• 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!

Form 1, Form 4, SBR's

Thank you. That is very interesting, and sounds like your dialed in more than most. I was referring to a convo I had with a custom gas gun builder with SOT.
I took advantage of the forbearance tax free offer, as I'm hardly unknown with 6 cans and 12+ form 4's. Tried the DIY method to no avail; then popped for the Silencer Shop $50 filing program, super easy.

Constructive Possession? Hmmm. This is what I found and don't entirely comprehend:
is a legal fiction to describe a situation in which an individual has 'Actual' control over chattels or real property without actually(?) having 'Physical' control of the same assets.

Any legal eagles who can define this, and how it relates to the brace? just curious.

It basically means if you take apart a machinegun, and still possess the parts, you still have a machinegun.

You were known to the ATF as someone whom legally transferred, or manufactured, NFA items. Now, you're someone known to the ATF as someone that possessed an unregistered NFA item. If approved, you'll get a provisional F1 back. Your F1 may, or may not, get revoked at some unknown time in the future because it is provisional, not strictly approved.
 
It basically means if you take apart a machinegun, and still possess the parts, you still have a machinegun.

You were known to the ATF as someone whom legally transferred, or manufactured, NFA items. Now, you're someone known to the ATF as someone that possessed an unregistered NFA item. If approved, you'll get a provisional F1 back. Your F1 may, or may not, get revoked at some unknown time in the future because it is provisional, not strictly approved.
Understood, thank you for clarifying.
 
One of the problems with the rule is it doesn't define how much area is considered a shoulder'able stock.

It's something along the lines of "too much". I certainly didn't hear an exact number during the presentation, and very much don't expect to ever get a straight answer.

Thank you. That is very interesting, and sounds like your dialed in more than most. I was referring to a convo I had with a custom gas gun builder with SOT.

All I can tell you is that's what I heard on the call, and it generally contradicts ATF rules that existed prior to the advent of braces. (After all, there is a reason that "pistol" receiver extensions exist.)

The sense I get is that ATF personnel in charge of implementing this change are not interested in making it any harder than strictly required by the exact wording of the rule.

Constructive Possession? Hmmm. This is what I found and don't entirely comprehend:
is a legal fiction to describe a situation in which an individual has 'Actual' control over chattels or real property without actually(?) having 'Physical' control of the same assets.

Any legal eagles who can define this, and how it relates to the brace? just curious.

It's a matter of A + B = C, where A and B are each legal things to own but C is not.

A: "pistol" (<16" barrel, no "stock")
B: brace
C: SBR

It's legal for you to possess a pistol. The ATF agents on the call explicitly stated that braces themselves are still legal. But if you put the two together or have them in sufficiently close proximity, you have an SBR. What's "sufficiently close" to constitute "constructive possession"? You'll need to ask your local attorney, and he/she probably can't give you an answer because there are no ATF rules and very little case law upon which to base an opinion.
 
Thank you. That is very interesting, and sounds like your dialed in more than most. I was referring to a convo I had with a custom gas gun builder with SOT.
I took advantage of the forbearance tax free offer, as I'm hardly unknown with 6 cans and 12+ form 4's. Tried the DIY method to no avail; then popped for the Silencer Shop $50 filing program, super easy.

Constructive Possession? Hmmm. This is what I found and don't entirely comprehend:
is a legal fiction to describe a situation in which an individual has 'Actual' control over chattels or real property without actually(?) having 'Physical' control of the same assets.

Any legal eagles who can define this, and how it relates to the brace? just curious.
Regardless of wording, we can assume the intention from previous rulings. This is just like having an AR and M16 trigger parts. You "possess" the AR and full auto parts and can therefore "construct" a MG (if you have this situation and do not own a legal m16 bury these parts in the back yard and only dig them up in case of shtf). Even though having the brace seems silly to us, lots of these constructed MG's turn up in crimes, so it makes sense for them to rule as they did. No one is trying to trick us with legal jargon, luckily they don't really give a shit, it's a narrative thing. Again "we" sort of tricked the ATF. It's my opinion that Obama didn't want to lose the gun vote so he didn't even try to "weaponize" (he-he) the ATF. We will have to wait to see if Biden will be proactive thru the ATF. I doubt it. State and local bans will likely be more worrisome. Make the sbr as some states that have banned ar's have not banned NFA guns. Went that way in my city under clinton. Lots of wealthy influential folks own lots of NFA guns.
 
Regardless of wording, we can assume the intention from previous rulings. This is just like having an AR and M16 trigger parts. You "possess" the AR and full auto parts and can therefore "construct" a MG (if you have this situation and do not own a legal m16 bury these parts in the back yard and only dig them up in case of shtf).

1) This is a bad example, as M16 FCG parts will not drop into an AR-15 lower. There's a reason that several web sites sell M16 FCG parts to the public (just bought some last week, didn't need to send my SOT). A drop-in auto sear (DIAS or "lightning link") is a different story, but that by itself is a machine gun per the ATF (same with "Glock switches").

There are some grey-area combinations of non-NFA parts that might form constructive possession of a machine gun (M1 Carbine + all seven components required for F/A operation), but the common and easy stuff has already been addressed by various NFA tech branch rulemaking throughout the years.

2) Please be very careful with comments like "bury it in the back yard" regarding potential violations of the law. There are eyes watching. I love the current Will Not Comply energy, but it's going to become less fun real fast once law enforcement starts uses social media posts as circumstantial evidence (or even a direct confession) to frame people. Also, it makes you glow like a Fed.
 
Thank you. That is very interesting, and sounds like your dialed in more than most. I was referring to a convo I had with a custom gas gun builder with SOT.
I took advantage of the forbearance tax free offer, as I'm hardly unknown with 6 cans and 12+ form 4's. Tried the DIY method to no avail; then popped for the Silencer Shop $50 filing program, super easy.

Constructive Possession? Hmmm. This is what I found and don't entirely comprehend:brac
is a legal fiction to describe a situation in which an individual has 'Actual' control over chattels or real property without actually(?) having 'Physical' control of the same assets.

Any legal eagles who can define this, and how it relates to the brace? just curious.

1) Sell the brace to a friend who doesn't have an AR at all?

2) This is not legal advice (I am a lawyer but do not know gun laws well), but I think the ATF are going to have a hard time prosecuting anyone for possession of a brace that is owned, but not installed. In particular, if the brace is nowhere near the pistol (say a storage facility), I think the ATF will lose in court on constructive possession unless the brace is on the the pistol. Why? The brace is legal on a rifle. It is only "illegal" when it is on a pistol.

3) Like you, I have other NFA items. They know who I am. I went with the Form 1 application and Silenceshop. $50 well worth it.
 
Last edited:
People pay $50 to file a form 1? It's free to submit online via eforms... (Minus any tax)🤷🏾‍♂️
Absolutely correct. Im a small biz owner with an IT guy and 5 days in a row it stopped working and said call local office or something. I alreadyn have a silencerco acount so their server populated everything for me. just took pic of each side of registered lower. easy peasy
 
  • Like
Reactions: nikonNUT
So who here has done a eForm1 to SBR their gun and what was your wait time? On the 3rd I'll be at 60 days personally.
 
I have done both the paid version of converting a pistol to an SBR as well as the "free" brace to SBR.

The paid version was a bit over 30 days (started in jan) and the "free" tax-exempt one was between 30 and 40 days...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30calDeath
1) This is a bad example, as M16 FCG parts will not drop into an AR-15 lower. There's a reason that several web sites sell M16 FCG parts to the public (just bought some last week, didn't need to send my SOT). A drop-in auto sear (DIAS or "lightning link") is a different story, but that by itself is a machine gun per the ATF (same with "Glock switches").

There are some grey-area combinations of non-NFA parts that might form constructive possession of a machine gun (M1 Carbine + all seven components required for F/A operation), but the common and easy stuff has already been addressed by various NFA tech branch rulemaking throughout the years.

2) Please be very careful with comments like "bury it in the back yard" regarding potential violations of the law. There are eyes watching. I love the current Will Not Comply energy, but it's going to become less fun real fast once law enforcement starts uses social media posts as circumstantial evidence (or even a direct confession) to frame people. Also, it makes you glow like a Fed.
My comment to "bury" parts was very irresponsible and flipant. Thank you for humbling me with the correction. My intention was to advise folks to simply stay as far as possible from any "grey" area. IMO there is never any case to purchase or own MG parts unless you own that particular registered gun. Again this is simply common sense to an inspector. Why would you own replacement MG parts if you don't currently own a registered MG? There was a day when you could not even purchase FA parts without sending in proof of ownership of a legal arm, but that ship has sailed long ago. Some folks think that since the parts are sold they "must"' be legal to own. Way too gray an area IMO. I can't say that it always happens, but i do know that when an FNA violation is found, ALL your guns are likely to be seized, not just the potential "offenders". Can your lawyer get your guns back? Maybe, but maybe not. Perhaps things have changed in recent years, but in the distant past when i was SOT/gunsmith, simply owning the parts (drop in or not) could and has been an NFA violation. Just my opinions/observations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: E. Bryant
My last approved was 30 days on the nose. I'm now at 45 days on one, looks like it's taking about 60.

Dang, I hate to hear that. I filed a couple (paid the $200 each, don't really trust the ATF enough on those "free" forms, personally) at the beginning of this month and am kicking myself for not getting them in at the beginning of the year when I meant to. Several guys were talking about them taking about 10 days or less at that time. I was trying to be prudent with my funds at the time, but hindsight is 20/20 as they say....

Now I'm left hoping the ATF will still approve them with this WA AWB that's getting rammed through (despite way more con than pro responses from the public); I haven't parsed out the legalese enough to understand whether it'll prevent making SBRs or not. Apparently Colorado is getting a very similar ban rammed through as well, probably the same situation for guys there.
 
The ATF point blank said no resources from the Form 1 folks would be put towards the pistol amnesty forms. Clearly a lie. They said there would be no delays related to the free pistol brace form. Now maybe everyone decided to just do the tax stamp Form 1 and they're flooded...but over on the Sig forum, there are a few guys who put theirs in 2-3 weeks before mine and just got them back. Mine's a single individual trust and the others I've submitted in the past have been quick. I went so far as to send my prints overnight and filed the day the gun came in. That clearly didn't help!
 
Submitted 1/28, approved 2/27.

Sig brace.jpg


Was true then, still true today...
 
I guess I'm curious of this:
Assholes say braces are legal.
then assholes say, nope, SBR, must register.
Then assholes let you register them free.
Are assholes going to arrest you for tax evasion now? They don't require the payment, but the rules state you must pay for the tax stamp. Or is this one of their illigitimate rules that'll get changed later on?
 
I guess I'm curious of this:
Assholes say braces are legal.
then assholes say, nope, SBR, must register.
Then assholes let you register them free.
Are assholes going to arrest you for tax evasion now? They don't require the payment, but the rules state you must pay for the tax stamp. Or is this one of their illigitimate rules that'll get changed later on?

You do have to pay for a tax stamp. They aren't giving you a tax stamp with this free SBR registration, just a free registration; it's not tax evasion and has nothing to do with taxes, because you didn't buy or receive a tax stamp.

People are still confusing "getting a stamp" with registration. They aren't the same thing.
 
Last edited:
You do have to pay for a tax stamp. They aren't giving you a tax stamp with this free SBR registration, just a free registration; it's not tax evasion and has nothing to do with taxes, because you didn't buy or receive a tax stamp.

People are still confusing "getting a stamp" with registration. They aren't the same thing.
Thats why I'm asking. I understand there is no stamp. They just registered an illigitimate SBR and didn't pay for a stamp. So they don't get one. But the rules say you have to pay to play, so tax evasion? Buy not paying for a stamp and not receiving one, it would seem some felonious stuff is going on.
 
From my casual read - you still have to APPLY for and be approved to possess your SBR. When/IF you are approved your gun will be REGISTERED and you will get paperwork that has a "STAMP" on it. Before electronics it was an actual stamp, now it's simply an electronic copy of a stamp on the registration document. There was a period when there was no stamp appearing on the early electronics documents, but the last ones i got had one. The stamp is meaningless, it's the document itself that counts. Try hard to not lose it. I assume(and i could be wrong here) that the $200 fee that usually accompanies your application is somehow waved in this case. Sniperhide is my favorite gun site, period, but there is another popular site out there that has a very large NFA catagory with lots of current SOT folks where all could be verified if desired. Again you are legally obligated to have this registration document/stamp with the gun at all times. Make a bunch of copies and just throw one in the gun case. Will you go to jail without it? No, but you could get some overzealous atf agent that could take it for a check. Be a boy scout with NFA items. Just my thoughts/advice FWIW.
 
Thats why I'm asking. I understand there is no stamp. They just registered an illigitimate SBR and didn't pay for a stamp. So they don't get one. But the rules say you have to pay to play, so tax evasion? Buy not paying for a stamp and not receiving one, it would seem some felonious stuff is going on.
2 separate things-
Amnesty- as long as you owned the braced pistol ( now an SBR) before 1/31 and filed the form 1 before May 31st, you will not be prosecuted for illegal possession of an SBR - fill in the form, go through the background check, they file your prints away somewhere and, if you're a good guy, you get your approval.

Forbearance - the $200 Tax is being waived on amnesty Form 1s, so you do not owe it. Simple as that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: btuse
Thats why I'm asking. I understand there is no stamp. They just registered an illigitimate SBR and didn't pay for a stamp. So they don't get one. But the rules say you have to pay to play, so tax evasion? Buy not paying for a stamp and not receiving one, it would seem some felonious stuff is going on.
Its akin to getting a one time tax exempt form from the IRS. You won't be hit with tax evasion. But yes later on they could change their minds and you could owe the $200.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30calDeath
Its akin to getting a one time tax exempt form from the IRS. You won't be hit with tax evasion. But yes later on they could change their minds and you could owe the $200.
other than FUD and your grammas cousins sisters former roomate who works at Nintendo, what is your basis for saying ATF could change their mind on approving a tax-exempt application after the fact?
 
Its akin to getting a one time tax exempt form from the IRS. You won't be hit with tax evasion. But yes later on they could change their minds and you could owe the $200.
You know, I've been thinking along these lines but trying to see the end game. I'm starting to lean towards the fact that ATF knows what they are doing isn't going to fly in court, so they don't charge the money, you get no stamp, your lower isn't engraved. When this gets overturned in court, they can say no harm, no foul. The only difference is now they have a list of people they should not have had before.

My thinking on this is ATF is trying to regulate a brace. Completely outside of their scope. They regulate firearms, not accessories. You can't justify saying that a friearm is legal in this configuration if you hold it this way, but holding another way makes it illegal.
 
other than FUD and your grammas cousins sisters former roomate who works at Nintendo, what is your basis for saying ATF could change their mind on approving a tax-exempt application after the fact?
Listen smooth brain.. I did not say the ATF could legally do any of this, but legalities have not stopped the ATF so far from just arbitrarily stating certain things (legal or not) and trying to impose penalties on people. I know your smooth brain has trouble comprehending any possibilities beyond "free registration" and that you trust them whole heartedly, but we will all give you a pass smooth brain..
 
Listen smooth brain.. I did not say the ATF could legally do any of this, but legalities have not stopped the ATF so far from just arbitrarily stating certain things (legal or not) and trying to impose penalties on people. I know your smooth brain has trouble comprehending any possibilities beyond "free registration" and that you trust them whole heartedly, but we will all give you a pass smooth brain..
Thats what I figured.
 
Smooth brain?:D Never heard that one. I guess that's the one thing everyone wants to be wrinkly.

Seriously, I think this is something we all need to stick together on. Everyone agrees that the ATF's flip flop on this is bullshit. You cannot say that a pistol with a brace is ok, knowing millions of gun owners will rely on this statement, have millions of gun owners actually rely on it and then, unilaterally decide that they're not legal, and that the millions of people stupid enough to rely on you are now felons if they don't remove pistol braces, destroy the firearm or register it as an SBR.

In fact, as an attorney, I have to say that this country's gun laws are extraordinarily discouraging. Our legal system is like our monetary system - it only works to the extent that people have confidence in it. A $100 bill is intrinsically worth almost nothing. It is a piece of paper. Yet it forms the basis of our entire economy. I know I can take that piece of paper into any store in America and exchange it for goods worth $100. But if tomorrow stores stopped accepting paper money what would happen? People would lose confidence in our monetary system and those pieces of paper would become worthless.

Out legal system is no different. I respect the laws of this country and the courts that interpret them for two reasons. The first is fear. I don't want to break a law and end up in jail. But the second, and more important reason, is that I believe that most laws are fair, reasonable and that the courts interpreting them are neutral and do their best to insure that their decisions are rational and consistent. But our gun laws are irrational, unfair and inconsistent. And whether its bump stocks, normal capacity magazines, pistol braces or so-called assault weapons, they can unilaterally change so that what was once legal to own, now becomes illegal. How can anyone respect these kinds of laws?

And to make matters worse many are extremely difficult to enforce, which takes away the only other reason people respect them - fear of being caught. I live in a state that bans magazines over 15 rounds - except if the magazines were in state before the ban was established. Of course, magazines are generally not dated. And gun shops in the four states that adjoin mine all would be more than happy to sell me standard capacity magazines. When I go to the range, everyone around me seems to have standard capacity magazines. Just started doing some of the action pistol sports. Do I really want to be the only guy running around with 10 round magazines? No. Have I always been a law abiding person that respects and follows the law? Absolutely.

So I sympathize with both sides of this argument. I absolutely respect someone who doesn't trust the ATF, doesn't believe we should have to do a new dance every time the ATF changes its tune and says "f*ck it, I'm not registering anything and if the ATF comes knocking on my door I'll just pull all the braces off my guns and put them in the closet". Yet, as someone who regularly posts on a number of gun forums, has registered several SBR's and a couple of suppressors, who's had their fingerprints taken numerous times, it's not like I'm completely off the grid when it comes to the ATF. And I'm someone who has genuinely tried to follow the law my entire life. So I'm going to register my guns. But I support those of you who have reached the opposite conclusion ... and if you ever need a good lawyer.;)
 
Thats why I'm asking. I understand there is no stamp. They just registered an illigitimate SBR and didn't pay for a stamp. So they don't get one. But the rules say you have to pay to play, so tax evasion? Buy not paying for a stamp and not receiving one, it would seem some felonious stuff is going on.

What rule, and what exactly does it say? If you look it up, I think you'll realize that you've made an incorrect assumption. "Tax evasion" is simply not part of this, end of story.

Congress gave the ATF the authority to charge $200 to register an SBR. The mechanism for charging that fee is through taxation, so you get a canceled stamp when you've paid that $200.

But here's where your assumption is incorrect - the ATF is not required to charge that $200. They have the ability to waive the fee while still processing the registration. But they can't give you a canceled $200 stamp when the fee was waived, which is why we're getting approved F1 forms with no stamp on them for the brace amnesty thing.
 
What rule, and what exactly does it say? If you look it up, I think you'll realize that you've made an incorrect assumption. "Tax evasion" is simply not part of this, end of story.

Congress gave the ATF the authority to charge $200 to register an SBR. The mechanism for charging that fee is through taxation, so you get a canceled stamp when you've paid that $200.

But here's where your assumption is incorrect - the ATF is not required to charge that $200. They have the ability to waive the fee while still processing the registration. But they can't give you a canceled $200 stamp when the fee was waived, which is why we're getting approved F1 forms with no stamp on them for the brace amnesty thing.
Can you show me that in the rules? I'll sleep better.
 
Can you show me that in the rules? I'll sleep better.
The existence of a 5320.5 (Application for a Tax Exempt Transfer of a Firearm) should be plenty, but you can also crack a history book and learn about previous tax amnesty, most notably the big ol MG amnesty of 1968.

That's why the people calling it a forbearance are wrong. Tax forbearance is what happens when you owe tax and negotiate a deal to forgive some of it as par t of a workout, like all the shady advertisers on talk radio who promise to stop the IRS from taking your shit. This is a tax exemption, which ATF is authorized to do and has done for nearly a century on firearms. Law enforcement, military, and inheritance are the most common examples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1911hombre