What's the sense of producing a 2003A series $2? Notice how far apart they are... 76 - 95 (19 years) 95-2003 (8 years)... 2003-2003A (hmm... a couple years) Any thoughts?
I don't get it either-- if you just print the bills, people might use them. Print them, they will spend.
New bills in every denomination are printed when they're needed. For everything except $2 bills, that's about every day. They were printed in 1976 for the bicentennial celebration, in 1995 because they ran out of '76's, and in 2003 because they ran out of '95's, etc. Also, if you look at production for each series: 1976--590,720,000 1995--154,880,000 2003--125,440,000 It appears they produced far too many in 1976 and it took 19 years to get rid of them all. I read recently that usage of $2 bills has increased since 1999, though I can't for the life of me remember where. But, 230,720,000 2003A's have been printed so far, we'll see how long it takes to use them all.
The technical reason for changing from Series 2003 to 2003A was that Anna Escobedo Cabral replaced Rosario Marin as Treasurer of the United States on January 19, 2005, so the signatures on the note changed without any other alteration of the design and legends. $2 bills printed after July 10, 2006 (if any) would be Series 2003B, as a result of Henry Paulson replacing John W. Snow as Secretrary of the Treasury, causing another signature change..
Originally Posted by sanskrit It appears they produced far too many in 1976 and it took 19 years to get rid of them all. I read recently that usage of $2 bills has increased since 1999, though I can't for the life of me remember where. I believe that it was in a recent issue of Coin World, I'll try to find the reference, but it was within the last two months.
Because the only change was in the signature. A new series of any denomination strats only when there is a design change other than the signatures of the Treasurer and Secretary of the Treasury.
Sorry Roy, but you are wrong on that. Before 1981 you would have been correct. Before 1981 the series date changedonly for changesin the design,or if BOTH signatures changed. If only one signature changed, the series letter changed. Since 1981 the date changesif the design changes, OR if the signature of the Secretary of the Treasury changes. If the signature of the Treasurer changes then just the series letter changes. So when the current printing plates wear out and are replaced it will be with Series 2006 or 2007 plates. (My uncertainty isbecause if they have already started making the plates they will be 2006. If they haven't and they produce them next year, they may be 2006 because that was when the change took place, or the may be 2007 because that was when the new plates that showed the change were made.) As to the recent huge increase in the number of to produced, I still wonder if the Fed is stockpiling the twos with the intent of making sure the new dollar coin succeeds by ceasing to order ones once the coin comes out and only supplying banks with coins,twos and the steadily declining supply of ever more ratty looking ones. (in order to do this they will need a large supply of twos already on hand because the BEP probably would not be able to supply them rapidly enough.)
Well, it's not the first time, and it won't be the last. Obviously I missed seeing anything about that change in procedure. Thanks for the update.
The next series is 2006, twenties with that series have already been released. I think the amount of twos printed is a little low to think about replacing the ones. One dollar bill production runs into the billions, and even if the Fed only ordered half the amount (twos being worth twice as much) it would still be billions. Anyway, wouldn't they need to get a law passed to get rid of ones? I wouldn't think they would have the authority to do that on their own.
Just because the twenties are series 2006, it doesn't mean that when other notes are changed that they have to be series 2006 as well.
Agreed, but I can't think of a reason why they wouldn't. A redesign of the five and hundred would do it, as was the case with series 2004 twenties and fifties versus 2003 everything else, but for just a signature change everything should *theoretically* be set to the same series. Granted, it is the goverment and they make little sense sometimes...
I think i have a stockpile of 70 or so 1976 series $2 bills. One is a star note, but a good chunk of them are CU.
