Home › Blog › Groceries and alcohol
Splitting groceries when some people don’t drink
A bottle of wine in the shared cart costs the same to the person who drinks three glasses and to the one who drinks none. It is the most common invisible imbalance in shared spending, and the easiest to fix: it takes one extra expense line.
The short answer
Take alcohol out of the common pot and split it between the people who drink it. In practice: two expenses instead of one. A “groceries” line shared by everyone, and an “alcohol” line shared by the drinkers only.
It costs ten extra seconds when you record the expense, and it removes the whole problem. Everything else — flat fees, estimates, “let’s just round it” — is an approximation of that one calculation.
What paying for other people’s wine actually costs
A weekend for six. Shared groceries come to $180, of which $48 is alcohol: three bottles of wine and two packs of beer. Four people drink, two don’t at all.
| Method | A drinker pays | A non-drinker pays |
|---|---|---|
| Everything divided by 6 | $30 | $30 |
| Food by 6, alcohol by 4 | $34 | $22 |
| Difference | +$4 | −$8 |
The fair calculation: food, $132, divided by six is $22 each. Alcohol, $48, divided by four is $12 per drinker. So a drinker pays $34 and a non-drinker $22.
Eight dollars over a weekend is not worth an argument. But it is the same weekend twice a month: close to $200 a year, charged to the person who is also driving everyone home. Repetition is what causes resentment, never the first bottle.
Three methods, from simplest to most exact
1. Two expense lines. The right method in 90% of cases. Back from the supermarket, the receipt splits in two: what gets eaten, what gets drunk. If the receipt is a single total, the alcohol is found in thirty seconds — it is always the most expensive line after meat.
2. A drinks levy. A fixed amount per drinker, agreed in advance: $10 for the weekend, paid into the pot. Unbeatable to organise, crude in its result: the person who has one glass pays as much as the one who finishes the bottles. Keep it for groups where everyone drinks about the same.
3. By the bottle. Everyone pays for what they opened. Exact, and unmanageable beyond two hours of an evening. Useful in one case only: the big party where alcohol is more than half the budget.
At the restaurant: the bill, line by line
This is where the subject is most awkward, because it has to be said out loud in front of the server. The arithmetic is the same. A $174 bill for six: $120 of food, $36 of wine, $18 of coffees.
| Item | Amount | Shared between | Per person |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starters and mains | $120 | all 6 | $20 |
| Wine | $36 | the 4 drinkers | $9 |
| Coffees | $18 | all 6 | $3 |
A drinker pays $32, a non-drinker $23. Check: 4 × 32 + 2 × 23 = $174. The total holds.
Two habits that avoid the painful moment. Order wine by the bottle rather than by the glass: one amount to separate instead of eleven. And ask for the itemised bill at the start of the meal, not when it is time to pay — nobody reads a receipt by phone light while nine people wait.
Two lines, three seconds
In WeSplit, an expense is split between the participants you pick: groceries between everyone, alcohol between those who drink it. Balances update themselves. Free, no ads.
Create a group for freeSaying it without making it weird
The problem is almost never the money: it is the fear of looking stingy in front of friends. Three phrasings that work, because none of them points at anyone.
- Before the shopping, not after. “Shall we keep the alcohol separate in the cart?” Asked at the shop entrance, it is logistics. Asked at the till, it is a complaint.
- On behalf of the group, not yourself. “Since Lea and Tom don’t drink, we’ll keep the two lines apart” beats “I don’t drink, I’m not paying for wine”.
- Make it reciprocal. “And the two who don’t drink take the desserts separately, then.” The split stops being a favour and becomes a rule.
And one golden rule: the person who doesn’t drink should never have to ask. It is up to whoever keeps the accounts to separate the lines unprompted. A group where the non-drinker has to justify themselves every time will eventually lose them.
The cases that keep coming up
Only one person doesn’t drink. Splitting feels disproportionate for a single person. That is exactly when it matters most: they are alone in paying a surcharge the others never even see.
Pregnancy, medication, religion, training. The reason is nobody’s business. Splitting the expense doesn’t ask for it either — you isolate a line, that is all.
In a flatshare. This is where the gap gets genuinely heavy, because it repeats every week. The solution fits in one sentence: alcohol never goes through the common pot. Everyone buys their own, like cigarettes or their favourite yoghurt. No calculation, no negotiation, and the shared budget goes back to being what it should be: what everyone actually consumes.
Soft drinks. Yes, a fruit juice costs $2. No, we are not adding a third line. Splitting stops where it costs more attention than it returns in fairness.