Collectors Long For This Special '25-Cent' Coin Valued At Around $10,000

If you're expecting to receive a quarter as change from a purchase, you'd probably raise a fuss if the vendor handed over a dime instead. However, in the case of a recently discovered quarter/dime hybrid, it's easy to see how that mistake could be made. And what a fortuitous mistake it is. 

The year 1976 marked the 200th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and America's autonomy from Great Britain. It was a time marked by rampant patriotism, including an attractive revival of the $2 bill, parades, and even special automobiles. For example, Cadillac released a special red, white, and blue Bicentennial-Edition Eldorado. Not to be overshadowed by the newly invigorated $2 bill, the U.S. Mint also got into the act with special bicentennial versions of the three largest then-circulating coins: the quarter, Kennedy half-dollar, and Eisenhower dollar.

In the case of the quarters, these 1976 versions are easy to identify due to the date under the bust of George Washington, which reads "1776-1976." On the reverse side is a Colonial drummer and a "victory torch." These commemorative coins were struck in the cities of Denver, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. Examples that have been circulated in use somewhat, but are still pretty mint, can fetch about $6 to $10. However, one unusual example is worth far more.

To begin, the rarified bicentennial quarter isn't truly a quarter at all. Rather, it's what the coin community calls a "double-denomination." Per Professional Coin Grading Services (PCGS), that's defined as "two different denominations on the same coin." PCGS continues, "Double-denominations are frequently referred to by the denominations that they are made up of." In the case of the unique bicentennial coin being discussed here, the denomination is 35-cents. That's right, it's actually a quarter's artwork struck on a minuscule dime. 

Stranger still, the 200th anniversary quarter/dime hybrid was actually double struck (struck means pressed into a blank metal disk), meaning that the quarter's design was accidentally pressed twice. As if that's not complicated enough, the Roosevelt dime from 1967 onto which the quarter was double struck was already struck with the proper dime design. That translates into three layers of stampings on a too-small canvas. 

Such a quirky mistake would be unusual on its own, but this rare bird "quarter" was actually part of a "proof" series. Unlike valuable coins that you might have lying around, proof coins are specially struck for collectors, not general circulation. Fittingly, the quality control is typically better, with mint workers hand-feeding the coin blanks and examining them prior to release to the public. As such, major errors in proof coins are highly unusual.

Before divulging the value of this highly collectible, one of a kind piece, its backstory deserves a few words. The exact origin of this coin is a little murky, but it eventually fell under the ownership of the state of California, of all possibilities. Auctioned as part of a larger collection by the state, the double-denomination coin has since been split apart from the group and was authenticated by the PCGS in approximately 2020.

In June 2023, this coin was once again sold. This time at Heritage Auctions for a total of $9,000, which includes a healthy buyer's premium. While $9,000 certainly isn't pocket change (pun intended), one could argue that it should have garnered a much higher price. In the past, three other 1976 bicentennial quarters struck on dimes have fetched $6,900, $9,200, and an undisclosed amount greater than $10,000. However, those examples weren't proof coins, which are intended for collectors and held to a higher production standard. Therefore, errors within proof coins are much rarer.

In fact, a few coin collectors, called numismatists, have commented that the "error" discussed here may have been intentional. That is, a mint worker intentionally fed the 1967 dime into the works to create something unique. The fact that this 1976 double-denomination proof quarter didn't outperform similar, but less rare, coins by a wider margin may be a reflection on increased volatility within coin values over the past several years.