you kind of value family a lot more because everyone places a big value on family."
5
Emily teaches English and works just 13 hours a week
Credit: SWNS
5
She plans to move back to the UK eventually
Credit: SWNS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
3 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Trump's global tariff agenda puts Ireland's pharmaceutical industry at serious risk
The whole world is in thrall to the whims of Donald Trump's tariff agenda, as it has been since the 47th president of the United States' swearing-in last January. We've learned a few uncomfortable truths along the way. Much of the early outcry from America's allies and trading partners surrounded the lack of economic logic to the imposition of tariffs – which are effectively a tax for Americans on foreign products, in theory making them less attractive to US consumers and heightening the allure of their own domestic suppliers. Critics said that the new regime would disrupt the world economy needlessly and perhaps bring about a global recession. That may well come to pass. The problem is that in this stand-off America has the greater wherewithal in terms of raw economic power. It holds the cards as Trump himself might say. And nations worldwide are beginning to fall into line, the EU just the latest after agreeing to a blanket 15% tariff on goods and services going forward. After President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump agreed the trade deal, the spin is that the pain of those tariffs is worth it in order to avoid a global trade war. Also, 15% is better than 30% or worse, is the thinking. Photo:The spin is that the pain of those tariffs is worth it in order to avoid a global trade war. Also, 15% is better than 30% or worse, is the thinking. Whether that represents capitulation in the face of bullyboy tactics, given that little or nothing has been asked of the US in return, is a separate conversation. Ireland's pharmaceutical industry Here in Ireland we have a bigger problem though, and that problem is the pharmaceutical industry. That industry contributes massively to the economy here via billions of euro in corporation tax contributions, with about 90 companies employing 50,000 people in highly-paid roles. A total 30,000 of those jobs are with American firms. Should foreign pharmaceutical concerns exit Ireland the impact on the country would be catastrophic. The industry globally had pleaded with Trump for it to be exempted from any tariff regime, ostensibly for altruistic reasons – that lifesaving medicines shouldn't be subject to capricious taxation. At an EU level, the industry asked that the bloc not apply reciprocal tariffs, one wish that has at least been granted. Pfizer is one of the massive American pharmaceutical companies holding bases in Ireland, in this case Cork. File picture: Dan Linehan Oddly enough, in Trump's world of permanent grievance where everyone has been making a sucker of the United States for decades, the outsize presence the US pharmaceutical industry holds in Ireland is one situation on which he indisputably has a legitimate point. Drug prices in the US can retail for as much as five times what an EU citizen would pay. Meanwhile, American pharma firms make a pretty penny avoiding American tax by basing themselves here. Trump's protectionist agenda demands that those jobs and companies should return home. The Government has been worrying about and planning for a worst-case scenario in terms of tariffs on pharmaceuticals for months. Reaction from the pharma companies But what of the pharma industry itself? The official line from the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA), the industry's lobby group here, is that it is reviewing the announcements coming out of Washington as and when they happen 'as key implications for the pharmaceutical sector remain uncertain'. A stance it's hard to argue with given the whole world has grown used to the haphazard nature of the Trump administration's demands. The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) notes that tariffs are 'a blunt instrument that will disrupt supply chains, impact on investment in research and development, and ultimately harm patient access to medicines on both sides of the Atlantic'. It added that if the goal is to rebalance trade and ensure a 'fairer distribution' of how pharmaceutical innovation is financed, then 'there are more effective means than tariffs that would help'. Impact on pharma in Ireland The IDA, the body with prime responsibility for attracting foreign investment to Irish shores, says of the pharma implications that it 'welcomes' the deal made between Europe and the US, arguing it provides 'much-needed certainty for Irish, European and American businesses who together represent the most integrated trading relationship in the world'. 'We are very much reliant (on the US market), there's no arguing with that,' says one industry insider. Last year a massive €44bn in pharmaceutical products were exported directly from Ireland to the US. 'But when you stand back €100bn was exported globally. So half went to America, but it's not like all business went there, though it is certainly the biggest partner,' says the source. That doesn't mean that those massive American companies holding bases here – MSD, Pfizer, ELI Lilly, Johnson and Johnson etc – are about to up sticks on the back of the new tariff regime. 'They are not going to leave today or tomorrow, no. But it could definitely impact future investment decisions,' the source says. One of the problems is that a great deal of uncertainty still surrounds the 15% tariff agreement, particularly with regard to pharma. One of the Eli Lilly production buildings at its state-of-the-art facility in Dunderrow, Kinsale, Co Cork. For starters, most people concerned thought that the pharmaceutical industry wasn't to be included in the deal. Then about two hours after the deal was agreed European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said it would be included, a point Trump appeared to back up. The following day the White House produced a 'fact sheet' describing how the new regime would work, and affirming the 15% rate for pharma. Except that the same sheet stated that the European Union would pay the tariff – which isn't how tariffs work. Then there is the Section 232 investigation which the US Department of Commerce initiated into the pharma industry in April – aiming to establish if how the pharmaceutical system worldwide currently functions impacts negatively on the US from a national security standpoint. Should the answer arrived at be a 'yes', then additional tariffs on pharma may well follow (such investigations typically take a minimum of six months to conclude, so we'll probably get an answer sometime towards the end of the year). 'Pharma plans in the long-term,' says Aidan Meagher, tax partner specialising in life sciences with consultants EY, noting that most pharma manufacturers will have been planning for this scenario for months and will have frontloaded stock into the American market, thus negating immediate impacts in the near term. He says that companies will be likely looking at 'dual sourcing' initiatives, supplying the American market from within the US itself and using Irish operations for its trade around the rest of the globe. 'Ireland needs to up its game' But Meagher says that it would be 'remiss' of Ireland, and the pharma industry here, to take a 'wait and see' approach, perhaps with the supposition that Trump's policies will last for the remaining three-and-a-half years of his term, and no longer. 'It is all about the next investment. A lot of these drugs only have patent protection for a certain life or longevity. Ireland needs to maintain investment and to incentivise the right kind of activity in terms of attracting that innovation,' he says. That means thinking outside the box in terms of tax credits for research and development, and improvements to infrastructure, particularly housing, Meagher says, areas in which we are notably lagging behind in terms of international competition. But he argues that the situation is far from a doomsday scenario. 'It's not as simple as that, it's a whole range of business factors that need to be considered – it's all about impacts for specific companies,' he says. 'It's not all necessarily doom and gloom. Companies have had plenty of time to consider this. And pharma companies are long-term thinkers. Ireland has had just two issues with the FDA (the US food and drug administration, responsible for approving new drugs) in its history. "The country has a strong reputation. These countries have invested significantly and Ireland is the owner of a lot of valuable intellectual property.' But it's certainly not a time to be complacent, Meagher argues. 'We have dropped down the competitiveness radar, and our competitors now aren't in the EU – they're in Switzerland, Singapore and the US itself. We need to be a top competitor for inward investment, and R&D and infrastructure will be critical. That is where Ireland needs to up its game.'
The Irish Sun
6 hours ago
- The Irish Sun
Donald Trump vows to unleash ‘every tool in our arsenal' in price row with British drug firms
DONALD Trump insists he will unleash 'every tool in our arsenal' if British drug companies don't cut their prices within 60 days. The US President waged war with a total of seventeen firms demanding 'binding commitments' to match the lower prices offered to developing countries. Advertisement The move comes as the White House hit dozens of countries with a fresh slew of tariffs including punishing levies on neighbour Canada. Two UK drug firms, AstraZeneca and GSK, caught up in the pharma row saw their share price drop as Trump aims to lower prices for American citizens. The move could even have damaging consequences for the NHS whose leverage with suppliers due to its size could be reduced. Mr Trump has demanded the firms apply their 'most favoured nation' rates to Medicaid which is the health system for low-income Americans. Advertisement READ MORE ON DONALD TRUMP He said: 'Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government, and American patients. In a letter to the firms, he said: 'But if you refuse to step up we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices. 'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.' Around £16 billion was wiped off shares in the sector across Europe as fears grow higher prices in the rest of the world will fund the US reductions. Advertisement Most read in The Sun Exclusive The move comes after Trump said back in May that he wanted drug prices in the US to be reduced by 80 per cent. Moment Trump 'throws shade' at Meghan and Harry during Starmer press conference But experts appeared wary that he has the authority to reduce prices and a previous effort in his first term failed in court. At the time, he said the tactics were 'subsidising socialism' abroad in paying for the same pills from the same factories, which led to spiralling prices at home. The warning came as Mr Trump signed an executive order applying a wave of tariffs to 68 countries and the European Union. Advertisement Canada was hit with levies – up to 35 per cent from 25 per cent - due to its lack of co-operation in stopping flow of illegal drugs and fentanyl into America. Their PM Mark Carney said that his country was 'making historic investments in border security to arrest drag traffickers and end migrant smuggling'. Switzerland will also keep negotiating with the US after their tariff rate hit 39 per cent, which was far higher than they anticipated. 1 Donald Trump is demanding drug firms cut their prices for US customers Credit: Rex Advertisement
Irish Examiner
8 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Trading principles for predictability — what the EU gave up to avoid a tariff war
In the hours following the announcement that the US and EU had struck a deal last weekend on tariffs, European reaction was mixed. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the deal, which imposes 15% tariffs on most items going both ways, "creates certainty in uncertain times" and "delivers stability and predictability, for citizens and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic" as she tried to sell the deal to the 27 EU member states. But if Ms von der Leyen expected a lap of honour to ease her troubled start to her second term, one was not coming. "It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm their common values and to defend their common interests, resigns itself to submission," French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou wrote on X of what he called the "von der Leyen-Trump deal". German Chancellor Friedrich Merz himself initially appeared satisfied, saying that the agreement "succeeded in averting a trade conflict that would have hit the export-oriented German economy hard". But by Monday, amid cross-party criticism, Mr Merz said the deal would "substantially damage" his nation's finances, but acknowledged that the negotiating team "couldn't expect to achieve any more" as Mr Trump's willingness to enter into a 30% trade war was apparent. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, an ally of Mr Trump, said the US president "ate von der Leyen for breakfast" while Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said he would support it "without any enthusiasm". Across the bloc, there has been criticism of Europe's perceived capitulation, with many echoing Mr Bayrou's sentiments that it poses fundamental questions about the cohesiveness of the project. German Green MP Sandra Detzer told her parliament that the EU "has agreed to a deal that abandons fundamental principles of rules-based global trade, instead of long-term stability". Ms Detzer's alarm is representative of a particular sharp end of the deal. According to one think tank, the deal will cost the German economy around €6.5bn in terms of its GDP in the first year, while experts have slashed the country's growth forecasts in recent months. Fabio de Masi, a German MEP, told EuroNews this week that not only was the deal bad, it was "a betrayal" for which Ms von der Leyen should resign. The bloc is set to face 15% tariffs on most of its goods including cars, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals entering the US, and 'zero for zero' tariffs on a number of products including aircraft, some agricultural goods and certain chemicals – as well as EU purchases of US energy worth €643bn over three years. But as the tariffs were set to kick in on Friday, the two sides had not agreed on all of the details, which Ms von der Leyen's commission has stressed will be a "set of principles" and not a trade deal. On Thursday, commission spokesperson Olof Gill said that "from there will flow the additional negotiated exemptions that we're looking to bake into our agreement with the US". Drinks tariffs What shape those carveouts take is still to be decided, with a 15% tariff applying until they are. That is of particular concern to the drinks industry across the continent. From Irish whiskey to French and Spanish wines, exporters across Europe have been arguing for a carveout on their products. The US tariff on European spirits is currently 10%. Brussels is keen to reduce that to zero or, for wine at least, to the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates that are set on a fixed cost per litre basis, rather than in percentage terms. Until recently, spirits had benefited from zero tariffs between the US and EU following an agreement in 1997 that also included other countries such as Canada and Japan. That lasted until 2018, when the EU response to US steel and aluminium tariffs included increased duties on US bourbon and other spirits. These were suspended in 2021. From Irish whiskey to French and Spanish wines, exporters across Europe have been arguing for a carveout on their products. File photo US most-favoured-nation rates for wine are 19.8c per litre for sparkling and 6.3c per litre for most other wine, which equates to very low rates in most cases. But as Mr Trump signed an executive order overnight into Friday, there was no movement on the exemption and the drinks industry will, for now at least, pay the 15% rate. With EU officials privately briefing Reuters that negotiations could run into late autumn, that will mean financial pain for those businesses in the short-term, at least. Speaking to journalists at a press conference on Thursday, commission spokesperson Olof Gill said: 'The commission remains determined to achieve and secure the maximum number of carve-outs, including for traditional EU products such as wine and spirits. 'It is not our expectation that wine and spirits would be included as an exemption in the first group announced by the US tomorrow, and therefore that sector, as with all other economic sectors, will be captured by the 15% ceiling.' Motor tariffs In Germany, a number of car manufacturers revised down profit guidance on the back of the tariffs, which will face a 15% tariff as well, but for BMW, the impact of the agreement was "exaggerated". 'I think this tariff discussion is way exaggerated and also its effects on the industry,' chief executive Oliver Zipse told the Financial Times. 'What's more important is the question, are the products attractive?' Carveouts At Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, enterprise minister Peter Burke updated ministers on the detail of the weekend's agreement, telling journalists that there will be exemptions to the tariff regime, with aviation one for which Ireland had successfully argued alongside others. 'The key thing is that there will be a number of carveouts. Obviously, aviation has been cited as zero-for-zero, but also in relation to agri-foods and potentially spirits.' Ireland, like many other countries, is banking on the carveouts agreed protecting key sectors like agri-foods and that the rate for pharmaceuticals would not exceed 15%. Like many countries across Europe, ministers here are privately saying that the deal is far from ideal, but also query what else is to be done. By Friday, they could point to Mr Trump's executive order, which imposed tariffs on many countries with whom he had not negotiated. But there is also acceptance that the tariff regime brings with it a new reality, one with which the EU needs to grapple. If countries are arguing for exceptions, how does the European negotiating team balance those interests? And what will the reaction be when the final deal is reached?
