BUG: OutOfBoundsDatetime for large future dates like 9990-12-31

[maneranjit4]

Pandas version checks

• I have checked that this issue has not already been reported.

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the latest version of pandas.

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the main branch of pandas.

Reproducible Example

import pandas as pd
df = pd.DataFrame({
    'account-start': ['2017-02-03', '2017-03-03', "9990-12-31"],
    'client': ['Alice Anders', 'Bob Baker', 'Charlie Chaplin'],
    'balance': [-1432.32, 10.43, 30000.00],
    'rank': [52, 525, 32],
})
df["account-start"] = pd.to_datetime(df["account-start"], format="%Y-%m-%d")

Issue Description

Getting an error as OutOfBoundsDatetime

Expected Behavior

it should parse the date and covert the '9990-12-31' to datetime dtype

Installed Versions

INSTALLED VERSIONS

commit : d9cdd2e
python : 3.9.13.final.0
python-bits : 64
OS : Windows
OS-release : 10
Version : 10.0.22631
machine : AMD64
processor : Intel64 Family 6 Model 154 Stepping 4, GenuineIntel
byteorder : little
LC_ALL : None
LANG : None
LOCALE : English_United States.1252

pandas : 2.2.2
numpy : 1.26.4
pytz : 2024.1
dateutil : 2.9.0.post0
setuptools : 58.1.0
pip : 24.3.1
Cython : None
pytest : 8.2.2
hypothesis : None
sphinx : None
blosc : None
feather : None
xlsxwriter : None
lxml.etree : 5.2.2
html5lib : 1.1
pymysql : None
psycopg2 : None
jinja2 : 3.1.4
IPython : 8.18.1
pandas_datareader : None
adbc-driver-postgresql: None
adbc-driver-sqlite : None
bs4 : 4.12.3
bottleneck : None
dataframe-api-compat : None
fastparquet : None
fsspec : 2024.5.0
gcsfs : None
matplotlib : 3.9.0
numba : 0.60.0
numexpr : 2.10.1
odfpy : None
openpyxl : 3.1.5
pandas_gbq : None
pyarrow : 16.1.0
pyreadstat : None
python-calamine : None
pyxlsb : None
s3fs : None
scipy : 1.13.1
sqlalchemy : 2.0.31
tables : None
tabulate : 0.9.0
xarray : 2024.6.0
xlrd : None
zstandard : 0.22.0
tzdata : 2024.1
qtpy : None
pyqt5 : None

[sai-srinivasan-v]

Hi, I have manually tested the main branch and this issue does not occur.

[snitish]

Agree with @sai-srinivasan-v. This bug is present in 2.2.3 but not in main anymore.

[MarcoGorelli]

yup - this is part of an intentional change that's being tested for, so I think it's OK to close this- thanks for the report!