7 email sign-offs that read passive-aggressive in 2025

Some sign-offs age like milk.

In 2025, remote and cross-cultural teams skim messages at speed, reading tone as much as content — your last line often decides whether the thread moves or mutates into a months-long misunderstanding.

The closer you choose is doing more than ending a paragraph—it’s deciding the temperature of the next one. Good ones create motion without pressure, gratitude without obligation, and clarity without edge.

The tricky part is that phrases which once sounded neutral now carry baggage, especially after years of inbox fatigue and Slack-induced hypersensitivity.

None of this is about walking on eggshells. It’s about choosing language that keeps people leaning in.

Here are 7 sign-offs that frequently land as passive-aggressive in 2025, plus the kind of closing energy that keeps momentum—and relationships—intact.

1) “Thanks in advance”

It’s efficient and, technically, polite. But in a year where everyone feels over-subscribed, pre-thanking can read like a promise you made on someone else’s calendar.

For many recipients, it compresses agency: you’ve already banked gratitude for work they haven’t agreed to do. That small pressure shows up in replies—slower cadence, curt tone, or silence when you actually need partnership.

A warmer, cleaner close acknowledges uncertainty and time.

You can thank the attention, not the outcome: “Thanks for taking a look when you can.” If the clock matters, name it specifically and give context so the ask feels anchored in a shared goal: “If you’re able to reply by Tuesday noon, I can include it in the client summary.”

Then, when they do help, send the real thank-you that lands like appreciation instead of assumption. It’s remarkable how much smoother projects feel when gratitude follows effort rather than trying to pre-authorize it.

2) “Per my last email”

There are legitimate reasons to point backward—recreating context, pulling a link out of a buried thread, reconciling different versions of the truth. Unfortunately, this phrase arrives wearing a red pen.

Even when you mean “see below for convenience,” many readers hear “I already told you and now I’m keeping score.” The conversation collapses into defensiveness, which is the least productive collaboration mode we have.

A better close sets the stage without the scold.

Try a quick, service-oriented recap above your sign-off: “Resurfacing the timeline below in case it got lost; I’ve pulled the two dates we need to lock in at the top.” Or, if you truly need acknowledgment, ask for it plainly: “Could you confirm these three points by EOD so we can move forward?”

You’re doing the cognitive lift for the reader, which is the opposite of passive-aggressive — it’s generous. And generosity buys you speed later.

3) “Please advise”

This is office-speak that survived because it sounds neutral. It rarely lands that way now.

In distributed teams, it can feel like you’ve tossed the problem back over the fence without specifying what you actually need.

People will either ignore it or reply with clarifying questions that slow everything down. The cure is specificity. If you need a decision, write the decision: “Could you choose A or B by Thursday?”

If you need guidance, show your work and propose a path: “Leaning toward Option A to hit the budget—any objections?” If you genuinely don’t know next steps, say so and bracket a small ask: “I’m stuck on vendor terms; would you be open to a five-minute steer or a sample clause you like?”

The sign-off that follows those lines can be simple—“Thanks for the guidance here”—because the value came from the part where you did the hard-thinking on their behalf.

4) “Looking forward to your prompt response”

There are moments when urgency is real — the language of urgency, however, doesn’t need to sound like a collections notice.

“Prompt” arrives dressed in legal stationery. It tends to harden the person on the other side just enough to slow them down. If timing genuinely matters, tie it to an outcome the other person likely cares about.

“If I can get your edit by 3 p.m., I’ll include it in today’s deck and save you another review loop.”

That close carries a different weight because it frames speed as a favor to the future them, not a favor to you.

If you’re worried the request will be deprioritized, give a gentle off-ramp rather than a threat: “If today’s tough, a quick ‘tomorrow works’ reply keeps us good.”

You turn the exchange from a demand into an invitation, and the sign-off can land as a partnership instead of pressure.

5) “Noted.”

One word, infinite chill—often the frosty kind. In fast threads full of stakeholders, it can be tempting to acknowledge and bail. The problem is that a one-word closer suggests finality without alignment.

People read “Noted.” as “I heard you, but I’m not engaging,” which is the corporate cousin of hanging up. Swap the performative brevity for a tiny recap and an action.

“Got it—updating slide 7 and removing the Q3 callout. I’ll send a fresh PDF after lunch.” Or, if their input changes nothing, acknowledge it with respect and state the plan: “Understood; we’ll keep the original copy for launch and revisit in the first patch.”

The extra sentence costs seconds and saves days. It signals you’re still in the room, and it puts the responsibility for the next move squarely where it belongs—on you, on them, or on the timeline you share.

6) “Regards” at the end of a tense thread

Language is regional, and in some contexts “Regards” is just neutral.

In high-stakes exchanges or after hard feedback, though, it often reads like a door closing. The shift from a lively back-and-forth to a chilly formal sign-off can make people wonder if they just lost you, which invites another round of clarifying mails no one wants.

Temperatures are contagious — choose the one you want reflected back.

After conflict, a close that reopens the path works better: “Appreciate the candor here—incorporating changes now.” Or, “Thanks for the push; I’ll send the revised doc at 4.” If you truly want neutral, your name alone is fine.

If you want warmth without cheerleading, “Best” still functions.

The point isn’t to juice the mood. It’s to make sure the final line supports the next productive action instead of announcing a vibe.

7) “Just following up” as a permanent ending

“Just” is a word we add to seem small; it also makes the request smaller than it needs to be. When messages keep ending with “Just following up,” they start to feel like pokes with no new information attached.

People delay because there’s nothing to grab. If you’re bumping a thread, add value or add a plan. “Quick bump with the doc attached in case it fell down the inbox—happy to go with Option A if I don’t hear back by Friday noon.”

Now the sign-off is actually steering the work, not broadcasting hunger for a reply. If the nudge is about scheduling, close with a specific floor: “If this week’s packed, I can hold 9:30–10:00 Tuesday or 3:00–3:30 Wednesday; whichever you pick, I’ll send the invite.”

The best follow-ups make inaction the heavier lift. The sign-off should feel like a friction-reducing choice, not a tap on the glass.

Final thoughts

The point of an email isn’t to display good manners — it’s to move shared work without bruising anyone on the way.

In 2025’s inbox, where attention is taxed and translation—human and cultural—is constant, the last line is leverage.

Retire the closers that sound like velvet hammers. Close with the thing you actually want to happen, the time it matters, and a thank-you you can repeat later without flinching.

That tiny discipline turns threads into progress and colleagues into allies. You’ll send fewer follow-ups, get fewer defensive replies, and give everyone—including yourself—the gift of a workday that feels a notch calmer. That’s not semantics. That’s design.