Is it possible that the other two are thinking by taking it to the boss that you were, in part, saying you didn't want it
That is how I interpreted the first post to. If I had been the boss I would have thought that the OP didn't want it so wouldn't have offered it back to her.
Yes, that's how I interpreted it as well at first. I had to go back and read the post a couple of times, and even then read between the lines a bit to realize that the OP actually wanted
the champagne. Uh, if that actually is the case, I'm still a little iffy on it.
Maybe next time the wording could be, "I received this as a gift for Client X, and I wanted you to know about it. I feel like it's a gift for the whole company, really, but I'm not sure how we would all share it. I wondered if it would be okay for me to take it home? Or is there something else that we should do with it?"
I think the attitude of "this is really for the whole company" is the most professional one to have in this situation. But, that also means, the default thing to happen with that gift is that everyone shares it. If that's not possible, the rest of the (future) work policy kicks into gear, meaning it goes to whoever is next in the rotation, or gets sold and the money split three ways, or whatever. There should be no expectation that it will automatically go to the person who initially received it or who wants it most. What if company policy already
said it was to be handed out on rotation, and it was the woman's turn to receive the gift, and she was like, "Yeah! I'll give it to my son, who loves expensive champagne!" Same outcome, but no room for complaint, really.
Also, you could end up with a "work policy" that all gifts end up going home with the boss! I mean, probably this particular boss wouldn't do that, but some would. So I think coming up with an official work policy would really just work to the protection of everyone--to avoid even the appearance