(Based in part on this question.)
If I purchase a new dish that would require immersion, and I use the dish FOR a gift (I bring brownies on the dish to my Jewish neighbor), and I do not intend to collect the dish after the brownies are gone:
See this article by R. Aryeh Lebowitz, discussing the very similar case of purchasing a dish which has been pre-filled with candies to give as a gift, which I think addresses most of your questions.
I am going to answer the questions in reverse order, as I think the logic is easier to see this way.
From R. Lebowitz:
Rav Hershel Schachter has ruled that candy dishes require tevilah even before the first usage. The recipient is obligated to empty out the contents and immerse the utensil before eating anything from the plate.
Presumably, the same holds true here; the recipient may not use the dish for its function of holding/serving the brownies, but must instead transfer them to another dish.
One of R. Lebowitz' suggestions in the case of the pre-filled candy dish is as follows:
The author of Sefer Shiurei Halacha Al Purim writes that he asked Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach whether, in a situation in which the buyer has paid for the item but not yet done any formal acquisition, the store may then do the tevilah for the buyer. Rav Shlomo Zalman ruled that while payment alone does not effect a transaction, it suffices to turn the utensil into meal utensils. Similarly, Ohalei Yeshurun (p. 64 n. 212) cites the ruling of Rav Moshe Feinstein that as soon as a purchaser expresses clear intent to buy an item, it is classified as a meal utensil and is therefore ready for tevilah. A viable solution may be to have stores only sell glass and metal candy dishes with advance orders. Once the item is ordered and payment is made, the store can immerse the dish on behalf of the customer.
The implication for your case is that the gifter himself may indeed tovel the dish, as it is "classified as a meal utensil and is therefore ready for tevilah". This is the key difference from the case under discussion here. The tevilah done by the gifter then works for the recipient.
This is not discussed directly in the linked article, but I think the gifter has an obligation to tovel the dish for two reasons.
Firstly, because he has purchased it with intent to use it himself for food preparation, as discussed above.
Secondly, as noted in R. Lebowitz' article:
[I]t would seem to be a violation of lifnei iveir (placing a stumbling block in front of the blind) to sell a utensil that requires tevilah to a Jewish consumer who will likely not do so. Since the average recipient of a gift, even if normally scrupulous about immersing utensils, may not realize that the candy dish that came full of candies will require tevilah the store bears some responsibility to inform the consumer.
I assume the same holds true for the gifter in your case - to avoid issues of lifnei iver he must either tovel it himself (which we established above that he is able to do) or at the very least inform the recipient that he needs to tovel it before (even a first-time) use.
