| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 3,002 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12817 Posts |
http://news.coinupdate.com/bill-see...ements-4770/Interesting. If this bill passes it looks like, among other things, Silver Proof coins would end up being 99.9% Silver instead of 90%. Quote:
Under the bill, modifications would be made to the United States Code sections which provide authorization for the United States Mint to strike various circulation coins in a composition of 90 percent silver and 10 percent copper for inclusion within various numismatic products. The Mint currently strikes 90% silver proof versions of the dime, quarters, and half dollar for inclusion within the annually offered Silver Proof Set and similar products. The bill would change the composition requirement to "not less than 90 percent silver." This change would allow the United States Mint to strike the coins in the more commonly used composition of 99.9% silver, a move which the Mint has previously stated would yield cost savings. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr1698
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
That's kinda short-sighted; it's only cost-effective because silver is low. The moment prices rise they'd have to raise prices to match. Is that what we want?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4589 Posts |
Actually I've read that it's more than that. While it used to be that coinage was the biggest usage of silver, today most manufacturing and bullion is 0.999. With a large part of the "raw" material being silver bought at wholesale from (ultimately) retail purchases. Say you sell your silver stash to (city-name)G&SE - you know the one with all the TV ads. Call it 10 1oz rounds, $10 face in old quarters and five 2014 ASEs. 15.715 troy ounces of silver. Which would assay at about .985. They pick out the easy resales - the ASEs mostly. And sell the rest (your old rounds, old coins, granny's 0.925 sterling flatware they bought from the next guy, etc.) on to a refiner such as Dillon Gage. DG throws it all in a large pot, melts it, stirs the pot and casts it. Based on assay they find the batch is anywhere from 0.900 - all coin sliver - to 0.999 - all bullion. It can even be below 0.900 if junk or fakes slip in. They then refine the batch to 0.999 and cast it in large bars, for which there is already a cost ($x over spot) built in for the refining. Now the mint buys 1,000 ounces (including your 10.715) and has to alloy it *back* to 0.900 before manufacturing the blanks that become planchets that become your 2015 ASE which sell as bullion as 0.999. Which you buy from (city-name)G&SE when you add to your stash. -----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/ |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
Why does the Mint need a new Law to do that for?
Surely the Mint should have it's own legal power to simply market it's numismatic products within it's own legal regulatory framework.
That's quite a differnent situation to minting base metal coins for legal currency.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
261 Posts |
The US mint would then start to resemble RCM. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Surely the Mint should have it's own legal power to simply market it's numismatic products within it's own legal regulatory framework.
Not in the US. Here, Congress tells the Mint what to do, or approves their suggestions. I'm taking the point about "keeping up with the Joneses" regarding silver content for bullion, and changing my position on the issue. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
Why does the Mint need a new Law to do that for? Because the current law specifies they be 900 fine. And this proposal has been floated several times before. Edited by Conder101
04/08/2015 10:05 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
188052 Posts |
Would be interesting. I foresee a year when both .900 and .999 versions of the silver proof coins exist, hopefully in error and not a deliberate decision to make further expand collector options.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4589 Posts |
And the only way to tell is a $10k xrf or a TPG label... -----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/ |
|
Moderator
United States
188052 Posts |
I was not even thinking that far ahead.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1247 Posts |
bstrauss3, one of your statements confuses me.. Quote:and has to alloy it *back* to 0.900 before manufacturing the blanks that become planchets that become your 2015 ASE which sell as bullion as 0.999. the silver in the ASE's is .999, not the 90% standard used for coinage. It isn't the same as the AGE's which are .900 but by weight contain 1 oz .999 gold, (once it is purified again). I think that is correct. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4589 Posts |
SV: right, but the bill is not changing the .999 fine ASE but rather the .900 fine regular commems. like this year's US Marshall's coins... -----Burton 50+ year / Life / Emeritus ANA member (joined 12/1/1973) Life member: Numismatics International, CONECA Member: TNA, FtWCC, NETCC, EveryCountry (online) coin club Owned by three cats and a wife of 40+ years (joined 1983) Author: 3rd Edition of the Sample Slabs book, https://www.sampleslabs.info/ |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2734 Posts |
The 90% composition was designed to improve the wear characteristics of business strike silver coins, and since modern 90% silver strikes (1982-up commemoratives, 1992-up Silver Proof coins) are NIFC, there's no reason why future issues thereof shouldn't be .999 fine.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:And the only way to tell is a $10k xrf or a TPG label.. There would probably also be a weight difference, and a SG test could tell them apart as well. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Ohh, ive wanted an xrf bad but can't justify the expense. I wonder when the tech level will have them at the $1,000 retail mark? It might just change the hobby!
|
|
Moderator
United States
188052 Posts |
Hopefully this will not be a problem.
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 3,002 |
Posted 04/08/2015 07:54 am
