My solution: Double the purchase cap to at least $20,000 a year.
By David Enna, Tipswatch.com
Last week, TreasuryDirect again sent emails asking holders of savings bonds in gift boxes to deliver them as quickly as possible. I have written about this in the past (here, here, and here) but this email seems to step up the urgency.
The gift box program is used almost exclusively by investors in Series I Savings Bonds, a highly attractive, very safe inflation-linked bond. For more on gift box basics, read this from TheFinanceBuff.com.
I didn’t receive the email, because I delivered all our gift box I Bonds in 2024, the year they were purchased. But readers have sent me the text (you can read the full email and explanation here). Highlight:
Dear TreasuryDirect Customer,
It’s time for some spring cleaning! That includes clearing out your TreasuryDirect gift box by delivering purchased gift bond(s) to your intended recipient. We encourage any TreasuryDirect customers with undelivered gift bonds to deliver them promptly after purchasing so your recipient can access and manage their gift now. …
While you can only deliver one gift bond at a time, there is no limit to the total amount a recipient can receive. However, once they have received $10,000, they should not purchase additional savings bonds that year because gift amounts are applied towards the purchase limit.
Note the wording here: 1) You can deliver only one set at a time, 2) but you can deliver as many individual sets as you want, at any time, and 3) after the delivery, the recipient will not be able to purchase additional savings bonds that year.
In other words, the recipient must make any traditional I Bond purchase — up to $10,000-per-year purchase cap — before receiving the gift box deliveries. After the purchase, the door is wide open for deliveries of unlimited amounts.
This policy, which I Bonds investors have known about anecdotally, appears to create a giant loophole and allows investors with a trusted partner to buy and deliver unlimited I Bonds in one year, one month, even one week.
TreasuryDirect has created an FAQ on the gift box program, which more or less clarifies implications of the email:
Is there a limit to how many gift bonds I can deliver to recipient(s)?
You can only deliver one gift bond at a time. There is no limit to the amount a recipient can receive; however, once they have received $10,000, they should not purchase additional savings bonds that year because gift amounts are applied towards their purchase limit.
Can my recipient cash out gift bonds over the annual purchase limit once they are deposited into their account?
There is no limit to the amount of bonds a recipient can cash out from their TreasuryDirect account, regardless of how the bonds were acquired. Bonds can only be cashed out if it has been at least one year since the bond was purchased.
Is there a deadline for delivering gift bonds?
Delivering gift bonds proactively prepares you for upcoming enhancements and enables your recipient to experience the full benefit of your gift.
Is delivering my gift bonds mandatory?
You are encouraged to deliver gift bonds now to ensure you are prepared for coming enhancements and so your recipient can experience the full benefit of the gift bond.
What happens if I don’t deliver my gift bond(s)?
Gift bond recipients are the sole legal owners as soon as the bonds are purchased, so holding undelivered gift bonds introduces potential complications. While no changes are currently being made to the gifting process, delivering your gifts now reduces the risk of possible issues in the future.
Will there be changes to the gift bond program or is it being eliminated?
Future changes to the gift bond program are still being determined. However, there is no impact to your participation at this time. Stay tuned as more information becomes available on how we’re enhancing your customer experience.
My interpretation
For well over a year, TreasuryDirect has been hinting at major changes to the gift box program and possibly its entire savings bond purchasing system. This email steps up the urgency with a plea to clear out all gift box savings bonds as quickly as possible.
At the same time, it opens the door to “abuse” of the system by allowing unlimited gift box purchases and immediate deliveries. OK … it really isn’t abuse since the Treasury is clearly allowing it as long as deliveries are made quickly (there is a 5-day waiting period). With this plea, Treasury has backed its way into an unintended consequence.
The urgency is strange since Treasury has been hinting at upcoming changes for 18 months, even before President Trump’s election in November 2024. Did the administration turnover delay the changes? Are they now ready to roll out?
A bit of history
Investors never really noticed the gift box program until fall of 2022, when the I Bond had a variable rate of 9.62% and was about to transition to a rate of 6.48%. Those I Bonds had a fixed rate of 0.0% but the composite rate of 9.62% was extremely attractive (the 1-year T-bill was yielding about 4.5%). I Bond mania was in full swing and the gift box program became a viable strategy for investors with a trusted partner.
At that time, the consensus view was that gift box purchases of $10,000 could only be delivered one at a time, each year, and any delivery would lock the recipient out of additional purchases or gift box deliveries in that year. Some investors bought 10 sets in 2022 and it appeared they would have to sit on those 0.0% I Bonds for delivery over the next 10 years. Once TreasuryDirect opened the floodgates with emails urging deliveries “as soon as possible,” those investors could immediately deliver and redeem. The loophole sprang open.
I was never a fan of using the gift box strategy unless the fixed rate was historically high, because the fixed rate is permanent. The only time I used the strategy was in 2024, when the I Bond’s fixed rate was 1.30%. Later that year, I delivered all the gift box swaps and figured I would never again use the strategy.
Common-sense solution
Why do investors use the gift box strategy? Most of the time, these are fairly wealthy people looking to build a stockpile of inflation-protected cash in a very safe investment. For them, the $10,000 per year purchase cap is too small to make a difference in their asset allocation. So they craftily resort to the gift box.
Here’s my solution:
- The Treasury should immediately raise the savings bond purchase cap to $30,000 a year — equal to the cap that existed from 1998 to January 2008. Adjusted for inflation since January 2008, that cap would be $46,000 today.
- It should eliminate the gift box program or alter it in a way that allows only small purchases and controlled deliveries. Gifts from grandparents to kids were nice in the past when Treasury issued paper savings bonds, but less accessible in our new age of electronic investments.
As a compromise, I’d accept raising the purchase cap to $20,000 a year — $40,000 for a couple. That would make the I Bond more attractive for sophisticated investors. And it would create an expanded opportunity for investors without a trusted partner, who are essentially locked out of the gift box strategy.
And another thing … TreasuryDirect, please be upfront about future changes you are planning. Let us know in clear terms what to expect.
And a reminder … If you are planning a purchase of the April-issue I Bond, make sure to place your order at TreasuryDirect no later than Tuesday, April 28. Purchases “completed” on April 30 will be May-issue I Bonds. From TreasuryDirect:
I expect we will see the new fixed-rate / composite rate announcement Friday morning about 10 a.m. EDT. I will be posting an update.
Did you get the gift box email? If so, what are your plans? Would you consider using the strategy in 2026 to lock in the 0.9% fixed rate?
• Confused by I Bonds? Read my Q&A on I Bonds
• Let’s ‘try’ to clarify how an I Bond’s interest is calculated
• Inflation and I Bonds: Track the variable rate changes
• I Bonds: Here’s a simple way to track current value
• I Bond Manifesto: How this investment can work as an emergency fund
—————————
Donate? This site is free and I plan to keep it that way. Some readers have suggested having a way to contribute. I welcome donations, any amount. And FYI, ads on this site pay for about one visit to Costco.
—————————
Follow Tipswatch on X for updates on daily Treasury auctions and real yield trends (when I am not traveling).
Feel free to post comments or questions below. If it is your first-ever comment, it will have to wait for moderation. After that, your comments will automatically appear. Please stay on topic and avoid political tirades. NOTE: Comment threads can only be three responses deep. If you see that you cannot respond, create a new comment and reference the topic.
David Enna is a financial journalist, not a financial adviser. He is not selling or profiting from any investment discussed. I Bonds and TIPS are not “get rich” investments; they are best used for capital preservation and inflation protection. They can be purchased through the Treasury or other providers without fees, commissions or carrying charges. Please do your own research before investing.
Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities 
I actually want the gift box to stay because I use it to give actual gifts. I just wish I could do so without having to ask the giftees for their SSN as that’s super awkward.
Pegasus, you are absolutely right and that is why TD didn’t really vet its migration to no paper bonds. It knew that that was the vehicle for gifting in the greatest sense. I started over 50 years ago with minor relatives for funding college, filed tax returns for accruals for tax recognition purposes, physically delivered at beginning of each school year, etc. Now all the focus is on immediate deliveries from gift box which I do when I get the misguided TD annual letter! TD blew it! Peace
Still think people need to consider who is on the other side of this issue. Every broker, every bank, every insurance company, every corporate and municipal bond issuer, every credit union … None of them want to see you send off your money to a safe government sponsored investment that you may hold for 30yrs. Where is their vig in that? Seriously doubt we will get a increase in the limit of 10k. Who do you think was behind the original drop from 30k/30k? Holding that limit to 10k is a way to slowly eliminate the IBond program altogether.
Alas great point. And the current adminstration is nothing if not in the pocket of Wall Street. The president and the treasury secretary are billionaires and the incoming chair of the federal reserve is also super wealthy. Not much connection with the man in the street there.
And only 20 years ago the Republicans wanted/tried to privatize Soc Sec! Thus there will be NO foreseeable remedial action to Soc Sec allowing it to go belly-up!
Since the loosening, non loosening, clarification or I dont even now how to quantify it, of the gift box “rules”. Emails from Treasurydirect. And multiple confirmations that all is ok to do so.
Over the past year I have contributed over 200k to my wife’s account and 200k to mine with the gift box.
Ditched all my bond funds. This is my sole inflation, bond allotment.
Not a single issue in doing so. So all you gift box naysayers. Whether right or wrong. Whether gaming the system or not. I now have what I want in iBond allocation. Took advantage while allowed.
Sailor George, Amen, I did exactly the same thing, 200k to my wife’s account and 200k to mine with the gift box. This was after transferring 100k from those accounts to our trust account. I now have peace of mind that I have my I-Bond allocations done and I can do a large ROTH conversion this year from my IRA and reduce my RMD’s.
Maybe it would be better to just get the $10,000 / year than none at all.
I think it unlikely that I bonds or the savings bond program go away anytime soon. Even if savings bonds give the government more of a headache than it’s worth, the optics would be terrible. The President and the Republican party are being beaten up in the polls on rising inflation/ worsening affordability. There is a real risk that they lose majorities in the House (a virtual certainty) and perhaps the Senate as well in the midterms. So they would quit a popular program that helps citizens cope with inflation? On the contrary, the time is ripe for increasing those annual purchase limitations. David’s open letter on behalf of I bonders is timely. Fingers crossed!
I feel the $10k is too small bore to matter either way, although people willing to jump through the hoops of $10k are also the most likely to be engaged in voting their representatives. And taking away something without even a pretense of something better gives a bad taste.
I see according to the US Treasury unmarketable (I-bonds, EE bonds) Savings Bonds Sold as a Percentage of Total Debt Held by the Public, as of March 2026 amounts to 0.5% of the total debt held by the public.
It doesn’t appear to me likely that worry about ‘the optics would be terrible’ in the cancelling of a small program, with relatively high customer service costs, would be any significant concern to the current government.
I always assumed that the I Bond program was initiated by the government, largely as a show in its own confidence to be able to control inflation. Conversely, were the govt. to end the program I would interpret that as a loss of confidence in the ability to control inflation. Of course, this administration may not care one way or the other.
I believe the big money holders of the US debt in Marketable US bonds indicate every day their confidence in the US Treasury bonds and credit worthiness, shown in the open market Treasury bond pricing in the billions of US Treasuries traded each day.
If you read the wording of the FAQ quoted in the article, they use phrases such as “upcoming enhancements“. This is not the language they would use if they were going to eliminate I Bonds entirely. The focus is squarely on the gifting process, and enhancing it is not the same as eliminating it, although they use generic language to avoid committing to any particular course of action, which is government-speak for not being ready to announce anything yet.
“Upcoming enhancements“, just like “new and improved”, almost always mean “worse and likely to get more worse”. You have to understand Orwellian to interpret anything coming from companies and government.
I-bonds are too convoluted: the mystery about how fixed rates are set, the gift box complications, the buying as many you like if you have a trust, the bizarre “warning” emails, the mis-information you get when you phone (hint: ask for an old lady who has been working there for 30 years if you want a correct answer), with changing annual limits from $30,000 to $10,000, with only being able to buy them through TD when you could a while ago buy them at any bank, with the strange warning that the Savings Bond Calculator only works with paper bonds when in fact it works fine with electronic bonds although sometimes you have to split your denominations into two $5,000 bonds instead of one $10,000 bond, with the really complicated forms if you want to change ownership title (some forms need a bank medallion signature guarantee as I recall), with TD’s ancient (some would say quaint) web site. Perhaps a major overhaul is needed. I could see the government ending the savings bonds program altogether. Maybe for existing savings bond holders, the government would make them an offer that they could not refuse.
Much truth here, but also recognize that any future changes the government makes could be a negative for mom-and-pop investors. I hope not. The current system, as clunky as it is, works fairly well except in the 2% of times when it doesn’t, and the 2% of times people take deep dives into the loopholes.
A little tongue in cheek but…2% and the source of that number is? Mere speculation…there is enough of that “everywhere”…facts are much nicer! Is that what you would want TD to read “as your letter to TD?” Have a nice evening. Oh, it works fine if you know what “you” are doing!
I haven’t had any concerns with IBonds and expect IBonds will remain available to provide a great inflation-protected option.
Canada has eliminated issuing any inflation adjusted government bonds. The US could easily do the same.
You point out many of the rules that have been built around the I Bond program which add complexity to it, but there is no indication the government is going to end the program. They have already taken steps to streamline it by eliminating paper bonds, ending the option to direct part of your IRS refund to buy I Bonds through your tax return, and ending the use of C of I as a new payment destination.
As a bond, it has a unique function that remains intact. While we may disagree with some of those rules and wish they would improve them, they all have valid reasons for existence as far as I can tell.
I just got off the phone with treasurydirect seeking guidance on whether an individual could receive two or more $10,000 ibond gifts in a single calendar year. The answer appears to be no, or at least the telephone assistant was unable to verify in his databases that this was permissible. Hence, his conclusion was no. If anyone has any information to the contrary, I would appreciative.
I had the opposite conversation in 2024. And many Bogleheads reported the same.
One change I would like to see is making I bonds eligible for Roth IRAs. You can buy TIPS in a Roth. Why not an I bond? I don’t think it would be too difficult to do.
If the Treasury decided to privatize the savings bond program, I think IRA accounts could be possible. Of course, one of the current benefits of an I Bond is that for most people interest is tax-deferred, making it a stealth traditional IRA, but one without RMDs or loss of the state tax exemption.
Well, more like one with one very big RMD at year 30.
True, but the maturity date is flexible, so you can time redemptions to avoid a huge tax hit.
Before Series I existed there was such an IRA savings bond called an Individual Retirement Bond, but they haven’t been issued since 1982, before most people even had an IRA. There are still vestiges about them in the IRS instructions which is the only reason I know anything about them. But maybe this means the statutory authority/regulations are already there and could be reactivated.
Recall quite well those early 70/80s Bonds…low dollar amount and, vaguely, recall an age cap of some form but was meaningless…know seniors who bought some. Low dollar tax shelter…just tried to read up on them but did not succeed
Many thanks for another well written article. I am very glad to see the “new” interpretation further solidified. My wife and I made significant use of the gift box strategy in ’23 and ’24. Made minor additions in ’25 and will be making minor additions tomorrow. While the gift box strategy works well for us, the whole thing seems rather silly and I support eliminating the limit entirely or seting it at something like $500,000 per year.
Top jobs of the future:
content creator
influencer
[government program] navigator
trusted partner
I used the gift box approach a year ago to get more 1.3% fixed iBonds and I am glad it was available. But not everyone has access to a trusted partner for that. Raising the personal limit above $10K seems like a no-brainer.
These repeated emails over 18 months about possible changes have lost their luster. Action is not required, just suggested. Time to actually put out real info about a specific change and time line or stop talking about it. Might that need a regulation package?
Do we know any reason the $10K limit hasn’t been raised? Other than not being a priority apparently.
Back in 2001, I believe you could get 30K in paper bonds and 30K in electronic. Was very nice but starting in 2031 I will be paying tax piper so, as in life, things are both good and bad. Think at spund point you could also get your tax refund issued as an Ibond. This is all too complex…
Yes, and when I Bonds were a relatively new security, not as well-known as now, you could not only by $30,000 paper and electronic but could also buy them with a credit card. Hard to believe in view of all the savings bond program changes since then.
My wife and I took some airline trips on all those credit card points.
My wife, ever the airline points hunter, did the same in 2001.
I’m opposed to eliminating the gift box in favor of (for some) a too paltry $20k or $30k yearly limit, which can take a long time to build a significant (for some, especially singles) position. And why not $100k, or $200k? I see the gift box as a savings vehicle for individual savers (not suitable for institutional investors), who fear their savings could be ravaged by inflation, with TIPS having many disadvantages. A US debt crisis with debasement (likely in our future?) could be a crushing blow for retirees. Sure the gift box is a backdoor, but a much smaller one than Roth conversions and backdoors (for those who otherwise don’t meet Roth contribution income limits).
At some point, when promised changes don’t come, the promise rings hollow. We’ve reached that point. But this newly “sanctioned” loophole is really a Grand Canyon -sized one. They don’t seem to care.
And/again no discussion on why no letter by the author to TD on proposing a regulatory change as well as no discussion on why yearly transfers over $10k to a recipient can be “properly” conducted with the same result! With all this chatter why not advocate…TD should privatize or stop the program and reduce their headcount…clear example of being careful what one wishes for! The “hostility” (“here, here, here and now here”) toward TD on the gift box is unbecoming…just my thoughts….what says you
I am a fan of TreasuryDirect, honestly, and have used it for 25 years in Legacy and Electronic forms. I am a frequent defender. No hostility. And if you don’t see this article as a public “letter” to TreasuryDirect urging sensible changes, I must be an awful writer.
I honestly like the TreasuryDirect website. It’s simple, it works, and it doesn’t have advertisements.
The website’s gotten much easier to use in the past couple of years.
In my view, the view of a regular reader of this site, because this article (and there, there, and there) within arguably the most prominent I Bond-related web publication despite its title focusing on TIPS, is advocacy and constitutes the open letter to TD that you suggest in point of fact.
In my opinion, there is nothing unbecoming about making suggestions on how to improve this program. There should be a higher annual purchase limit, the gift box should have clear rules codified in both writing and in practice, and we should demand greater responsiveness, clarity, and transparency from our government.
Wow…a regulatory requested action letter by media post…never heard of that. Bet TD hasn’t either. Who collects all of the post(s) and put them into the regulatory history file? Why have there been other direct mailings by the author to TD in the past? And the TD process for same is? Copy them and send to TD and bypass the middle person?
Well said
Yikes. “Hostility”? “Unbecoming”?! The First Amendment protects our right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”!
Here’s one way to let Uncle Sam know:
https://www.regulations.gov/deregulation
I submitted a suggestion to eliminate or increase the $10k limit in 31 CFR 363.52, although I doubt anyone actually monitors this “suggestion box.”
I hope they keep the giftbox option. For the last few years it has solved the problem of gifting my daughter 10,000 a year. She is very independent and handing over a check was always awkward and I could tell she disliked it. She didn’t need the money but I liked the idea of giving her the inheritance she would eventually get earlier. Having the money delivered via the giftbox was much easier and allowed her to use it as an emergency fund she could pretty much ignore.
I’m hoping they keep the giftbox and, perhaps, set an automatic delivery after 3 to 6 months to counter the problem of the gift initiator dying before gifting and all the problems that causes.
Your use here, gifts to a daughter, seems like a realistic use for the gift box, as it was intended.
I am unmarried and have been frustrated by the purchase cap for I bonds which is ridiculously low. I too haven’t opted for the gift box strategy because it would seem to invite problems. My solution has been to purchase EE bonds as well, which don’t seem to be great given the current interest rates on offer. I started buying EE’s in 2014 when I realized they double after 20 years. They did limit my losses in the bond market wipeout of 2022, as did I bonds.
And what to do now as retirement draws near? I find the TIPS ladder thing confusing and complicated. Perhaps lean into high grade municipals or a long term treasury fund with Vanguard? Hopefully 2022 won’t repeat anytime soon.
This is a great blog. I love all the free discussion and everyone is fairly civil. Have you thought David of who your successor might be?
Re: “Have you thought David of who your successor might be?”
Obviously I’m not David. But he has written of constructing a TIPS ladder with maturity dates to his 90s. I’m sure he won’t want all those lovely TIPS to “go to waste” by “outliving” him, so we should expect him to be around for a long time. 🙂
Dr Matt…have you considered trust(s), or a sole proprietorship, etc. one should (is) not be yearly limited even if only $10K for an individual account. Have fun!
I’ve used the sole proprietorship EIN from my solo 401(k) for $20k a year for some time now, and I tend to think that is plenty for me.
The Treasury needs to fund 35 trillion in debt, seems like any way possible of attracting investors to buy the debt should be examined. I believe the British still sell what are called Premium Bonds. They have lottery feature. Can buy these up to 50000 pounds. They have drawings every month and award prizes. Some lucky winner can get up to a million pounds tax free. The overall payout and cost run to about 3.6%. Since every one seems to be betting on just about everything these days, let’s turn these into lottery scratch offs. Instead of throwing the spent scratch offs in the trash, throw them in the junk drawer. Gather them up 5 to 10 years latter and at least get your initial money back.
That premium bond scheme is really amusing to me. Thanks for sharing.
The savings bond program is immaterial to our debt and our deficit. I posted this a few articles back:
I Bonds are a rounding error – only comprising $86 billion of our $38 trillion in debt. Their balance is down from $89 billion from the year prior. Issuance, including the inflation adjustment, runs less than $6 billion per year.
EE bonds are even smaller at $27 billion.
While that means there is little to gain by changing the fixed rate formula, it also means there is little to lose by changing the formula or eliminating the program completely.
Not saying they will or are even considering such, just that the logic works both ways.
Rocky, you hit at an important point: The savings bond program (especially I Bonds) were set up for small-scale, mom-and-pop investors, not so much to relieve the government’s debt problems. In the past, maybe, but today that debt is way out of control. So these savings bonds are sort of a “gift” of a very safe, reasonably rewarding investment.
I believe Canada has already eliminated issuing any inflation adjusted government bonds.
I think your reference to “the [$30,000 annual] cap that existed from October 2002”, Should be to September/October 1998.
Also, do you have any comment on the March 1 elimination of the Zero % C of I for new accounts and the hint that the Zero % C of I is slated for elimination.
You are correct, and I have fixed the article. TreasuryDirect has some very odd info in its timeline, but obviously that $30,000 purchase cap existed in the 1999 to 2001 era of very high fixed rates. On the Zero % C of I, the change is another indication that TreasuryDirect is planning to change its purchasing systems. I wrote about that here: https://tipswatch.com/2025/10/26/treasurydirect-sends-another-clear-message-changes-are-coming/
What’s the fixed rate going to be after April 30?
My forecast is for a fixed rate of 0.9%, same as the current rate. We won’t know for sure until April 30. Read this: https://tipswatch.com/2026/04/12/i-bond-dilemma-buy-in-april-in-may-or-just-keep-waiting/
How ironic that the purchase limit on inflation-adjusted savings bonds is not itself ever adjusted for inflation.
Delicious, delicious irony.
Indeed! Given I’ve historically no one to participate in the Gift Box shenanigans with, I’ve felt left out. I’d happily double my annual purchase if I were given a straightforward way to do so by the US Treasury.
Here’s hoping to future higher limits! Since 2019 we’ve seen 29% cumulative inflation, but I-Bond purchase limits haven’t budged since 2012.
I’ve only used the gift box for a younger non-spouse relative who has been redeeming the bonds to pay for higher education expenses. So I’ve been periodically delivering bonds when those bills come due. This approach I’m more comfortable with instead of doing a full one time delivery. It’s worked out well so far and would like to continue to have that option for the time being.
I’ve heard from other readers making this point: The gift box can be used to pass on money to a younger relative to redeem a bit at a time, possibly when they are in a low tax rate. I think this is in line with the way Treasury intended it to be used.
AmD…and I’m sure everyone is/should be aware that at the time gift box “gifts” are made they are deemed under gift tax law future interests when to nonspouses and require a gift tax return being filed (even if no tax is due) at that purchase time…that is what should be changed…too many Gotchas that have real impact!
You only need to file the IRS gift tax return form (form 709) when you exceed the annual gift tax exclusion towards that giftee. for 2025 and 2026, the annual limit is 19k per person you are giving a gift to. IE if you have two people you want to gift, you can gift a total of 38k (19k each) without having to file form 709. So, if your only gift to the person in the current tax year was a $10k ibond from your gift box, no additional form needs be filed (10k < 19k). gift them two $10k ibonds in the same tax year, however, and you will need to file out form 709 (20k > 19k).
PS to John’s post…one must look at the difference between present interest and future interests in deliveries for gift tax issue. One CANNOT use the annual exclusion for future interests! Enough said…look at thefinancebuff.com. The lifetime exclusion is what precludes most being exposed for/of a gift tax but the annual exclusion isn’t for future interests…need “delivery.” Ergo, a gift tax return for annual gift box transfers to nonspouses is real!
For clarity, here is the Finance Buff take on Gift Tax rules and I Bond gifts:
Gift Tax Form 709
There’s no tax for receiving gifts. Gift tax is on the gift-giver.
Buying I Bonds as a gift counts as a completed gift in the year of the purchase (not the year of the delivery). There’s no limit on how much you can give as gifts to your spouse (unless the spouse isn’t a United States citizen). Each person has an annual gift tax exclusion amount for “present interest” gifts to each non-spouse recipient, which is 16,000 in 2022 and $17,000 in 2023. If the total “present interest” gifts (in I Bonds and other forms) during the year from one specific giver to one specific non-spouse recipient go above this annual gift tax exclusion amount, you’re required to file a gift tax return on IRS Form 709.
The gift tax annual exclusion amount for gifts to a non-spouse recipient is $0 for “future interest” gifts. You’re always required to file a gift tax return when you give “future interest” gifts to anyone except your spouse. It’s not clear to me whether the I Bonds you buy this year as a gift but hold for delivery in a future year count as a “present interest” gift or a “future interest” gift. To avoid ambiguity in determining whether it’s a “present interest” gift or a “future interest” gift, only give gifts to your spouse or deliver all gifts to non-spouse recipients within the same calendar year.
Unless you’re also giving the same non-spouse recipient gifts in other ways, buying and delivering $10,000 worth of I Bonds as a gift in the same calendar year falls below the annual gift tax exclusion amount, which doesn’t trigger the requirement to file the gift tax return.
I looked at thefinancebuff.com. Harry is unsure whether it counts as “future interest” or not: “It’s not clear to me whether the I Bonds you buy this year as a gift but hold for delivery in a future year count as a “present interest” gift or a “future interest” gift. To avoid ambiguity in determining whether it’s a “present interest” gift or a “future interest” gift, only give gifts to your spouse or deliver all gifts to non-spouse recipients within the same calendar year”. And searching the web does not come up with any further clarity (boggleheads thinks it does, redditors are split, a legal clarity website seems to think the gift exclusions counts, so not “future interest”, etc).
PSS…The calendar issue raised in this thread should be carefully analyzed. When is a transfer by gift box to the spouse determined? At the end year? Really? And what does a calendar year have to do with the character of transfer by gift box to a nonspouse…in both cases it is determined at the time of that initial transfer.
TD says the gifted item before delivery to the recipient belongs to the recipient subject to some very important conditions, i.e. its a future interest if not immediately enjoyed by the recipient (perhaps this is what TD is trying to “dodge,” ie the characterization of items in a gift box for gift tax purposes in its inartfully drafted email). A future condition creates a non-present interest but a future interest subject to a condition being removed, i.e. actual delivery to the gift box recipient.
In the paper bond day, all of this was a non-issue since the physical bond was delivered to the recipient or agent thereof.
Talk to your legal advisor if “real money” is involved!
Can’t wait to get the fall edition of the email from TD!
definitely talk to a legal advisor when unsure, as the information and arguments in both directions available on the internet (including yours) are not definitive. Though I suspect even legal advisors probably differ on which it is (as there are valid arguments that can be made on both sides of the issue) so perhaps a query to TD wouldn’t be amiss if you really want to know for sure.
I wonder if TD’s required 5 day holding period adds to thew complication of the calendar issue. What about a year-end purchase in which the 5 day holding period crosses into the new calendar year?
When the gift-box I Bond is purchased, that sets the issue month. The 5-day holding period applies to the delivery of the gift-box item, but it still can’t be redeemed for 12 months.
In hindsight, I probably should have had some discussion with this relative’s parents about setting up a 529 rather than going the I bond route for future educational expenses. Unclear to me why they decided to forego opening 529s for their children.
Thank you for this article.
Please fix the error in the reminder: April 28, 2026 is a Tuesday.
Thanks for catching that. It is fixed.
To answer your question, I’ve already used the gift box to secure the fixed rate for this year. I’ve been retired and out of the workplace for 28 years and unable to contribute to my IRA. I look at the I-Bonds as a way to differ my savings from immediate taxes like my IRA that I can no longer contribute too.
Do you feel that doubling the purchase cap to $20,000, or possibly $30,000, would eliminate the need to use the gift box?
No. I have already moved more than that in several gift transactions as my CD’s have matured. But I do think the cap should be raised for the single people that are unable to use the spouse gift box. I bought $30,000 back in 2001 and recently started buying again.
At that age if tax deferral is important to you, you should probably look into multi year guaranteed annuities. Unfortunately too many salesmen selling subpar products in this field but there are good ones out there, provided you are willing to lock your money up for five or more years.