zero cost to

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "zero cost to" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing something that does not incur any expense or financial charge. Example: "The new software update is available for zero cost to all existing users."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

31 human-written examples

And we're providing that at zero cost to employees.

The New York Times

We are carrying out high-quality projects at zero cost to the city.

The New York Times

We use their products reflexively, every single day, and much of it comes at zero cost to the user.

The New York Times

For these folks, Free Basics is great because it does exactly what it sounds like: grants people crucial, life-enhancing information at virtually zero cost to them.

The Washington Post

Surely it is not beyond the wit of the British to do something similar which, provided the construction is done by British companies employing British workers, could be done at zero cost to the UK economy?

The Guardian

In practice, the employer usually leases - rather than buys - the equipment from a supplier running an HCI scheme, and then leases it on to the employee at zero cost to the employer apart from the paperwork.

The Guardian - Money

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

29 human-written examples

One cost to the team that is less easily measured is the human manpower that is required in the garage.

The New York Times - Sports

Cost and Financing: The C$84 million cost to New Flyer consists almost entirely of the assumption and discharge of NABI's existing debt.

Forbes

The investment bank made a loss of 329 million in the fourth quarter, hit by restructuring costs, a 220-million-pound charge for litigation and regulatory penalties and a 333 million cost to pay a UK bank levy.

Huffington Post

Feed is one cost to consider.

WikiHow

"There are two costs to buying something," Mr. Shirky said.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "zero cost to" when you want to emphasize that something is provided without any financial burden on the recipient, often in contrast to potential costs or other options.

Common error

Avoid using "zero cost to" without clearly specifying to whom the cost is zero. For instance, saying 'the program is zero cost' is vague; clarify it as 'the program is at "zero cost to" the participants'.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "zero cost to" primarily functions as a prepositional phrase, modifying a noun or verb to indicate the recipient who does not bear any expense. Ludwig provides numerous examples showing its use across diverse contexts, supporting this grammatical function.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

60%

Science

20%

Formal & Business

10%

Less common in

Wiki

5%

Encyclopedias

3%

Reference

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "zero cost to" is a commonly used prepositional phrase that signifies something provided without any financial burden to a specified recipient. As Ludwig AI confirms, the phrase is grammatically sound and suitable for use in written English across various contexts. With a neutral register, it effectively communicates that there are no expenses for the intended beneficiary. Its usage is particularly frequent in "News & Media" and "Science", as well as Formal & Business contexts. For clarity, when using "zero cost to", specify who benefits from the absence of cost. Alternative phrases like "free of charge for" or "at no expense to" can be used to convey a similar meaning, maintaining precision and clarity in communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

at no cost to

Simplifies the phrasing while retaining the core meaning of being free.

at a cost of zero for

Rephrases "zero cost" to emphasize the numerical value of the expense.

free of charge for

Replaces "zero cost" with "free of charge", emphasizing the absence of any payment.

available for free to

Emphasizes availability and the absence of a purchase requirement.

at no expense to

Highlights that there is no financial burden placed on the specified recipient.

without charge to

Directly indicates that no fee or payment is required from the recipient.

without payment from

Explicitly states that no money is exchanged from the recipient's side.

provided gratis to

Uses a more formal term, 'gratis', to convey the idea of being provided freely.

complimentary for

Suggests the offering is a courtesy or gift, implying a gesture of goodwill.

for nothing to

Uses a more informal expression indicating no financial obligation.

FAQs

How can I use "zero cost to" in a sentence?

You can use "zero cost to" to indicate that something is provided without any financial burden on a specific entity. For example, "The training program is at "zero cost to" the employees".

What are some alternatives to "zero cost to"?

Alternatives include "free of charge for", "at no expense to", or "without charge to", depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to say "at no cost to" or "zero cost to"?

Both "at no cost to" and "zero cost to" are grammatically correct and widely used. "At no cost to" might sound slightly more formal, while "zero cost to" is more direct and common in contemporary usage.

What does it mean when something is described as "zero cost to" taxpayers?

When something is described as "zero cost to" taxpayers, it means that the funding or resources for that initiative are not derived from taxpayer money. This can be achieved through private funding, commercial sponsorships, or other revenue streams.