• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Suppressors Houston we may have a problem

GBTX01

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Sep 14, 2001
109
68
44
Dallas, TX
new gun control steps

WASHINGTON (AP) — Striving to take action where Congress would not, the Obama administration announced new steps Thursday on gun control, curbing the import of military surplus weapons and proposing to close a little-known loophole that lets felons and others circumvent background checks by registering guns to corporations.

Four months after a gun control drive collapsed spectacularly in the Senate, President Barack Obama added two more executive actions to a list of 23 steps the White House determined Obama could take on his own to reduce gun violence. With the political world focused on Mideast tensions and looming fiscal battles, the move signaled Obama's intent to show he hasn't lost sight of the cause he took up after 20 first graders and six adults were gunned down last year in an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

One new policy will end a government practice that lets military weapons, sold or donated by the U.S. to allies, be reimported into the U.S. by private entities, where some may end up on the streets. The White House said the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to be reimported since 2005; under the new policy, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms.

The Obama administration is also proposing a federal rule to stop those who would be ineligible to pass a background check from skirting the law by registering a gun to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks as individuals if they want to register guns.

Vice President Joe Biden, Obama's point-man on gun control after the Newtown tragedy thrust guns into the national spotlight, was set to unveil the new actions Thursday at the White House.

The event in the Roosevelt Room will also mark the ceremonial swearing-in for Todd Jones, whose confirmation to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives after six years of political wrangling to fill that position was another of Obama's post-Newtown priorities. A Senate deal to approve the president's pending nominations after Democrats threatened to change Senate rules cleared the way for Jones' confirmation last month.

Still out of reach for Obama were the steps that gun control advocates and the administration's own review say could most effectively combat gun violence in the U.S., like an assault weapons ban and fewer exceptions for background checks for individual sales. Only Congress can act on those fronts.

Although Obama and Biden have said the fight is not over, there is scant evidence that there is more support for gun control legislation than there was in April, when efforts died in the Senate amid staunch opposition from the National Rifle Association and most Republican senators.

"Sooner or later, we are going to get this right," Obama said that day in the White House Rose Garden, with the families of Newtown victims and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords — herself a victim of a gunman — at his side. "The memories of these children demand it, and so do the American people," the president said at the time.

In the months following the Senate vote, Biden has claimed that at a handful of lawmakers who opposed expanded background checks have told him privately they've changed their minds and want another chance. But Biden and White House officials have not named any of those lawmakers.

These days, Obama mentions gun control with far less regularity than when it appeared the Senate was poised to take action, although Obama did meet Tuesday with 18 city mayors to discuss ways to contain youth violence. And with immigration and pressing fiscal issues dominating Congress' agenda, the prospects for reviving gun legislation appear negligible.

With Jones' confirmation at ATF, the White House has completed or made significant progress on all but one of the 23 executive actions Obama had previously ordered in January, the White House said. Still lingering is an effort to finalize regulations to require insurers to cover mental health at parity with medical benefits, although the White House said that it is committed to making that happen by the end of 2013.

The new rules for guns registered to corporations will follow the traditional regulatory process, with a 90-day comment period before ATF reviews suggestions and finalizes the rule. Last year, ATF received 39,000 requests to register guns to corporations and trusts.

___

Reach Josh Lederman on Twitter at http://twitter.com/joshledermanAP
 
I wonder what they'll do with pending transfers to trusts.

I can imagine that I'll get a call from NFA branch saying I need to submit FP cards and photos and undergo the BG check before approval. Glad I spent the money on an estate attorney to set up a solid trust. Errrrrrrr!!!!
 
It has 90 days for review. Contact your representative. As far as pending I would not think anything in the works now would be effected but you never know.
 
A trust is not a corporation..... Let's not get all wound up over something that hasn't taken affect yet. Contact your state reps and congressmen. Have them oppose any executive orders on gun control.
 
When they say guns, they mean suppressors and SBR's in addition to fully automatic weaponry. Luckily, there is a 90 day wait period. Note that he also made it impossible for the CMP to bring Garands back into the country and distribute them. He is basically pissing all over gun owners with these moves. How many crimes and murders were committed with Garands last year? The year before? I guess he is pissed because Clint Eastwood held one in "Gran Torino." How about murdered committed with suppressors and SBR's? My guess is again negligible. The goal at this point is just to look at ways to irritate us because he knows we aren't going to vote for him or his people at any point in our lifetimes. I have had a suppressor in line for a tax stamp since March. Hopefully, I will get cleared before the new rules go into effect.

There will be a 90 day public comment period in which any of us can put in comments. Then the rules might be edited based on comments, and then they will be put in effect. We are looking at 100+ days minimum for it to go into effect assuming they don't just railroad it through. If then, there is a minimum of 90 days.
 
I guess the interesting question will be what happens to all of the form 4's and 1's that are in the system either pending or waiting to go pending when the new rule is enacted? Do all trusts and LLC's automatically get kicked back for fingerprints and background checks or are they grandfathered?
 
Hmm, so, if it goes into effect will it remove the CLEO requirement for individuals?
If so, why setup a trust for NFA items?

I realize there are additional benefits to having a trust for NFA items..
Just playing devil's advocate.
 
I guess the interesting question will be what happens to all of the form 4's and 1's that are in the system either pending or waiting to go pending when the new rule is enacted? Do all trusts and LLC's automatically get kicked back for fingerprints and background checks or are they grandfathered?


No, try reading the article, it still has a 90 day review, and nothing is final, this is just a proposal at this point. The ATF still has to finalize the rule and since when do you ever have something that is pending get kicked back because of a rule change after the fact.
 
Given that O has written an executive order, we know that there will be a rule change, so whining about the rule change will not impact the final rule. However, if we get together and submit comments to insure that the rule affects only those applications submitted after the rule goes into effect, that will be an effective use of everyone's time here. I called the BATF to find out about how to comment on the rule change, but nobody answered the phone. I imagine they are being swamped today. I had no idea that there are 39,000 tax stamp requests on trusts in a year. That is a lot more volume than I would have estimated. It was only a matter of time before they closed this loophole.
 
Stupid change. I'm glad nothing else is going on that requires attention.

All this will do regarding NFA is make ALOT of NFA items go missing when the owner of the trust dies.
 
Does it include new requirements for only Trusts and their constituency or does it impact LLCs, partnerships and corporations?

Does the responsible party just require one designee (responsible party) per entity or does it include a full blown background check plus photos and prints for every member of an LLC or majority shareholder / officer / board member in a corporation?

Their proposal is awfully vague.
 
The responsible party already has to do a 4473 when you pick up the NFA item.

You file the Form 4, I (responsible party) fill out the citizenship form along with it, and then when I pick up the item I fill out a 4473... that is current.
 
I agree with that Sir, but I'm curious as to their completely vague proposal and the wording that as yet remains a mystery.
 
Given that O has written an executive order, we know that there will be a rule change, so whining about the rule change will not impact the final rule. However, if we get together and submit comments to insure that the rule affects only those applications submitted after the rule goes into effect, that will be an effective use of everyone's time here. I called the BATF to find out about how to comment on the rule change, but nobody answered the phone. I imagine they are being swamped today. I had no idea that there are 39,000 tax stamp requests on trusts in a year. That is a lot more volume than I would have estimated. It was only a matter of time before they closed this loophole.
I never looked at it as a loophole, it's law and added in for a trade of some sorts years ago. A loophole is what they call law abiding activity that they don't like.
 
Is the executive branch even bound to consider any feedback presented during the comment period?

I'm not exactly sure how an executive order is legal on the trust 'responsible person' thing. ( from a civics, not politics perspective).
 
Here's a blog explaining the process for changing the current regs.
 
Hmm, so, if it goes into effect will it remove the CLEO requirement for individuals?
If so, why setup a trust for NFA items?

I realize there are additional benefits to having a trust for NFA items..
Just playing devil's advocate.

There is more to the whole trust thing than just getting around the CLEO signature.

I own 3 suppressors, (3 more on the way). The first one I bought a few years ago and did it as an individual (will transfer to trust but have to pay the $200 tax). Since the suppressor is in my name, my wife or daughter can't use it without me present. If I die my wife would have to pay $200 and have it transfered into her name, if she then died my daughter would have to again pay $200 to keep it in the family. If I was convicted of a felony and could no longer own a suppressor it has to be surrendered immediately.


The other 2 are on a trust, with my wife and daughter listed. If for some weird ass reason my wife wanted to go shooting and I did not she could take either one and I could stay home. when she got to the range she would be in control and could let someone try it if she wanted. When my daughter turns 18 (legal age to be a trustee) she could do the same. Now If i die nothing happens, if my wife dies nothing happens. If we both die before my daughter turns 18 then my brother will maintain the trust until she is 18. As my daughter grows up and hopefully has children of her own, they can be added to the trust and items in the trust can be passed along without paying the $200 tax every time someone passes away. If I am convicted of a felony, while I would not be able to use it (a trust does not get you around that law despite what some think) but it would not have to be surrendered with a loss of the investment. My wife and daughter could keep it and remove me from the trust, and/or they would have time to sell it and recoup some of the investment.
 
Unless that person was also a Trustee on your trust, that is debatable.
When My YHM arrived at my SOT he called me and told me it was it was in and that I was welcome to come and put it on my gun and shoot,which I did. He had legal possession of the suppressor and even though I was the one who paid for the YHM. I still see myself as an interested party wanting to shoot the YHM equipped AR and the SOT as the owner letting me do it under his supervision. Immediately afterward he prepared all the necessary paperwork to send my trust documents to the ATF where it sits Pending since 03/26/13 with at least another 3 months wait. I removed the suppressor and put it back in its box after cooling and the SOT put it back in his safe. we were both perfectly legal. I also go to an indoor range to check my 100 yd zero occasionally the range rents machine guns too of various flavors.
 
Last edited:
Unless that person was also a Trustee on your trust, that is debatable.

This has been beat to death a million times and if you would do some research you would see that you are wrong. Sure we could get in to a big pissing match about "control" but i will just use this example and you can work it out in your brain.

How does Knob Creek machine gun shoot work, or any gun range that "rents" NFA items. Do you really think that the ATF doesn't know about Knob Creek. Knob Creek is probably the most well known, but there are other machine guns shoots that you can go to and rent, borrow, try or use many NFA items. How could they possibly do that, you can't put the whole world on as a trustee.
 
After talking to my SOT the 4473 that you fill out when you pick up the can does not have to be run through the NCIS background check. That is not required since they assume you have already been background checked through the NFA process with fingerprints, photos CLEO etc. So that is supposedly why they will want every "responsible" person listed in the trust to cough up fingerprints/photos. It would seem that they could just add the requirement that the SOT runs the "responsible" party through NCIS but then they wouldn't get all the extra paperwork they want to impose.

Skeeter
 
It was put into affect yesterday. You now have to send in fingerprint cards of the responsible party in the trust...... ATF.gov
 
It also reads that CLEO's are not _required_ to sign a statement that they have no reason to believe the applicant will use the item for unlawful purposes. That looks like a pretty big deal to me. CLEO's can now simply just ignore requests for sign off or refuse to for any arbitrary reason. I sure hope this part doesnt make it past the proposal as I have been told by many people (including a family member who is a judge in the county just north of mine) that getting a CLEO to sign off is nearly impossible in my city. This one of the main reasons I went with a trust. I dont mind the additional fingerprint cards, photos etc. for "responsible parties"... but the signoff is going to be a big issue for many people.
 
Great, now my tax stamps will cost $1000. $200 for the stamp and $800 lost wages to take the day off to get printed and photos.
 
Two pieces of info passed on by the lawyer who set up my trust that suggest this may not be as bad as we fear. He spoke to the ATF yesterday and these are the rule revisions:
View Rule
Notice it says elimination of CLEO signoff? Strange.

More info on electronic filing
https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/atf-ruling-2013-2.pdf

Hmm, is there bad reporting on this issue? Incorrect pro gun control spin? Lots of conflicting info on the CLEO signoff.
He also reinforced the idea that elec filing will eliminate redundancy amongst examiners and speed matters up. He said anyone who currently has a trust will more then likely be grandfathered in and get an ATF login and pin for future filing. Worst case scenario for current trusts is sending in a photo and fingerprints. Current trust are also very likely to be granted CLEO signoff exemption if for some reason it is required of newly established trusts once changes go in effect.
He also said that individuals would also be exempt from CLEO sign off with the new rules, but wont be able to eFile.
However, it does look like CLEO's will be forwarded info to do whatever they wish with.... like build a registry/database?
When you start reading between the lines its starting to look less like "closing loopholes that let bad guys buy machine-guns as LLC's/Corporations" and more about the suppressor lobby having some success in making it easier to acquire "gun mufflers", since that is what the vast majority of NFA Trusts are created for.
 
The CLEO signoff is what they are really counting on. That most CLEOs will just ignore all requests to them. In a rural county, where the sheriff is the CLEO, then he might think twice if he angers voters. In a city, the Chief of Police is not an elected position and it will be easier to ignore people because he doesnt fear being voted out of office.

If all this stuff goes through, it basically means the end of the NFA game for me. Unless a friend becomes district attorney. 3 Form 4's in ATF review right now. its going to be pretty terrible if its applied to pending Forms. they are devious enough that i wouldnt put it past them.
 
Two pieces of info passed on by the lawyer who set up my trust that suggest this may not be as bad as we fear. He spoke to the ATF yesterday and these are the rule revisions:
View Rule
Notice it says elimination of CLEO signoff? Strange.

More info on electronic filing
https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/pdf-files/atf-ruling-2013-2.pdf

Hmm, is there bad reporting on this issue? Incorrect pro gun control spin? Lots of conflicting info on the CLEO signoff.
He also reinforced the idea that elec filing will eliminate redundancy amongst examiners and speed matters up. He said anyone who currently has a trust will more then likely be grandfathered in and get an ATF login and pin for future filing. Worst case scenario for current trusts is sending in a photo and fingerprints. Current trust are also very likely to be granted CLEO signoff exemption if for some reason it is required of newly established trusts once changes go in effect.
He also said that individuals would also be exempt from CLEO sign off with the new rules, but wont be able to eFile.
However, it does look like CLEO's will be forwarded info to do whatever they wish with.... like build a registry/database?
When you start reading between the lines its starting to look less like "closing loopholes that let bad guys buy machine-guns as LLC's/Corporations" and more about the suppressor lobby having some success in making it easier to acquire "gun mufflers", since that is what the vast majority of NFA Trusts are created for.

Up until the announcement it was believed the ATF was willing to conceded the CLEO requirement as a concession. Obama and Holder and the new head of the ATF have decided to intercept those intentions and go the opposite route.

They want to extend the CLEO requirement for every person listed on the Trust.

There is no confusion, it was one way when you spoke to your attorney yesterday, today it is different.
 
I guess I'll wait to pull the trigger on my TBAC to see how this pans out.
 
Last edited:
Yep, this sucks. I've got two cans on a trust, but if this signature thing goes through, it will effectively end my being able to get anymore NFA items. My Sheriff won't sign off on this stuff. Soooo...that's why I HAD to go the trust route. looks like a lot of people are gonna get screwed.
 
If I die my wife would have to pay $200 and have it transfered into her name, if she then died my daughter would have to again pay $200

I'm not sure I understand that the $200 tax has to be paid each time? ATF has a form 5 where an heir can request a tax-free transfer.

http://www.atf.gov/files/forms/download/atf-f-5320-5.pdf

I suppose there is the possibility the ATF would not automatically approve such a transfer but I always thought you could make a tax-free transfer as part of estate planning?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I understand that the $200 tax has to be paid each time? ATF has a form 5 where an heir can request a tax-free transfer.

http://www.atf.gov/files/forms/download/atf-f-5320-5.pdf

I suppose there is the possibility the ATF would not automatically approve such a transfer but I always thought you could make a tax-free transfer as part of estate planning?

I believe you are right that the $200 tax has been waived in the last decade or so. but still have more government paper work to fill out verses not on a trusts.