Talk:United States Treasury security

Total Debt

So what is the total debt held in treasury bonds, and by foreigners? Some number here would be nice. The external chart listing foreign holders lists all these different maturity dates- only last one is effective?, but total debt seems way too low (2.4 trillion) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.251.11.1 (talk) 23:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This info is way out of date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.127.183 (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Keep in mind, the majority of the debt is not held by foreign treasuries. Individuals, both foreign and domestic, corporations and even U.S. government agencies hold an enormous amount of the debt, but they are either domestic, and therefore don't qualify for the chart, or hold too little to appear on the chart. --ShadowRangerRIT (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Treasury bill

The way treasury direct is mentioned in this section is too like an advertisment for comfort. Howdoesthiswo 21:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

"Very liquid"... numbers please.

Questions

Maturity

On newspaper, for example, a treasury note will mature on Nov 08. What does this mean? It will mature on November 1st, 2008 or on November 30th, 2008? Thanks. Jackzhp 19:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Every issue has a specific day that it matures and that is cited when the bond or note is announced. It so happens that the most recent 3, 10, and 30 year bonds (notes) are issued and mature on the 15th of February, May, August, and November. The schedule is changed as the needs of debt management change. For example, 5-year notes used to mature on the 15th of the month. Those issued in the past two years or so, will mature at the end of the month. 18:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vajs (talk • contribs)

Spelling

The New York Times (and some of my friends who work in the finance industry) use the spelling "Treasurys" instead of "Treasuries". Can anyone give a reason for the preferred spelling?

Thanks, dyker_2000@yahoo.com

In the eyes of the NY Times, "Treasury" is an abbreviation for "Treasury Bond" with the word "Bond" removed. "Treasuries" means "more than one department responsible for money", e.g. "The U.S. and Japanese Treasuries today issued a joint press release that they would defend the U.S. dollar against currency manipulation". "Treasurys" is supposed to remind you that the word "Bond" is supposed to be in there.

This should be noted in the article, which incorrectly says "Treasuries."

Historical Treasury Bonds

This is a question requesting an answer, please.

I need to know if Treasury bonds purchased in 1880 would still be negotiable today. If so, when did they stop interst bearing. For instance a $1,000. treasury bond purchased in 1880. What would it be worth if presented for payment today? And is that possible? I have none. This information is for a book of fiction I am working writing.

Thank you. kelkraf@earthlink.net

I think you need to find a good history or reference work that covers this topic. I note however, that the Fed was only just coming together in the early 1900s. It sounds unlikely that you would have anything resembling a normal T-Bond from 1880, although I think it very likely that the government issued a variety of debt instruments prior to 1900. Beyond that, T-Bonds stop paying interest when they reach maturity. The bond would have had physical coupons attached to it, which would have normally been redeemed to collect the interest payments. The bond itself should still be worth the original principal or par value, (say $10,000), and the coupons would be worth the semi-annual interest payments, if they were present. So the ancient bond would not have appreciated to some astronomical value. Its value would have maxed out at maturity, and has remained the same since, except, perhaps, for it's value to collectors.--Fish-man 14:31, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Calculation of Yield

CAn anyone tell me the way to calculate yields of these t notes i.e. yield to maturity. abhishek65@hotmail.com

Hi, I have a sheet which explains the calculation, pls mail me on vrajesh.poonawala@citigroup.com

30-year Bond

What does it mean that, when the Fed re-introduced the 30-year bond, there was a higher-than-expected demand from foreign investors? Does it mean that foreign investors have more confidence in national security here--i.e. they have no doubts that the US will still be around in 30 years? Or do investors assume that all governments will continue to exist in some form, in which case this high demand reflects simply the expectation of a higher interest rate than EU or ASEAN countries offer? --I.B. iybet@hotmail.com

The all basis of bond trading is that US will never default.There may be higher rates of return elsewhere but the surity that the US will not default takes all investors to the US

The main risk is not default but devaluation of the currency which is also under control of the U.S. government. The Federal Reserve System is supposedly independent (but of course only until Congress amends the Federal Reserve Act accordingly) but they have a dual mandate which makes it unclear how much inflation they may create in an attempt to create employment. MMMMM742 (talk) 18:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Update on HH bonds

The HH bonds are no longer available per the trasury's website.

Yes, breaking news in govies! Who would have thought. I have poked in a change for this. --Fish-man 16:20, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

explain for non-technical readers?

I hope this isn't too pedantic, but I added a cleanup tag to the Treasury note section because I, as a non-expert in Treasury matters, could not understand it at first. I added my concerns in these html comments:

explain the calculation here to a non-technical reader; a par value price of 95:7 is 10 times (95 plus 7/32) which is 10 * 95.21875 which is 952.1875; are prices rounded? is : needed to distinguish from decimal point?

Also, Bloomberg and Marketwatch gives T-note prices in number-fraction format, eg. 99 5/8 and 99-25/32 - I could not find any quotes using decimal points. -213.219.161.27 14:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned this up and removed the tag. I've seen a lot a different notations for quoting bond prices, but never have I seen 95.7 as shorthand for 95 7/32. I believe that was an error. I added the four notations that I'm familiar with to the article. As for the question about rounding $952.1875 to $952.19, I feel that rounding to the nearest penny is such a common practice that it can be left unmentioned. However, I do not know for certain if the actual prices paid in the bond market do this, although I'd be very surprised if it were otherwise.

I added some more documentation with addition so that people can calculate the decimal price in the cases where + and the third digit is used. Riskglossary.com is a great resource for this kind of stuff, and they actually state the the decimal is sometimes substituted for the - or : (I've personally never seen the : myself). --Thesilence 18:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

TBill - Bond

My Question is, how do we identify whether the security is T-Bill or a normal Bond by looking into Security Description?

Is it like, if security is having zero copoun, it means its T-Bill?

If any one has answer to this, pls mail me on [e-mail address removed to divert spam]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.193.160.8 (talk) 05:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC). jhjewhjweqhjwekde —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.26.132 (talk) 15:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

People pictured on the bonds

Would it be relevant to include who is depicted on the different denominations of bonds here? This page has the information for I Bonds but there's no similar page for EE bonds. —Scott5114↗ 21:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Pricing

Does anyone know why Treasurys are priced in 32nds and the history behind using 32nds?

Thank you, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.27.111.132 (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Interest rate on T Bonds

The description of why 30 Year bonds were dropped in the 90's (used surplus), makes a lot of sense. However, with significant increases in the U.S. debit, I don't see why T-Bond (30 year) rates have not gone higher. The 90's rates were 8+%, and the 2006+ rates are under 5%. The discussion indicates "opportunity cost" ... but I'm not sure why this applies. I can understand it if foreign interests are bidding on these and keeping the interest down as a result of high demand (or more deliberate intention; one can envision a country with a massive trade surplus investing much of that in long term notes of the country with the deficit as a matter of agreement or appeasment.) 69.21.251.165 15:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Jim

United States of Where? Article needs GLOBALIZATION!

Errr, am I to assume the author thinks that there is only one country that issues Treasury Securities? (unsigned)

Agree with complaint about US-centred article. Canada also issues at least one of these types of securities. Since the article isn't "Treasury Securities of the United States", it should be expanded to reflect a world-view. --RealGrouchy 21:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Question: So the solution to being US centred is to say Canada also issues Treasury bills. I would not say that this is exactly a world view, what about UK, France, Italy, Spain, and probably all other developed countries (any maybe non developed ones too)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.29.77.101 (talk) 09:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I added a GLOBALIZE tag to the article. Article seems overly US-centric without, in many cases, making the US-centric point-of-view explicit. In other cases, the article specifies explicitly US-oriented information with no global view as to what a treasury security or treasury bond or whatever might mean in a non-US context. The article should either be globalized, or retitled to a US-centric Wikipedia article by adding United States in the title somehow. N2e (talk) 02:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Article renamed

After more than one year of discussion, no one has contributed any non-U.S. information to the article. Since the contents are strictly U.S.-specific, I have moved the article from Treasury security to U.S. Treasury security and removed the "Globalize" tag. I maintained the capitalization on "Treasury" because it is short for the "U.S. Department of Treasury." --HYC (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding replacement of lost savings bonds

It's mentioned that "savings bonds can be replaced if lost or destroyed". Can this process be explained? Thanks. Pzxkys 10:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It appears that paper savings bonds have social security numbers printed on them so that ownership can be traced.[1] However, the text you quoted is no longer in the article. --HYC (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

T-Bills and Medicare

Are T-Bills protected from Medicare calculations ?15.251.201.70 16:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean, is the interest subject to Medicare tax? If that's what you mean, then no; only earned income is subject to Social Security and Medicare tax, interest income (including income on bonds) is only subject to normal federal tax. US government bonds are also exempt from any state tax. 24.8.252.164 (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Basic questions not addressed

I was trying to learn about the federal bonds and the money system, but found it very difficult to read these artciles, as they ponder some insignificant details without adressing some very simple and natural questions:

• How is the bond interest determined? Is the interest guaranteed at maturity in advance? What are the typical interest rates and who determines them (on basic level, i.e. on the level of basic bonds)?

As mentioned in the article, the interest rate on marketable debt is established by auction. The basic method is as follows. The sale of a particular security is announced to the public - usually market news services report these. The sale will detail the total amount to be sold, the maturity of the security, the time of the auction, and the CUSIP identifying number of the security. You will see, for example, a tiny paragraph in The Wall Street Journal in section C on Fridays and Tuesdays detailing the sale. By the scheduled time (e.g., 1:00 est on Monday) bidders and their dealer representatives will submit bids through a system managed by the Bureau of Public Debt and the Federal Reserve. Each bid will specify how much money and at what interest rate the bidder would be willing to accept. The Treasury starts with the lowest bid (based on lowest interest rate bid, which is also the highest price for the debt bid) and cumulates the total amount of money bid. It continues until the accumulation equals the amount of debt to be sold. The interest rate bid at that point (called the stopout rate) becomes the interest rate for the issue. All bidders who were willing to accept a lower interest rate get their bid at the stopout rate. All other bidders get nothing. I believe one of my earlier versions of this article described that system as a Dutch, or single-price, auction.Vajs (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

• From what I have read here, it appears that bonds are sold on discount rates - say, 95 dollars for 100 bond. Does that mean that at maturity I will get 100 dollars for the bond, and that this is the way interest is handled?

That is exactly how discount is done.Vajs (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I really think this basic question - WHAT is the bond, i.e. what do I get if I buy the bond - without resorting to trade, what does the state, issuing the bond, promissing. This is central question, and it should be answered in straightforward way, so that a person not familiar with economic terms can instantly get the answer.

Lolpo —Preceding comment was added at 08:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Why was all the specific information deleted from the article?

I have undone the edit that removed discussion of other marketable debt beyond Treasury bills. I have done so because the picture of US Treasury securities would be unbalanced otherwise. T-bills make up 21-24% (depending on time of year) of all outstanding marketable US Treasury debt. TIPS currently make up about 10% and notes and bonds make up the remaining 65% of the debt. To eliminate 75% of the topic seemed to create an inaccurate picture. Vajs (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vajs (talk • contribs) 14:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I will concede that there was a lot of technical information about cash management bills, TIPS, and other questions that could seem fairly specific. The current article, however, is a serious distortion of the financing of the US Treasury.

Here is the breakdown: marketable securities account for about half the outstanding debt (currently at $9 trillion) of the US. The other half - nonmarketable securities - is mostly the holdings of trust funds such as Social Security. To be honest, savings bonds (which are in the class of nonmarketable debt) make up such a miniscule part of the outstanding portfolio that the heavy focus on them in this article would lead to a complete misunderstanding of how the government is financed.

Look at it this way - every week, the Treasury sells between $40 and $75 billion in T-bills alone. The amount of outstanding debt grows on net monthly by an average of $40 billion: $25 B in nonmarketable and $15 billion in marketable. Savings bonds make up no more than 2% of the total current debt and the number is shrinking.

I will concede that it is not easy to read the article and know what a bond is. I would suggest that the entire topic of fixed income securities could stand a review and a fresh outline. Certainly the recent events in the financial markets highlight the impact of fixed income securities. I do not believe that simply cuttting out entire sections is advancing this project. 18:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vajs (talk • contribs) 13:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Coupon payment dates

Does anyone know when the coupons are paid?

Are they paid in the same months for ALL bonds or is it worked out based on the maturity (so different maturities pay interest on different months/days). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.244.153.18 (talk) 09:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's on every six month anaversity of the actual bond. And I think they avoid issuing new bonds on Feb 29th of leap years to avoid the leap year birthday paradox. Jon (talk) 17:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

TreasuryDirect?

Any thoughts on adding a section or seperate article about TreasuryDirect? 66.191.19.217 (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

HH Bonds "Sold at a discount" ?

The article currently says HH Bonds are "sold at a discount and mature at face value". Sources I've found on the web say they were sold at face value:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/products/prod_hhbonds_glance.htm, from the US Govt, says "Unlike EE bonds, HH bonds are current-income securities. You paid face value, and receive interest payments by direct deposit to your checking or savings account every 6 months until maturity or redemption."

http://www.njseniorlaw.com/courier_article/estate_administration/us_savings_bonds.htm says "The redemption value of the bonds remains constant at the amount invested. Interest is paid to the bondholder every six months. When the bondholder cashes an H/HH bond, he receives his original investment back."

http://www.savingsbonds.com/bond_basics/hhbond1.cfm says "Issued: January 1980 to Present, at 100 percent of the face amount."

I leave it to somebody more knowledgable than me to make the change, if warranted. Peter Delmonte (talk) 02:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Treasury Inflation-Targeted Securities?

Is this a joke? Anyone have a citation for TIPS initially being called "Treasury Inflation-Targeted Securities" (with a funny acronym)? --Boreas231 (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Readers need to know the total amount of TIPS outstanding in dollars. This article is very inadequate.

Should be "inflation protected securities"

"Bail Out Our Banks Securities", a product of the Bush - Obama transition team? Possible dual presidential pictures on the new $3 bill? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.31.30 (talk) 19:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

TIPS

The citation (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/faq/legacychanges.htm) for the statement that 30 year TIPS are no longer offered does not support that statement, it discusses 30 treasury bonds and 20 year TIPS no longer being sold through some legacy system. Looking around treasury direct, there is no mention anywhere of 30 year TIPS ever being offered in the first place.

4.229.198.74 (talk) 23:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Also- TIPS are valued based off the CPI-U, not the Core CPI (which is implied when using just "CPI").--12.96.170.39 (talk) 16:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Found a potentially useful textbook reference that supports this statement: "Finance scholars Martinelli, Priaulet and Priaulet state that inflation-indexed securities in general (including those used in the United Kingdom and France) are an efficient way of diversifying a portfolio because they have a weak correlation with stocks, fixed-coupon bonds and cash equivalents. They can also be used by insurance companies and pension funds to optimize asset and liability management."[1] Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Please suggest the article text you would like cited to that source? SPECIFICO talk 16:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@User:SPECIFICO The TIPS section of United States Treasury security. I published it this morning. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I see. I misunderstood, thinking that was a quote of the source. I've made a copyedit and removed the redundant second sentence. Thanks for finding that source. SPECIFICO talk 13:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

China's holding

a section in the article refer to China as being the primary holder of bond. however on examination, China only hold under 30% of foreign held debt, and foreign held debt account for only 30% of total debt in circulation. multiplied: China therefore hold about 9% of total US debt. if we do the math where US has about 10 trillion debt, and China hold about 800 billion of bond, the 9% seem accurate. hence using the term "number one holder of U.S. debt" is inaccurate. the majority of US national debt is still in American hands. an interesting thing to note is that China did not buy the debt with it's own money. instead the money come from selling bonds. we are having a situation that is similar to paying 1 credit card bill with another credit card. we haven't seen the real bubble yet. Akinkhoo (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Discount Yield Calculation

The image with a formula for Discount Yield % has a term 360/Days till maturity....Why is it 360 as opposed to 365? 365 makes sense and appears on other sites, for example here —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teej (talk • contribs) 17:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

U.S. T-bills use a day count convention of Actual/360, which, for the purpose of convenient math, treats a year as being 360 days long. The "Actual" part means that months are treated as their real length; 30/360 would mean all months would be treated as if they were thirty days. Actual/Actual, which is what you were expecting to see, is used by U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, but not bills. See the day count article for more details. --ShadowRangerRIT (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No Pay Down of Debt / Reasons for Ending 30-Year Bond Issuance

The article had an unsourced statement that attributed the temporary disappearance of 30-year treasury bonds to the "pay down" of debt with the "budget surplus" which I deleted. First of all, the debt of the US Treasury has increased every year since 1957. No "pay down" of the debt has occurred in my lifetime, much less since the year 2000. Secondly, the idea that the Treasury was voluntarily ending longer-term issuance is suspect. Normally obtaining longer term debt has been the Treasury's preference, especially during times of low interest rates. A more plausible explanation for the disappearance of long-term debt is that they were having difficulty selling it. Someone may want to look into this question more deeply. John Chamberlain (talk) 18:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I added it back, with a reference. Granted, it's a press release and therefore not a perfect source, but the fact remains that the U.S. ran a significant surplus in the late 90s and the national debt decreased substantially. Now proving that that was the motivation for reducing and deissuing the 30 year debt is harder; someone else may be able to find a source for that particular assertion. --ShadowRangerRIT (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

A time series is available from the Department of the Treasury (here) A few datapoints for the debt held by the public:

09/30/1997 3,789,667,546,849.60

09/30/1998 3,733,864,472,163.53

09/30/1999 3,636,104,594,501.81

09/29/2000 3,405,303,490,221.20

09/28/2001 3,339,310,176,094.74

09/30/2002 3,553,180,247,874.74

09/30/2003 3,924,090,106,880.88

MMMMM742 (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Zero or negative yield

According to Bloomberg, the Treasury Department once sold four-week bills at 0% yield - who buys them? Why not just keep the cash? Who would offer the face value at an auction? Maybe the Federal Reserve? MMMMM742 (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

It sounds counterintuitive, but you have to remember that under some extreme conditions, even "cash" can be a risky asset. During the height of the November 2008 market collapse, the three-month T-bills were trading at a negative yield. Why would someone pay $1,000,050 for one million dollars of face value? Because of counter-party risk. If your cash was sitting in an account at, say, Morgan Stanley, and they were to become illiquid--a very real risk in November 2008--you could end up with far less than your one million. Treasury securities, on the other hand, are held as book entry by the government, so even if Morgan Stanley were to vanish, you'd still get your money back at maturity, minus the $50 you overpaid above par.

You can still ask, why not transfer the money to a safer institution? Sure, in normal times that's exactly what you'd do, but such transfers can take a day or two to complete. When banks like Lehman and Bear Stearns are dropping like flies around you, paying $50 per million for a good night's sleep doesn't seem too expensive. Owen× ☎ 16:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that leaves the question about the settlement of the transactions - according to Wikipedia, for government securities, it is 1 day, so if your bank is bankrupt within a day, you could still lose a substantial amount of money? And the same applies to the seller of the Treasury bill, if you don't buy it at an auction? MMMMM742 (talk) 15:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, that last part of my question was nonsense. If the seller goes bankrupt then you just have your money at the bank for a longer time. MMMMM742 (talk) 19:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Historical US Debt Distribution by Term-Length

It would be good to know both currently and historically how much (or what percentage) by term-length the US Debt is. The closest thing I've seen is http://trueslant.com/michaelpollaro/2010/02/19/interest-on-u-s-government-debt-a-brewing-time-bomb/ that has a graph near the middle of the page with the Average Years to Maturity over time, but I'm interested in something more granular. For example, how much debt (percentage and/or absolute) is held with 1-year term bonds vs. 5-year, 10-year or 30-year bonds?

It is clear that during low-interest periods (like now), Treasury would love to shift the ratios to the longer terms, but how successful have they been? The rate of shift might indicate confidence and have other implications that might be useful to observe.

Maybe this is irrelevant since it seems like most bonds have both a fixed and inflation-adjusted rate, but it would help to understand how the fixed component is going to play out and I guess assuming that the inflation-adjusted portion somewhat tracks GDP (or more importantly tax revenues), the fixed portion becomes more relevant.

Anyway, I'd welcome more data related to shifting term-lengths and a discussion of the implications. (I hope this is an appropriate place for this; if not, can you suggest another place.)

--Kjpires (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Transactions vs. Holdings

"There is fear that foreign countries hold so many bonds that if they stopped buying them, the U.S. economy would collapse; however, the reality is that more bonds are transferred in a single day by the Treasury than are held by any single sovereign state". Why on earth is the rate of transfer considered relevant to the risk of a buyers' strike? jiHymas@himivest.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.125.35 (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Discount rate formula

The anonymous user 99.46.205.85 wrote the following:

This is incorrect. The bond equivalent yield formula is shown,,, not the discount yield... the difference is 360 in the numerator, and 'face value' in the denominator.

about this formula:

${\text{Discount Yield}}(\%)={\frac {{\text{Face Value}}-{\text{Purchase Price}}}{\text{Face Value}}}\times {\frac {\text{360}}{\text{Days Till Maturity}}}\times 100[\%]$

This formula matches this source: [2]

So, I have left it in place for now but tagged it as disputed. If there are any experts that want to confirm or correct this vocabulary definition, that would be great. -- Beland (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Contradictory statement about Series EE Savings Bonds.

In the section about EE savings bonds, it says "At 0.10%, a $100 bond would be worth about $102 just before 20 years, but will be adjusted to the maturity value of $200 at 20 years (giving it an effective rate of 3.5%) then continue to earn the fixed rate for 10 more years." However, this statement contradicts itself. If its worth $102 just before the 20 year mark, it can't possibly be worth $200 at the 20 year mark. I'm sure I'm misinterpreting something.

137.125.142.65 (talk) 01:08, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you are. The entire point of Series EE bonds is that they are guaranteed to at least double their purchase price when they reach initial maturity at 20 years. So even if the actual accrued interest has not met the mark, the Treasury makes a one-time adjustment of principal to make it worth double the purchase price. (It continues to earn interest as a secondary maturation until the 30 year mark.) It's better explained in the United States Savings Bonds article. oknazevad (talk) 22:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect timing on 4/8 week Treasury Bills

The statement 'Offering amounts for 4-week and 8-week bills are announced on Monday for auction the next day, Tuesday, and issuance on Thursday.' appears to be incorrect at this time. The 4 and 8 week bills are announced on Tuesday, for auction on Wednesday, and issuance on the following Tuesday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.0.218.183 (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

References