Should there be a comma after "i.e."? [duplicate]

If I remember correctly from English class, then one should put a comma after "i.e.", i.e., the Latin abbreviation for id est.

But lately I've seen the comma after "i.e." dropped in books. So what is the rule or consensus here if any?

Some books & journals use American English, while some use British English. In the American style of writing, a comma is inserted before and after i.e. However, in the British style of writing, a comma is inserted before but not after i.e.

It seems that the use of comma is found more often in American English, and even there, it is not always required.

Nevertheless, even though I prefer the comma and have sources to back me up, they almost all use hedge words like “usually” and “preferred.” I've also been told that the commas are used less frequently in Britain, and the only style guide I found that advised against commas was Fowler's Modern English Usage, which has its roots in British English. The bottom line is that in American English, I recommend using a comma after i.e. and e.g. You could probably make an argument for leaving it out in some cases, but do so at your own risk.

Personally, my UK-centric view is that I would put a comma after 'that is'; that is, if I were to use the long-hand, so to speak.

But I would not put a comma after 'id est'; i.e. although it may seem 'correct', I feel it impedes understanding, rather than aiding it.