• Online Training Rescheduled: Join Us Next Week And Get 25% Off Access

    Use code FRIDAY25 and SATURDAY25 to get 25% off access to Frank’s online training. Want a better deal? Subscribe to get 50% off.

    Get Access Subscribe

House Budget Proposal to remove Tax on Suppressors but not remove it from the NFA

#301
doubloon said:
2) The HPA and SHORT amendments to the bill which dropped suppressors, SB-things, etc. from NFA. Arguably a better deal than a $0 tax but it was MORE than JUST a tax change. It was a regulation change.
Click to expand...
The reason that registration existed in the first place was because it assured that the tax had been paid. If there is no tax there is no need for registration.

Also think about this: If they can get the registration language to stick, what prevents them from adding other firearms to the list of weapons that must be registered? The precedent is set.

No taxation but you have registration. They will argue, "You won't have to pay a tax on the guns you already own and we're not banning them. All we want you to do is register them." BOHICA!

Go back and read post #289 if you haven't already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10ring'r and XP1K
#303
doubloon said:
There was with the HPA and SHORT as "amendments" to the bill. Those are what got struck by the parliamentarian. (I think)

There has always been two moving pieces to the NFA stuff.

1) The original verbiage in the actual bill which only dropped the tax down to $0 and only on suppressor "transfers" but didn't change registration. The original words only specified "transfers".

2) The HPA and SHORT amendments to the bill which dropped suppressors, SB-things, etc. from NFA. Arguably a better deal than a $0 tax with no registration but it was MORE than JUST a tax change. It was a regulation change and probably why it was struck unchallenged.

This new bill verbiage, assuming all the links I followed are true, accurate and up to date goes back to the original IN THE BILL text that dropped suppressor taxes down to $0 but kept registration and now includes SB-things, etc. in the $0 tax change which is just a tax change and not a regulation change. And it includes "making" not just "transfers".
Click to expand...
Ah, that does track now that I think about it it.
 
#304
Longshot231 said:
If there is no tax there is no need for registration.
Click to expand...

You keep saying this but a lot of things get registered without paying a tax.

In order for registration to be off the table suppressors, SB-thing, etc. would have to be removed from the NFA and that's what HPA/SHORT did, made them regular firearms so a 4473 would still be required for all of them.

Leaving them in the NFA but reducing the tax to $0 leaves registration in tact.

Longshot231 said:
Go back and read post #289 if you haven't already.
Click to expand...

I saw the post.

Opinions are not laws.

Testimony is not law.

The NFA is law.

I'd like to be wrong, I hope I'm wrong, I hope all works out the way you want to describe it but nothing I read backs up what you're claiming.

We and A.G. Cummings can be butt hurt all we want about getting screwed over by a bad law but it doesn't change the fact that it's a law. Unless suppressors and other toys are removed from the NFA registration is still a requirement tax or no tax. Again, I hope I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
#305
doubloon said:
You keep saying this but a lot of things get registered without paying a tax.

In order for registration to be off the table suppressors, SB-thing, etc. would have to be removed from the NFA and that's what HPA/SHORT did, made them regular firearms so a 4473 would still be required for all of them.

Leaving them in the NFA but reducing the tax to $0 leaves registration in tact.



I saw the post.

Opinions are not laws.

Testimony is not law.

The NFA is law.

I'd like to be wrong, I hope I'm wrong, I hope all works out the way you want to describe it but nothing I read backs up what you're claiming.

We and A.G. Cummings can be butt hurt all we want about getting screwed over by a bad law but it doesn't change the fact that it's a law. Unless suppressors and other toys are removed from the NFA registration is still a requirement tax or no tax. Again, I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
A lot of things do get registered without paying a tax. However, we're not talking about those things.

FDR & co. got around banning by charging a HUGE tax on those devices. That's how they got away with it for so long. IMHO, that's still a flimsy excuse because no other rights recognized in the BOR are taxed.
 
#306
Longshot231 said:
A lot of things do get registered without paying a tax. However, we're not talking about those things.

FDR & co. got around banning by charging a HUGE tax on those devices. That's how they got away with it for so long. IMHO, that's still a flimsy excuse because no other rights recognized in the BOR are taxed.
Click to expand...
You’re not wrong and we should always have that as a goal, but politics is politics and it takes time for the winds of change to move the needle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Longshot231
#308
Longshot231 said:
still a flimsy excuse because no other rights recognized in the BOR are taxed.
Click to expand...

Maybe there's a disconnect here.

The "they/them" being suppressors, SB-things or whatever.

I'm not saying they should be taxed, because I don't think they should.

I'm not saying they should be registered, because I don't think they should.

But I am saying they're currently taxed and registered because that's the current law.

And I am saying short of removing them from the NFA it will always be the law to register them.

It's a budget bill so that's all they're allowed to change, unless they can sneak or negotiate it in, is budget and tax stuph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomic41 and lash
#309
doubloon said:
Maybe there's a disconnect here.

The "they/them" being suppressors, SB-things or whatever.

I'm not saying they should be taxed, because I don't think they should.

I'm not saying they should be registered, because I don't think they should.

But I am saying they're currently taxed and registered because that's the current law.

And I am saying short of removing them from the NFA it will always be the law to register them.

It's a budget bill so that's all they're allowed to change, unless they can sneak or negotiate it in, is budget and tax stuph.
Click to expand...
We could be talking past each other.

1) I don't like the fact that they've left the registration part in the BBB.
2) The Parliamentarian can be ignored or fired.
3) The registration part can be taken out because the Parliamentarian is in an advisory capacity and serves at the pleasure of the Leader of the Senate.
4) JD Vance, as President of the Senate can override the Parliamentarian and put the HPA and the SHORT act as well as other amendments back in the BBB.
5) All of the above can be accomplished if people take a few minutes to call or email their congress critters. I have low patience for people that bitch but don't bother to make the calls or vote. They do nothing but drag the rest of us down.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: LonewolfMcQuade, 10ring'r, XP1K and 2 others
#310
Longshot231 said:
All of the above can be accomplished if people take a few minutes to call or email their congress critters
Click to expand...
This is the only part I don't buy into. It's like all those requests for comments by ATF. I tend to think the only thing congress critters respect or listen to is cash or lobbyists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SilentStalkr
#312
Longshot231 said:
Cash doesn't vote. Make more noise than the cash and lobbyists.
Click to expand...
I cast my vote at the polls.

Cash absolutely moves the needle regardless of how anybody votes otherwise lobbyists wouldn't have a job.

Nobody makes more noise than liberals but they're not getting everything they want.

The phones and polls are just to give the illusion of control/importance
 
  • Like
Reactions: SilentStalkr
#314
They put Crenshaw's amendment stopping Medicare funds from being spent on transgender surgeries back in the bill but did nothing on the HPA and SHORT act.

Here's what I wrote my two senators and Thune:

You can override the Parliamentarian and put Senator Crenshaw’s amendment banning Medicare funds from paying for transgender surgeries back in the Reconciliation bill but ignore gunowners.

If you can put Senator Crenshaw’s amendment back in the Reconciliation Bill, you can also override the Parliamentarian and place the ENTIRE HPA and the ENTIRE SHORT act back in the Reconciliation Bill.

Stop the unconstitutional tax AND the unconstitutional registration. The only reason that registration existed in the first place was to ensure that the tax had been collected. So, there is no need for registration if the tax disappears.

Fire the anti-gun Parliamentarian!
If you ignore gunowners again we will ignore you the next time you are up for reelection.

Here's the link to contact your senators and Thune.

U.S. Senate: Contacting U.S. Senators

www.senate.gov www.senate.gov
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Eunozs, kmckinnon and lash
#317
Something no one is talking about, taking the tax to 0 without removing from the NFA is a big problem for thereafter being able to remove them from the NFA. If there is no tax, we can not use a budget bill in the future to remove it from the NFA. The benefit of using a budget bill is a filibuster does not apply. So if there is no longer a tax and we want to try remove them from the NFA in the future it will just get filibustered. They should drop the tax to $1 if we’re not getting it removed in order to keep this option open in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JR_77, 10ring'r, lash and 1 other person
#320
Malum Prohibitum said:
Is anybody getting tired of the blame game, "Oh, the Democrats blocked it. We tried." ????

So the only question from here is whether the Republicans meant it, in which case they will fix this, or they knew from the beginning that they could pretend but would not have to follow through, so 2A folks would keep voting for them while they point and said that bad old MacDonough, she did this. She's a Dem, you know. We're Republicans. We support your Second Amendment rights.

There is a really good argument that this is a tax issue directly affecting the budget.



OR, it is just the Republicans doing this:


View attachment 8716377
Click to expand...
Stop following illegal laws......like seriously, jury stop.

Doc
 
#321
Y'all are funny thinking a phone call is going to change anything. We have seen this in the past when we have held the majority in congress, senate and the presidency and still got nothing passed or any of our rights back.

This is only gonna get worse folks. Just come to the realization that I have and realize that all politicians are bought and paid for by the higher powers that operate behind the scenes. We will never get our full rights back with whoever is in office until we force them all out and start over.....I mean we seriously let less than 500 people decide our lives and we talk of making a phone call......talk about battered women syndrome.


Doc
 
  • Like
Reactions: SilentStalkr and 10ring'r
#323
If I'm reading right (and who knows with all the misinformation and slanted information out there), they have not ignored or overruled any parliamentarian rulings.

They have re-wrote lots of things into new versions that were rejected by the parliamentarian in hopes of them being approved. Just like they did to the $200 tax and all removal from NFA status for SBR/Suppressors etc. Once it was rejected, they re-wrote a new version that they hope complies.

I don't think the drop to 0$ matters for NFA stuff (outside the tax bill) for a budget based repeal of NFA, because as we just saw, the only thing a simple majority budget vote is going to deal with is pure budget issues. Leave the tax at $1, try the same thing they just did and the NFA registration stuff will just get shut down again. They wouldn't even buck the parliamentarian on medicaid stuff and there's a couple dozen Senators threatening publicly not vote for it on that issue alone. You know how many senators I've heard say they won't vote for the bill if the NFA registration removal is not put back in...... exactly 0, number of articles I've seen senators talking about how important the NFA registration removal is......exactly 0. So if they won't buck the parliamentarian on medicaid by far the biggest issue threatening the bill from passing, they are never going to do it on something like NFA. NFA is just a small token issue that they can use for appeasing voters without actually putting any effort into making sure it happens. They know when it doesn't happen, they can just say he same thing they do every time something doesn't happen to voters. "We tried it wasn't our fault"

At this point it doesn't even sound like anyone is confident they can even pass it with a simple majority as it is. I spent decades calling and writing letters to politicians, they don't care. The only thing they care about is being voted out, that's the only message voters can send to them that they will listen to, period. For decades once politicians get to this level, it's a massive cash cow with almost no consequences for what they do and not nearly enough overturn from voters removing them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XP1K, SilentStalkr and lash
#324
I object to the registration of people more so than NFA items themselves. Like it's bad enough we you have to pay a tax on right.

But after ATF 41F/41P was adopted in 2016 you couldn't use the trust route to have your NFA applications approved without submitting fingerprints and mugshot photos. These get added to the FBI Next Generation Identification database permanently and there is no way to remove them without a court order. That information is shared with the States databases and if you live in a blue state that information is going to be used against you in things like a red flag ex parte hearing.

You shouldn't be treated like a criminal and registered like a sex offender for wanting to own a safety device like a supressor. The whole system is fuckery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XP1K, SilentStalkr, JR_77 and 1 other person
#325
doubloon said:
I cast my vote at the polls.

Cash absolutely moves the needle regardless of how anybody votes otherwise lobbyists wouldn't have a job.

Nobody makes more noise than liberals but they're not getting everything they want.

The phones and polls are just to give the illusion of control/importance
Click to expand...
Yup!

GenericBadGuy said:
I object to the registration of people more so than NFA items themselves. Like it's bad enough we you have to pay a tax on right.

But after ATF 41F/41P was adopted in 2016 you couldn't use the trust route to have your NFA applications approved without submitting fingerprints and mugshot photos. These get added to the FBI Next Generation Identification database permanently and there is no way to remove them without a court order. That information is shared with the States databases and if you live in a blue state that information is going to be used against you in things like a red flag ex parte hearing.

You shouldn't be treated like a criminal and registered like a sex offender for wanting to own a safety device like a supressor. The whole system is fuckery.
Click to expand...
Yeah that photo and fingerprint crap honestly scares the crap out of me. It’s not doing it as they already have all my prints, photos, DNA blah blah but that last time I got mine done really kind of freaked me out! Why you ask? Because the sheriff sent me across the street from his office to a prison, I stripped down of all my belongings, went into the prison to get electronic finger prints created. Yes literally in there with legit criminals and stuff and the whole time in my mind I’m thinking, what if my prints get screwed up on file somehow or are used for something else? Like seriously, it’s messed up! Like I was so upset the deputy asked me what’s wrong and I didn’t tell him my thoughts but I did inquire about how long these prints were there and kind of joked around about it and he said not to worry after 3 months they are all deleted. I don’t know if he was serious or not but reality is anyone that has an NFA item has given ammo to the gov to possibly use against you if a rogue agent ever wanted to and there really isn’t much you can do about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snatchsquatch, doubloon and lash
#326
GenericBadGuy said:
I object to the registration of people more so than NFA items themselves. Like it's bad enough we you have to pay a tax on right.

But after ATF 41F/41P was adopted in 2016 you couldn't use the trust route to have your NFA applications approved without submitting fingerprints and mugshot photos. These get added to the FBI Next Generation Identification database permanently and there is no way to remove them without a court order. That information is shared with the States databases and if you live in a blue state that information is going to be used against you in things like a red flag ex parte hearing.

You shouldn't be treated like a criminal and registered like a sex offender for wanting to own a safety device like a supressor. The whole system is fuckery.
Click to expand...
If you are a veteran, which many of us are, your fingerprints are already on a database.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10ring'r, Eddystone and SilentStalkr
#329
Longshot231 said:
I guess the republicans or someone on some committee put Crenshaw’s amendment back in the BBB. I only found out from Langley’s video.
Click to expand...

Ah, I didn't look for it in the latest version.

I don't believe the parliamentarian has been overruled on anything.

If the Crenshaw Amendment is back then it's back as part of the actual bill they voted to debate before voting to send it back to the House. Nobody overruled anybody, they just rewrote parts of the bill to vote on whether or not to send it to the House for another vote.

Like the $0 tax originally on suppressor transfers only that was actually IN the bill is now expanded in the actual text of the bill to a $0 tax on everything except machine guns and destructive devices for BOTH transfers and making, not just transfers like it was before.

Page 491 is where the $0 tax is spelled out.

I don't know exactly what was in the Crenshaw Amendment but the gender stuff in the new texts is around page 655.
 
#330
Longshot231 said:
The reason that registration existed in the first place was because it assured that the tax had been paid. If there is no tax there is no need for registration.

Also think about this: If they can get the registration language to stick, what prevents them from adding other firearms to the list of weapons that must be registered? The precedent is set.

No taxation but you have registration. They will argue, "You won't have to pay a tax on the guns you already own and we're not banning them. All we want you to do is register them." BOHICA!

Go back and read post #289 if you haven't already.
Click to expand...
The NFA was intended to be a ban on handguns, SBR, SBS, destructive devices, machine guns, and suppressors. Pistols were eventually removed, but it was intended to be a ban. BUT, a ban wouldn’t pass constitutional muster. A “tax,” however, was totally ok. The tax was set sufficiently high that it served the purpose of being a de facto ban. Remember that a Thompson machine gun went for about $200 at the time.

If the purpose is revenue generation, which should be the purpose of a tax, you can’t set it so high that effectively no one buys the taxed item.

The point of the NFA was to ban. The tool used for the ban was a tax.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waco Kid, gigamortis, JR_77 and 7 others
#333
Considering the tax was $200 starting in 1934 it should be easy to see it was meant to be prohibitive. For reference $200 in 1934 in 2025 dollars adjusted for inflation would be: $4800. It would difficult to argue that amount is "prohibitive" in 2025 when plenty of people are spending $200 at starbucks, for cable/streaming bills, and cell phone bills each every month, and most people are probably shooting that much in ammo per range session, and the suppressor they want to buy is 5-10x the price of the stamp to put on a gun that's at least that much more than the stamp.

Of course the Dems are great at this, for decades they've convinced everyone that making people just go to the DMV to get a valid ID/drivers license is too much of a hardship, not to mention mail in voting. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46, Beefmanne, lash and 1 other person
#334
ToddM said:
Considering the tax was $200 starting in 1934 it should be easy to see it was meant to be prohibitive. For reference $200 in 1934 in 2025 dollars adjusted for inflation would be: $4800. It would difficult to argue that amount is "prohibitive" in 2025 when plenty of people are spending $200 at starbucks, for cable/streaming bills, and cell phone bills each every month, and most people are probably shooting that much in ammo per range session, and the suppressor they want to buy is 5-10x the price of the stamp to put on a gun that's at least that much more than the stamp.

Of course the Dems are great at this, for decades they've convinced everyone that making people just go to the DMV to get a valid ID/drivers license is too much of a hardship, not to mention mail in voting. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I wish I was shooting that much per range session! Im a poors!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46, lash and doubloon
#335
Ah...its like an old comedy movie routine..."he's up...oh, he down...no, he's up...etc" lol I can't tell where we are at currently.

Is this still out of the bill due to the Parliamentarian's objections?
 
#336
SilentStalkr said:
I wish I was shooting that much per range session! Im a poors!
Click to expand...
They might shoot that much. But they're not doing shit. I can get more out of a $40-60 session of 5.56 ammo out of my Mk12 at varying distances.

Rules


rizzMC-830427.jpg



Oops, wrong thread.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: roostercogburn98, 91Eunozs, SilentStalkr and 2 others
#337
Baron23 said:
Is this still out of the bill due to the Parliamentarian's objections?
Click to expand...

It's insane. And probably on purpose.

Assuming I'm up to date on all the latest bullshit.

What's out (stricken by the parliamentarian) is full NFA removal of suppressors and SB-things. Make them plain firearms only, 4473 only.

What's in is $0 tax with registration of suppressors and all the SB-things for both making and transfers this time where it was just transfers and only suppressors the first time. Still all the usual NFA forms plus a 4473.

But only if the Senate votes to send it to the House that way and only if the House doesn't change it ... reminds me of the swirling of in a toilet bowl ... will it flush?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash and Baron23
#338
SilentStalkr said:
I wish I was shooting that much per range session! Im a poors!
Click to expand...
Heh, these days I figure I shoot a box of match 308 ($30) , 6.5 ($40), 223 ($25), a couple boxes of match 22LR ($40) and a bit of 9mm ($20) it's basically $200. but closer to $150. Still a far cry from the $4800 that a $200 tax stamp in 1934 was equivalent to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46 and SilentStalkr
#339
clcustom1911 said:
They might shoot that much. But they're not doing shit. I can get more out of a $40-60 session of 5.56 ammo out of my Mk12 at varying distances.

Rules


View attachment 8718629


Oops, wrong thread.
Click to expand...
Very true. I only shoot 40 rds usually, if that when going out to distance. Blasting $200 on ammo at 100 yds and under is kind of stupid. Well, really any distance for just practice. Like check zero, check varying distances, chrono, take notes, call it a day. Hell I could likely get by with 10 rds if I really wanted to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoDopes and clcustom1911
#342
Matches Malone said:
Yall think it’s worth calling in at the 4 quarter of this?

Click to expand...


"long ass background check" ... that's so 2020 ... approval times are counted in days now not months

"we don't want it" ? What a tard thing to say. We should claw back every little piece we can get the same way they clawed it away from us.

It is not worth dropping a dime.

Take the win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
#343
doubloon said:
"long ass background check" ... that's so 2020 ... approval times are counted in days now not months

"we don't want it" ? What a tard thing to say. We should claw back every little piece we can get the same way they clawed it away from us.

It is not worth dropping a dime.

Take the win.
Click to expand...
There’s people getting okayed the same day
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash and doubloon
#348
SilentStalkr said:
Very true. I only shoot 40 rds usually, if that when going out to distance. Blasting $200 on ammo at 100 yds and under is kind of stupid. Well, really any distance for just practice. Like check zero, check varying distances, chrono, take notes, call it a day. Hell I could likely get by with 10 rds if I really wanted to.
Click to expand...
my drive is 54m 1 way so gas $ matter. range fees are about 400C/yr. shooting 600yd 308 40r=$60,22lr 50r-$8,9mil at least $40. being a poor,it matters. at a reasonable cost might get a suppressor,def SBR. the stupid suppressor $ plus $200 a pop makes it a nonstarter. i have no REAL need for either.
the whole thing is just more gov abuse,control and tracking which is unlikely to go away. just gives the RINOs a trade off item. the dims can keep their "public safety" BS alive.
 
#349
lroseen said:
Something no one is talking about, taking the tax to 0 without removing from the NFA is a big problem for thereafter being able to remove them from the NFA. If there is no tax, we can not use a budget bill in the future to remove it from the NFA. The benefit of using a budget bill is a filibuster does not apply. So if there is no longer a tax and we want to try remove them from the NFA in the future it will just get filibustered. They should drop the tax to $1 if we’re not getting it removed in order to keep this option open in the future.
Click to expand...
Look, I want nothing more than for the NFA to go away and me to be able to buy a lightning link legally for $100.

But the huge thing that people are ignoring is that if we use the budget process to get things off the NFA, you can use the budget process to put stuff on the NFA.

When the Democrats nuked the filibuster on judicial appointments they were warned it would backfire. It did. The dems thought they would never be out of power, so they opened that door and it got used against them later.

The GOA is playing a stupid and very short-sighted game. They are behaving as if anti-gun dems will never be back in power. If the GOA got their wish, then the next dem admin could put AR-15s and Magazines and semi-auto pistols on the NFA, with the full and correct justification that the precedent has been set. They could remove or overrule the pro-gun parliamentarian to keep the NFA additions in place.

My rule is to think of how my worst enemy would use the power I'm about to invoke against me and then decide if it's worth the risk.

Sure, you could argue they could do that anyway. Same as with the filibuster. What I do know is that if we open that door sure as hell, 100 percent certainty, it will get used against us later.

At least zeroing out the tax removes the justification for keeping them on the NFA. Using a normal bill to finish the job is far less likely to bite us in the butt later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woogie_man, Lightning8, ZY100 and 3 others
#350
doubloon said:
That video could be 7 or 8 minutes shorter and still contain the same amount of useful information but the $1 amendment is sketchy for a reason.
Click to expand...
I agree....all these guys bloviate endlessly but I guess just saying what is up in 2-3 minutes just won't satisfy their need to hear their own voice and perhaps won't get them the $$ from monetized content. Dunno really, but its why i don't watch most of these vids....they just can't seem to help themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SilentStalkr and doubloon
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

longshot2000
Suppressors one man's view: BUY SUPPRESSORS
Replies
10
Views
2K
FuhQ
FuhQ
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Alpha Class High Magnification 6-36/7-35 FFP Scope Review
Replies
134
Views
11K
R_A_W
R_A_W
riffraff
MISSOURI STEEL TACTICAL SERIES (MOST) 2021 CENTERFIRE SCHEDULE AND INFO
Replies
2
Views
2K
Joshcole
Joshcole
JamieD
Training Courses Wolf Precision's Long Range Shooting School in Somerset, PA - 2020 registration is open!
Replies
6
Views
2K
BigPrince
B
M
Petition to remove SBR from NFA
Replies
1
Views
566
Dshooter
D
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts