US presidential gift-giving: From pandas and elephants to Boeing jets, a diplomatic tradition evolves

US presidential gift-giving: From pandas and elephants to Boeing jets, a diplomatic tradition evolves

Gift-giving is a time-honoured tradition in American presidential history—often symbolic, sometimes quirky, and occasionally controversial. While most people exchange gifts on birthdays or holidays, US presidents receive them nearly every day, especially from foreign leaders. These gifts serve as tokens of diplomacy, cultural exchange, and friendship. But they’re also tightly regulated by law, especially when their value stretches into the millions—as is the case with the luxury Boeing jet offered to President Donald Trump by Qatar, the Washington Post reported.

From symbolic gestures to a flying palace

President Trump’s announcement that he plans to accept a Boeing 747 from Qatar, potentially as a temporary Air Force One, drew scrutiny not just for its optics, but for its legality. Under federal law, presidents and other federal officials can accept foreign gifts over $480 in value only if they declare them and pay appropriate taxes or turn them over to the National Archives.

Historically, foreign gifts have been ceremonial. They include everything from inline skates (Netherlands to George W. Bush) to a basketball signed by Xi Jinping (to Barack Obama). A crocodile attack insurance policy presented to Obama during a 2011 trip to Australia offered $50,000 in the event of a fatal encounter with one of the country’s most fearsome predators. And then there are animals—baby elephants for Eisenhower and Reagan, a puppy for Bush, and a Cold War-era dog from the Soviet Union for JFK.

But the Qatari plane—reportedly valued at hundreds of millions of dollars—raises far different stakes. It is not a token of symbolic friendship but a strategic asset. If accepted, it would almost certainly require significant retrofitting to meet presidential security standards and has triggered questions about whether it skirts legal restrictions on foreign gifts.

Ceremonial tradition, diplomatic messages

Presidential gifts have often reflected the quirks and interests of each president. Ronald Reagan, an avid horseman, received numerous saddles. Barack Obama, known for his love of sports, was gifted a presidential-themed longboard and basketballs. In 1996, the National Archives mounted an exhibition titled Tokens and Treasures, showcasing gifts received by 12 presidents and playfully noting it was “putting the present in president.”

Not all gifts are displayed in libraries or museums, though. Most end up in the custody of the National Archives or are held in presidential libraries—unless the recipient pays taxes on them to keep them privately. The Resolute Desk in the Oval Office is one of the most iconic foreign gifts in US history. Given by Queen Victoria to President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1880, the desk was built from the timbers of the British naval ship HMS Resolute, symbolising friendship and shared maritime history between Britain and the US.

Legal framework for foreign gifts

The US Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act requires all US officials, including the president, to report and disclose gifts received from foreign governments. Gifts valued over $480 must either be returned, kept with a formal declaration and tax payment, or transferred to the federal government. The intent behind the law is to avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance that US foreign policy can be swayed by extravagant gifts.

This makes the Qatari jet an unusual—and possibly problematic—case. Even if the aircraft is considered a gift to the federal government and not Trump personally, the circumstances raise questions about whether it could influence diplomatic or defence arrangements.

For centuries, gifts to US presidents have celebrated alliances and conveyed goodwill, whether they’ve taken the form of exotic animals, hand-crafted artifacts, or sports memorabilia. Trump’s potential acceptance of a Qatari aircraft, however, marks a significant departure from tradition—one that blurs the line between ceremonial diplomacy and strategic procurement. As the legal and political implications unfold, the incident adds a dramatic new chapter to the long and often colourful history of presidential gift-giving.