• 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 Re-making suppressors

shooter6.5

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 16, 2007
413
1
Bedford,Texas
Did not know that apparently ATF will not allow a suppressor to be remanufactured with the same serial # as one before. By the original manufacturer.

Just one more way for them to screw with the industry and more money for them.

Just a short rant.
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

Which use to be a general practice before a well known company had to ask for clarification.

I still don't know why they even brought it up.....
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Slimguns</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which use to be a general practice before a well known company had to ask for clarification.

I still don't know why they even brought it up..... </div></div>

because AAC had a rebuild contest and basically built an AAC can and just put the Gemtech info on it..

Now I own all AAC suppressors, but I can admit that that shouldn't have happened.
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

And that's why this thing blew up and my old .22 can can't be replaced? Errrr.
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

I wonder how much business Gemtech has lost due to that? Regardless of what "actually" happened, it seems that a lot of people blame them for it...
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

Also known as the " Gemtax ".

Circumstantal evidence seems to poitn that they got a sandy mangina when AAC bitch slapped them be turning a POS G5 can into M4-2000.....this "allegedly" caused them to go nuclear and go straight to the BATFE and get them to shut this down for everyone.

I just paid the "gemtax" myself to upgrade me SWR Omega 30 to a 300.

Pisses me off....
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

We seem to like beating the same dead horse over and over on this one...for the record while this is referred to as a Gemtax the real culprit was/is AAC.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1106334&page=1

The issue was presented to ATF and was answered by them in 1999... the Bardwell letter well predates the clarification sought by Gemtech.
Your AAC koolaid crowd continues to try and spin the story away from the fact that AAC fucked up...I advise anyone even remotely interested in this topic to research it for themselves..
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

AAC is the Devil

FWIW I bought my SWR Warlock b/c one of the advatges over the AAC Pilot was the 1st rebuild/cleaning was free.......

Clearly others besides AAC were rebuilding cans.

Bardwell is a joke, those "love letters" appply only to who they were mailed to, not the public.

This is why "allegedly" Gemtech was pissed, they wrote a love letter and got a big fat NO SOUP on rebuilding thier cans without paying the 200 tax........vs everyone else was allowed to continue to do this.Including rebuildings gemtech's own cans while they could not. This filled vaginas with sand.

moral of the story, send your love letter to penthouse not the BATFE unless you hate NFA owners IMHO
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

and the koolaid crowd will continue to ignore and misrepresent the facts...

"Bardwell is a joke, those "love letters" appply only to who they were mailed to, not the public."

Your statement is not factual.....




DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

19 APR 1999

901040:GS
5320/99-7473


Dear Mr. Bardwell:

This is to clarify the advice contained in our response of January
27, 1999, to your letter of December 26, 1998, regarding the
replacement of a broken or defective silencer that had been
returned for repair.

You asked if a licensed manufacturer of firearms may lawfully
replace a broken or defective silencer, returned to him for repair,
with a new silencer with the same serial number as the broken or
defective one. You added that the original silencer would be
destroyed in the process of replacement.

A complete firearm silencer or muffler is a "firearm" subject to
the provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA). In addition,
certain silencer parts and components also qualify as a "firearm"
and are subject to NFA controls. Repair or replacement of silencer
components can result in the creation of a new firearm which would
be subject to additional registration and transfer tax
requirements.

A person who possesses a registered silencer may transfer the
silencer for repair on ATF Form 5, tax exempt, to any licensed
manufacturer of firearms who has currently paid special
(occupational) tax (SOT) as a manufacturer of NFA firearms.

Any such manufacturer may repair or replace unmarked silencer
components such as baffles, wipes, end caps, or specially made
packing material. If such components are replaced on an exchange
basis and the original components are destroyed, there is no
registration of a new firearm required and the silencer may be
returned on Form 5, tax exempt.

- 2 -

Mr. James O. Bardwell

If the manufacturer did not originally make the silencer and must
replace components bearing required markings, such as the outer
tube, the new replacement components would then require
registration as a new firearm and would be subject to marking
requirements under 27 CFR section 179.102. Return of the new
components would incur applicable transfer tax.

If the original defective components were not destroyed and were
returned to the customer in addition to replacement components, the
replacement components would also require registration as a new
firearm and could be subject to transfer tax.

A silencer which is unusable due to a manufacturer's defect, may be
replaced without incurring transfer tax, only if the silencer is
returned to the original manufacturer for repair and the original
manufacturer is licensed as a manufacturer of firearms and has
currently paid SOT as a manufacturer of firearms. The original
manufacturer may them mark the replacement with the same serial
number used on the defective silencer and then return the
replacement silencer on ATF Form 5 without incurring transfer tax.
The original defective silencer components must be destroyed.

We apologize for the inconvenience and trust that this clarifies
the matter. Should any additional information be needed, please
contact Gary Schiable at (202) 927-8330.


Sincerely yours,


[signed]
Kent M. Cousins
Chief, National Firearms Act Branch


"FWIW I bought my SWR Warlock b/c one of the advatges over the AAC Pilot was the 1st rebuild/cleaning was free......."

Rebuilds and cleanings are not subject to a new $200 tax...

"This is why "allegedly" Gemtech was pissed, they wrote a love letter and got a big fat NO SOUP on rebuilding thier cans without paying the 200 tax........vs everyone else was allowed to continue to do this.Including rebuildings gemtech's own cans while they could not. This filled vaginas with sand.
"
Do you actually read this crap before you post? Clearly you have not bothered to verify what you are posting.

This obviously is an emotional issue for some people. Emotional posts are simply that and should be read for what they are. Why in Gods name would you concern yourself with factual statements when it is all the more comforting to blow it out ones ass....
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

Bardwell's letters apply only to him, this isn't up for debate.

Now if someone decides what the batfe told someone else applies to them, well, it's a free country.

When the batfe decides someone's love letter applies to you, they'll let you know IE Atkins Accelarator & Gemtax

This is also not up for debate
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

Well, as long as there is no debate.......
smile.gif
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

Arevalosocom

Did you previously work for the BATF?
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

I did my best to look this up in the regs and could not find it. Does a mfg or mfg/s rep know if this is policy or is it directed at one company.

TIA
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

The letter to Bardwell, if authentic, is very clearly an exposition of the rules on silencer repair by the Chief of the NFA Branch.

There is no reasonable interpretation of that letter which could lead one to conclude that it applies only to Bardwell, absent a subsequent ruling to that effect by the BATFE itself.

If you know of such a ruling, please post a reference to it.

This FAQ by the BATFE dated April of 2008 would appear to clarify this matter, and appears to my eye to be perfectly consistent with the Bardwell letter.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/041708silencer-faqs.pdf

It seems to me to be very clear about repair procedures for silencers.
 
Re: Re-making suppressors

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the first letter was so clear, why the second letter?</div></div>

Because of people like the poster above who assert that the Bardwell letter applied only to Bardwell. So, the BATFE put the repair policy up as a FAQ on their website, rather than in a letter.

Some people have a deficient grasp of the obvious.