Couple Without Kids: Why Two Incomes Don’t Mean Double The Savings

So, you’re a couple without kids (CWOK). Two salaries. No childcare costs. More freedom. On paper, it looks like you should be financially ahead of everyone else.

But here’s the surprise: having no kids doesn’t automatically mean you’re better off.
And having two incomes doesn’t automatically mean double the savings.

In fact, couples without kids who don’t budget, plan, or protect themselves financially can end up worse off than couples who do, even those with kids and all the expenses that come with them.

Let’s break down why.

The Assumption: “No kids = no extra costs = automatic savings”

Many CWOKs assume that the lack of child-related costs gives them a huge head start. And yes, in theory that’s true: fewer direct child expenses (school fees, uniforms, childcare, etc).
But there are some hidden traps:

• You’re two working adults: higher earners often have higher lifestyle budgets. Travel, eating out, bigger homes, and second cars.
• With fewer “required costs”, it’s easy to let spending creep up.
• Without a clear budget or plan, extra income just disappears into lifestyle inflation.

Common money drains among couples without kids:

• Eating out more often
• More holidays or weekend trips
• Nicer rentals or rushing to upgrade property
• Extra subscriptions (gym, apps, streaming, lifestyle services)
• Two cars, both on finance
• Treating money as “ours to spend” instead of “ours to grow”

Without a financial plan, the extra income gets absorbed into lifestyle fast.

Without a Plan, You Could Be Worse Off Than Parents

It’s ironic, but couples with children often must organise budgets, monitor costs and think ahead because those child costs force them to. By contrast, CWOKs can feel “free” and skip this discipline.

Research in Ireland backs this up: a recent report found that in terms of financial attitudes, couples with and without children scored almost the same, indicating that having no kids does not automatically translate into more prudent financial behaviour.

So if you aren’t budgeting, don’t have protection (insurance) in place, and haven’t planned for significant risks, the “extra” income can become an illusion.

Common traps for CWOKs

• Lifestyle creep: The house gets nicer, the holidays longer, the new car looks tempting. The two incomes fuel it.
• No budget “guard-rails”: Because you feel you should be fine, you skip formal budgets or saving goals.
• Under-insurance/protection gaps: With no dependents, you might think “we’re ok if something happens”, but the cost of a major event (job loss, illness, payout falls short) can be huge.
• No plan for “what if we do have a kid” or “what if we never have kids and retire on two incomes”: Without long-term thinking, you compromise future flexibility.
• Tax & pension opportunities missed: Sometimes couples assume “we’ll sort it later” because “we have more money now”. But the earlier you act, the more powerful the compounding.

It’s Not Being Child-Free, It’s What You Do With Your Money

It’s not your status that matters (kids or no kids), it’s your behaviours. Two incomes can be a huge advantage, but only if you channel them wisely.

What to check and plan

• Budget together: Sit down with your partner. What are the fixed costs, discretionary costs, and goals? Track actual spend.
• Define common goals: Retirement, property, travel, whatever matters. Then allocate your “extra” income accordingly.
• Use the “two incomes” to your advantage:
  • Maximise pension/retirement contributions early.
  • Invest a percentage of your income instead of just spending.
  • Build a protection/emergency fund.
• Protection matters: Even without children, you share lives, maybe a mortgage, and commitments. Income protection, illness cover, life cover, it’s still relevant.
• Don’t assume you’ll always stay earning at this level: With two incomes, you may feel safe… but what if one drops off, or you take a career break? Build resilience.
• Have a plan for later changes: Maybe you will have children, or maybe you’ll never have them. Both paths need planning.
• Avoid the “we’ll start saving later” trap: Because you feel unconstrained now, you might defer. But time is a powerful saver.

Example: Two incomes but no plan = false comfort

Let’s imagine “Aidan & Ciara” (living in Ireland). Both earn €60k. No children. They rent in Dublin city. They believe they’re financially ahead.

• They spend freely: nice holidays twice a year, new car, premium subscriptions, regular nights out.
• They don’t have a written budget. They assume “we’ll save the rest”.
• They have minimal protection: just basic life cover and standard health insurance.
• They haven’t maximised pensions or tax-efficient savings.

If one income drops (say one job loss or serious illness), they risk a significant drop in lifestyle and savings. Meanwhile, couples with kids might already have built savings buffers and pension contributions because they had to.

Contrast that with “Brian & Eimear” who have two incomes but also two children. They have to budget, they consciously spend, they have protections in place, and they have longer-term savings as part of family planning. Ironically, that gives them a more structured financial base.