.999 silver coming to US proof sets?

Could be, according to an article in this week's Coin World.

The mint, in the FY2013 budget, wants to change the wording of the law from "90% silver and 90% copper" to "no less than 90% silver".

The Deputy Director of the Mint wants to achieve product perfection by offering a pure silver product.

Thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The link is dead, and I can't seem to find it from the homepage (I'm not a subscriber). Maybe a summary?

 

The link is dead.

 

The Canadian mint is already one step ahead. They came out with a full .999 proof set this year including the cent. I ordered one. Probably where the US mint got the idea.

 

I read that article in Coin World today.
It claims commemorative dollars are struck in .999 fine silver - which is news to me!

 

Depending on how much more they charge for the set I would be interested. Just have to wait and see if actually happens.

 

Yeah that's news to me too. All the COA say 90% silver and even the weight of the coins are a little less than 1 oz and that's counting the non-silver portion too.

 

Here is the erroneous quote from Coin World, and clip from the digital version it was published in for the upcoming 3/5/2012 issue:

 

Linky: http://www.coinworld.com/articles/mint-touts-cost-savings-in-999-silver-switch/

 

that's not how I see it. sounds like they may use something other than copper for the 10%. or some mix with the coin still being .90 silver

 

This is the title of the article I linked above. [h=2]Mint touts cost savings in .999 silver switch[/h]

 

No savings for the consumer/collector. He's gonna pay more.......

 

No doubt

 

I responded to this on another forum. I think it is a big mistake. I might save a very small amount in manufacturing costs, but it would mean as much as a 10% increase in materials cost. Hardly a savings. Another problem is the way the bill is written. Nowhere does it actually call for 999 fine silver, it calls for "at least 900 fine" silver. This means that ANY fineness between 900 and 999 would be acceptable. That means that the actual fineness could could vary considerably from one batch of planchets to the next and all would still be acceptable. The collector could be paying a higher price based on the assumption of 999 fine silver and receiving 901 fine and that would be within specs! The planchet supplier would love it. Do a crude refining and if it comes back over 90% your done no further costly refining needed.

 

Wow, prescient thinking!

 

It's possible that this is what they mean, but it seems extremely unlikely. The discussion I've seen centers on the notion that alloying .999 down to .900 entails an extra step, one that adds to process cost. I don't think anybody's proposing an "anything goes" composition.

 

Agreed. I think the wording is to allow the mint wiggle room. If the .999 silver proof sets are a flop, they can go back to making .900 silver proof sets without getting additional legislation passed.

 

I'm sure they aren't intending to propose an "anything goes" composition, but the way it is written that is what could happen. What would probably be the determing factor is whether the planchet manufacturer is just buying 999 fine silver or if they are also refining the silver to make the planchets from. Either way you could have a problem. If they are refining once they are over 90% it's good enough. If they are buying 999 fine there would be the temptation to add some copper to the melt. As long as you add less than 10% by weight it will be over 900 fine and they are saving some on the silver. And unless the mint assays each melt and pays for that batch based on it fineness, how do pay for these planchets? You run the risk of paying for one fineness and receiving a lower fineness. Sorry I'm just not the trusting type.

 

I'll believe it when I see it. I see it as pretty unlikely.

 

I don't think the mint would try an "anything goes" strategy.
Could one years proof halves vary in fineness from one coin to another?
Why would anyone buy anything without a guarantee of purity?