The penny costs nearly 4 cents to make. Here's how much the US spends on minting its other coins
Months after President Donald Trump called on his administration to cease penny production, the U.S. Mint announced this week that it had made its final order of penny blanks — and plans to stop making new 1 cent coins after those run out.
Coin production costs vary thanks to different raw metals used, complexity of their designs, labor needed and more. Many of those expenses have been on the rise — and the penny isn't the only coin entering our wallets today that costs more to make than it's worth (enter the nickel debate).
Here's a rundown of U.S. Mint production costs from the government's latest fiscal year.
Cost of the penny
Each penny costs nearly 4 cents — or $0.0369, to be exact — for the U.S. Mint to make and distribute.
In total, America's coin manufacturer said it shipped more than 3.17 billion pennies throughout its 2024 fiscal year. That's notably less pennies than it sent the year prior (when nearly 4.14 billion 1-cent pieces went out) — but circulating shipment for all coins was down about 44% overall. The Mint often changes its new circulation based on public demand and seasonal trends.
At the same time, the penny's 'unit cost' has gone up in recent years. The nearly 4 cent price tag is up 20.2% from the Mint's 2023 report, when a penny cost just over 3 cents.
Cost of the nickel
Each nickel costs nearly 14 cents ($0.1378) to make and distribute. That price tag is nearly triple the five-cent coin's buying power today.
The unit costs for both the penny and the nickel have remained above face value for 19 consecutive years, the Mint noted in its latest annual report. And, like the penny, the nickel has also seen recent price jumps — with the latest 14 cent cost up 19.4% from the 2023 fiscal year, when its cost sat under 12 cents.
U.S. Mint reported shipping 202 million nickels over its 2024 fiscal year, down from nearly 1.42 billion sent out the year prior.
Cost of the dime
Each dime costs nearly 6 cents ($0.0576) to make and distribute.
That represents more than half of the 10 cent coin's buying power. And the cost of producing and distributing the dime increased 8.7% over the last year.
In total, the U.S. Mint reported shipping 840 million dimes for its 2024 fiscal year — down from nearly 2.67 billion the year beforehand.
Cost of the quarter
The quarter costs nearly 15 cents ($0.1468) to make and distribute.
That's also more than half of the 25 cent coin's buying power today. The quarter's unit cost has increased by 26.2% since the Mint's 2023 report, when its price tag was closer to 12 cents.
U.S. Mint said it shipped more than 1.6 billion quarters in the 2024 fiscal year, down from about 2.27 billion the year prior.
Cost of the half-dollar
The half-dollar coin costs nearly 34 cents ($0.3397) to make and distribute.
That represents nearly two-thirds of the 50 cent piece's buying power. And its price has increased by more than 30% since the 2023 fiscal year, when the coin's production cost was just under 26 cents.
U.S. Mint said it shipped 52 million half-dollar coins in its 2024 fiscal year, up from 18 million coins shipped in the 2023 period.
What about cash?
Coins aren't the only form of physical money that vary in production costs. Dollar bills also see differences due to paper and ink used, labor and other expenses.
Here are the latest printing costs for U.S. paper notes, according to the Federal Reserve:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
There is a solution to America's gerrymandering problem
The redistricting war going on across the country began with the president asking — or, as some see it, directing — Texas to redraw its congressional map to give the GOP as many as five additional House seats in the 2026 midterm elections. Given that the party that holds the White House typically loses House seats in the midterms, and with a thin GOP majority after the 2024 election, the president is looking for any advantage to hold the House. This action has elicited outrage among Democrats, pushing the most populous state, California, to redraw its map. Several other states, including Ohio, Florida and Indiana, are also investigating the possibility of redrawing their maps, in an all-out gerrymander fest to squeeze every last seat out of Congress. Yet the maps drawn after the 2020 census were already well gerrymandered. Of the 435 total seats, just 36 were deemed competitive in 2022, defined as winners determined by a margin of victory below 5 percent. In 2024, the number of competitive seats jumped to 43. Though the problem appears to be the gerrymandering of congressional maps, the real problem is how representation is determined. The popular vote in each congressional district determines its winner, but the way the population of each state is dissected into discrete districts partitions the popular vote across each state. Since each district seat is represented by a winner-take-all vote, the design of each state's congressional map effectively determines how its voters are represented in Congress. Take, for example, Massachusetts. Its nine congressional seats are all represented by Democrats. In the 2024 election, five of the seats were uncontested. Among the four contested races, the closest margin of victory was 13 percent. Yet in the presidential race, 36 percent of the votes cast were for Donald Trump, the same percentage that voted for the Republican candidates in the four contested seats. This begs the question: Should these 36 percent of voters have some GOP representation? A similar situation occurred in Oklahoma, with all five of its congressional seats held by Republications, even though 32 percent of the votes cast were for Kamala Harris. Given that computational redistricting can draw House maps that are either maximally gerrymandered, provide sensible voter representation, or anything in between, there is no need for maps to be drawn by redistricting commissions, whether they are independent or made up of partisan legislators. The necessary mapping criteria specified by state laws can now be incorporated into mapping algorithms. Examples of such criteria include compactness of districts or preserving communities of interest. The only role for redistricting commissions is to specify the desired bias of the map. Gerrymandered maps demonstrate that we no longer have representation of the people but of the parties, making Congress a de facto House of Mis-Representatives. At the core, the problem is how members of the House are elected, and indirectly, the Electoral College. As long as voter preferences are packed into discrete ongressional district seats, the current gerrymandering wars will continue to discount and ignore voters. In fact, Trump told a group in 2024 during his campaign that they would not need to vote again if he were elected. Despite not knowing precisely what he had in mind, he may indeed be correct, given that representation of voters is mostly predetermined. Is there a solution? Continue to hold elections with congressional districts. However, the number of seats won by each party should be allocated by each party's state popular vote. Then the top vote getters, either in absolute number or in percentage of votes won, across all the districts from each party are assigned seats, up to the number of seats won by the party. This means that all the representatives in each state would be at-large, representing all the people of the state. A formula for rounding would be needed to determine which party gets the partial seat fraction, much like how congressional apportionment is used after each census to determine the number of House seats in each state. With such a system, in Massachusetts, Republicans would have won two congressional seats and Democrats would have won seven. In Oklahoma, Republicans would have won four seats and Democrats would have won one. Such a process would neutralize the impact of gerrymandering, since each state's haul of seats would be determined by the state popular vote, giving every eligible voter the added incentive to cast their vote. The net effect of such a system would likely not yield a difference in the overall number of House seats held by each party. It would, however, redistribute party representation across all 50 states. Most importantly, it would neutralize the benefits of gerrymandering to the parties, since each state's popular vote would determine representation. —Such a new system would require a change in the Constitution something that is highly unlikely in this vitriolic political environment. Yet without such a change, gerrymandering will continue to erode the influence of voters and elevate the power of parties. Texas's actions to redraw their congressional map midterm has unleashed a war on democracy. More accurately, it has taken gerrymander politics to unprecedented levels. The final outcome will be less voter representation and more partisan party politics. What the Texas 'seat steal' effort demonstrates is that, in the eyes of parties, voters are no longer relevant. Every voter in the 2026 midterm elections who is disgusted with such disrespect should write in an unnamed candidate, 'Other' — if such a name won a seat, it will send a strong message that gerrymandering is no longer acceptable, that the current toxic mapping system is shattered beyond repair, and a new model for earning representation is needed. Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a computer science professor in the Grainger College of Engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. As a data scientist, he uses his expertise in risk-based analytics to address problems in public policy. He is the founder of the .
CNET
a few seconds ago
- CNET
This TP-Link Wi-Fi 7 Mesh Router 3-Pack Is Down to a Record Low of $420 Right Now
It's back-to-school season and with so much academic information available online, slow internet speeds are a no-go. Faster Wi-Fi isn't just great for students, everyone in the rest of the family can benefit from having fewer delays as they work, watch movies or play games. Upgrading to a Wi-Fi 7 router can boost your Wi-Fi connection, and we've spotted a deal that can help you save big bucks. The price of a TP-Link Wi-Fi 7 router 3-pack is usually $550, but it's down to a record low of $420 at Amazon for a limited time. Plus, with concerns over technology prices going up due to tariffs, now is a smart time to invest if you've already been considering this type of system. If you don't need all 3 routers, you can grab the 2-pack for just $300, which saves you $150 over the original asking price. Shoppers who want a single router can grab one for just $200 after clipping the on-page coupon that provides a $30 discount. Whether you choose a one-device, two-device or three-device setup, you'll be getting a whole-home mesh system that promises to blanket the area with reliable and fast internet connectivity. The system offers tri-band connectivity and superfast speeds of 5,188Mbps on the 6GHz band, 4,324Mbps on the 5GHz band, and 574Mbps on the 2.4GHz band. That's more than enough to stream 4K videos from your favorite services to a whole battalion of devices around the home. Hey, did you know? CNET Deals texts are free, easy and save you money. With smart homes becoming more and more the norm, people often have a lot more devices connected to their Wi-Fi network than they might think. These systems support more than 200 devices at any given time and can cover homes of up to 7,600 square feet with two access points and even more if you choose the three-pack. Despite that, the whole system is quick and easy to set up in minutes and can be managed using just a smartphone. An important note to consider is that while CNET does feature TP-Link models on our list of best Wi-Fi routers, US departments are considering a ban on these routers. We will monitor this story closely. Our evaluation of the hardware itself has not changed, but out of an abundance of caution to our readers, CNET has refrained from naming any TP-Link routers as a top recommendation for now. Consider the risk of a potential future ban before you buy. Why these deals matter This is a solid price on a mesh router. Whether you're getting one or picking up two, you'll find significant savings. Keep in mind that the 3-pack is at a record low. But these limited-time deals from Amazon won't last forever. These could be a great option for people who need the best of the best, but not everyone will need such a capable Wi-Fi setup. For you, we have a list of the best mesh router deals that we constantly update to make sure you're getting the best possible deal, no matter your needs.
Fast Company
a few seconds ago
- Fast Company
Palantir, Nvidia stocks slip as Wall Street edges away from its records
Wall Street is edging lower on Tuesday following drops for Palantir and other stars that had been riding the mania surrounding artificial-intelligence technology. The S&P 500 slipped 0.4% and is on track for a third straight modest loss after setting its all-time high last week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 8 points, or less than 0.1%, as of 11:50 a.m. Eastern time, and the Nasdaq composite was down 1%. The heaviest weight on the market was Nvidia, whose chips are powering much of the move into AI. It sank 2%. Another AI darling, Palantir Technologies, dropped 5.7% for the largest loss in the S&P 500. It has seen bets build up sharply among investors this year that its stock price will drop, according to S3 Partners. Only Meta Platforms has seen a bigger increase in what's called 'short interest,' where traders essentially bet a stock's price will fall. Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, fell 1.7%. Criticism has been rising that stock prices have shot too high, too fast and have become too expensive. One way companies can make their stock prices look less expensive is to deliver solid growth in profits. Palo Alto Networks climbed 4.7% after reporting earnings and revenue for the latest quarter that topped analysts' expectations. The cybersecurity company also gave forecasts for profit and revenue in its upcoming fiscal year that were above Wall Street's. Home Depot's rise of 3.1%, meanwhile, was the biggest reason the Dow was doing better than other indexes. The Dow had been flirting earlier in the morning with its own record, which was set in December. The retailer reported results for the latest quarter that were a bit short of what analysts expected. But it nevertheless delivered growth in revenue and stood by its prior forecasts for revenue and profit over the full year. Other big retailers will deliver their latest profit updates in coming days. Lowe's and Target are on deck for Wednesday, while Walmart and Ross Stores will report on Thursday. The week's likely headliner for Wall Street is arriving on Friday. That's when the chair of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, will give a highly anticipated speech in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The setting has been home to big policy announcements from the Fed in the past, and the hope on Wall Street is that Powell may give a hint that cuts to interest rates are coming soon. The Fed has been keeping its main interest rate steady this year, primarily because of the fear of the possibility that President Donald Trump's tariffs could push inflation higher. But a surprisingly weak report on job growth across the country may be superseding that. Traders on Wall Street widely expect the Fed to cut interest rates at its next meeting in September in order to give the economy a boost. Treasury yields have come down notably in the bond market as a result, and they fell on Tuesday. The yield on the 10-year Treasury eased to 4.31% from 4.34% late Monday. Strategists at Bank of America, though, warn that Powell may not sound as inclined to cut interest rates as the market is expecting. He could remain non-committal and discuss the possibility of a worst-case scenario for the economy called 'stagflation.' The Fed has no good tool to fix that situation, where the economy stagnates at the same time as inflation remains high. On Wall Street, Tegna rose 4.1% after Nexstar Media Group said it will buy the owner of 64 television stations across the country for $22 per share in cash, giving the deal a total value of $6.2 billion, including debt. Nexstar, which owns the CW and local television broadcasters of its own, added 0.4%. The companies said combining will give them a broader reach and allow them to better compete with Big Tech and legacy media. Viking Therapeutics tumbled 43% after the biopharmaceutical company released results from a clinical trial of its oral tablet, which could treat obesity and other metabolic disorders. In stock markets abroad, indexes rose in Europe after falling modestly in Asia. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index slipped 0.4% as market heavyweight SoftBank Group Corp. fell 4% after it announced it was taking a $2 billion stake in U.S. chip maker Intel.
