Told ya we would get screwed on the pro quo side of things.

No no no, the op just said this is good for us, less work load for the ATF.

TXL

Its good to train us to be photographed. And fingerprinted every time we buy something

and to notify local law enforcement every time we plan on exercising our rights.

Interestingly, in Florida you might by Federal mandate have to send the CLEO that notice,  but if he keeps it or establishes a file he has violated State Statute and is subject to a really hefty fine............along with his governing body!

Can you elaborate for me on how it's dishonest and misleading?



Enacting new law? Yep.

No congressional approval for it? Yep.

Forces fingerprinting and photographing of gun owners in cases where no requirement existed before? Yep.

Establishes local gun registration databases? It depends on the CLEO, but I don't see a requirement that he destroy the documents.  So, if all semi-autos end up in the NFA database as Feinstein wants, then all your CLEOs can operate their own local databases of guns.





I'm having trouble finding the beneficial side....

Getting 10+ people fingerprinted where we didn't have to before.

Getting 10+ people photographed where we didn't have to before.

Telling the local CLEOs about our private business when we didn't have to before.

Increasing NFA branch work load.



I can tell you straight out that if this goes through I'll have to amend my trust to be just me and my wife, because most of the rest of the people on it now aren't nearly as gun crazy as I am and wont want to be cataloged by the government on account of me.
 

The naysayers seem to be missing the point that the NFA world is highly regulated anyway. Do you really think you can preserve your anonymity while having a registered NFA weapon?

Here in Virginia, we have state police registration of machine guns. This hasn't proven to be a problem.  So, in what way would notifying the local CLEO be any different? (In fact, I would like to see the proposed regulation clarified so that the "notification" requirement would be satisfied through the registration with the state police.)

The fact that trust "responsible persons" can get by without photographs, fingerprints, and a thorough background check is an obvious weak link in the system. I'd rather be proactive here than wake up one day and find that a felon used this means to get a legal machine gun.

The proliferation of trusts is one of the things that has increased the workload of the ATF NFA Branch, since all these trusts have to be scrutinized for proper form, etc. If trusts were discouraged -- by removing some of the incentives for them -- the ATF workload would be reduced, and approvals could be done faster for the rest of us.

You're kidding yourself if you think this is going to make things faster. I've had stamps come back in three weeks on my trust. There is simply too much volume for them to handle with an antiquated process. Yes we can preserve our anonymity. It's a tax document and local le has no idea what I have. The only way the process would actually be improved is allowing dealers to issue stamps at the point of sale after paying the tax and a nics check. Fucking over trust and LLC stamp holders isn't going to speed up shit.

FAMOUS LAST WORDS.

I doubt it would "be faster for the rest of us".  What holds up the individual transfers is the prints / FBI?  My individual transfers take just as long as as the ones I do on a trust.

I agree with you on this idea in every case except in the case of NFA guns.


If you think about it, the NFA laws are the only thing keeping NFA ownership legal in the face of the dangerously random emotions of the public.

Certainly no politicians will take our side.


If you went to the supermarket and picked 100 people, I think 90% of them would be somewhat stunned that you can legally own an M16.

I think they would be upset about it until you explained how highly expensive and regulated they are.  Then they would feel OK.


I've noticed in the past that citing the NFA regulations is enough to counter even rabid liberals

what are they going to say?  that a $18K price tag and a 6 month wait isn't enough?


So in this particular instance, I think the heavy regulations sort of protect NFA ownership


I know that sounds weird but i dont see anything else except for theoretical disputes like we're having here.   The public doesnt care about such stuff.

I predict a " have more than 15 people in your trust, you need to provide health insurance for them" interpretation coming.

People will just switch back to the individual route since there is no longer any incentive to using a trust.

It should speed up the process a bit since trusts are all being examined.

Wow, just like Canada did back in the day, then they decided that no new owners would be allowed (closed purchasing) if you owned a machine gun you could buy more, but if you ever sold all your machine guns you could never get another......

slowly the ownership of machine guns has shrunk, and I foresee that happening faster up here as the owners get much older.

Same thing they decided to do later on with "converted autos" which are classed as machine guns in the USofA anyways, then handguns with 4" barrels or less, or in .32, or in .25.......

Sorry your gov is using us as an example

So for those who list their children as beneficiaries that means we get to cart them in to the police station to get fingerprinted so they can inherit our firearms where they didn't have to before.  Face the fact that all this does is further continue down the road of criminalizing gun owners.

Also they would have to make it a crime to amend your trust/corp/llc after a stamp is given.

Do they have a proposed date for implementation of the new rules? I have to submit a Form 4 for a SWR Specwar that is pending until the Form 3 comes back from ATF, and I have to know prior to sending in the Form 4. Like many said, I jumped through all the hoops for a trust, now I have to do everything just like I would have for a Individual. This sucks!

Wake up. Nothing is going to be sped up. This is a pile of shit. NFATCA is screwing us with this change.

good point. i got my trust this summer and am finally getting around to sending in my first one and my son is the benny, he's 10 months old. we did a trust because my wife a mil cop and we both love to shoot. this way we both have access and if we have to leave the country we can leave them in possession of a family member also on the trust till we come back.

this sounds like it really will suck!!! i better get off my duff and send my dang packet in. now i just have to rember what i have to send in

These are issues that have to be addressed during the comment period.

I suspect that the "responsible persons" they are talking about in connection with a trust will be the trustees, not the beneficiaries -- especially not underage beneficiaries.

Regulations (which is what these are) cannot create crimes in the absence of underlying legislation. There might be a procedure to send in additional photographs/fingerprints if the "responsible persons" of a trust or corporation change.

We just don't know the specifics until we see the text of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. That should be available soon.  (All we have now is an abstract.) Maybe we should withhold criticism until we see what is actually being proposed.

I agree we need to see what comes from the comment period and that people are not making sound decisions yet on this.

I'm not a member of NFATCA only a forum member there so I can interact with them and you can go read the two threads posted earlier and make the decision yourself but here is my basic understanding of what has happened.  The BATFE/DOJ has discovered a Form 1 or Form 4 was approved for a Felon that used the Trust Route.  So the DOJ decided they were going to implement something to prevent this from happening in the future.  The NFATCA put in their two cents, how about looking at removing the CLEO sign off for individuals?  I don't believe the NFATCA advocated for what the DOJ/ATF is actually proposing to require for trust/LLC's etc.. and only were pushing/wanting the CLEO sign off to be removed.  The NFATCA was probably not involved with the writing of the abstract or anything to that nature.

Now for all those saying this is illegal or they can’t do this without congress etc…   Well congress gave permission back in 1934.

The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is derived from what is passed by congress and becomes part of the United States Code (USC).

The DOJ requirement for CLEO sign off is in the CFR which can be changed with out there becoming a new law or congressional involvement.

The two statements below from the USC is what gave the authority to the Secretary of the Treasury now the DOJ to require the CLEO sign off, because there is nothing specifically written in the USC that says there must be a CLEO sign off for NFA firearms.  The same section of the law also allows the removal of the CLEO sign off which is in the CFR.  This same USC section that I bolded below also gives the DOJ the authority to require the identification of everyone in a Trust if they choose to do it.

From 26 USC § 5812 - Transfers
"(3) the transferee is identified in the application form in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, except that, if such person is an individual, the identification must include his fingerprints and his photograph;"

Also From 26 USC § 5822 - Making
"(d) identified himself in the application form in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, except that, if such person is an individual, the identification must include his fingerprints and his photograph; and"

So not sure how many will actually read this and understand what I am saying, I’m not a lawyer, but this is just what I get from reading the actual regulations that cover NFA firearms, which most people have NO clue where the actual regulations or laws come from that allow them to have their fun toys.

So you are saying that the other people (I assume you mean trustees) on your trust are "free riders" and; You would like to not see the primary hurdle for individual ownership removed  (negating the necessity of forming a "legal individual" [and all the risk {there is some, ask the Atty. who drew up the doc.}] and expense that entails) to protect them?

The fear of further involvement of the local CLEO I understand, but this can be partially abated with involvement in local politics. Local politics is an arena where the average individual has more opportunity for influence and should be devoting a portion of their time anyway.

It's a lot easier to prevent a JBT Sheriff or Police Chief from getting into office, than getting someone into office that's willing to sign an NFA form. One requires a lot less campaign volunteer work and donation than the other.

Based on the info above it could be possible that only the primary trustee would be the one having to do prints/check/cleo notify.  This however, would not do anything to counter somebody putting a felon in a trust.

Just a guess, but I think this may be the case, if only so they don't clog up the FBI fingerprint system with more requests than it already has.  Maybe just have a form where one trustee who has the background check done on him certifies that all other trustees are not prohibited possessors.

This is why I want a license and an A&D book to replace tax stamps.

This. Even though our CLEO will sign, I have a NFA trust for a number of convenience and estate planning reasons.



High on that "convenience" list is that it's a PITA to get your fingerprints done around here, and I once had to make 3-4 "come back this day at this time" trips over a month's time while STILL never getting 'em done because the "jailers are too busy right now", and they're the only ones who can/will do print cards for public. Fuck that.



 

What would be less work for the ATF is suppressors and SBRs weren't under the NFA! I just had my trust done yesterday, ugh.

This is most definitely NOT a good thing for those of us with trusts.

It will be interesting to see what they rule in relationship to minors in a trust.  Will they consider them a prohibited person and void the application?  Even though it has a 00 July 2013 date it could be months, years, never before it goes into effect.  This is much more complicated then the ATF just removing the CLEO signature and I'm sure they will become more aware of the unintended impact as the process moves forward.  If somehow certain title I firearms get thrown into this mess (more and more I believe anything is possible) it is going to be a nightmare.

Sorry to hear this is going to cause problems for those who have done the work to established trusts but as someone who lives in a state where NFA CLEO's are frowned upon it's nice to see the CLEO removal moving forward.

Wes

Shitty, but not an insurmountable issue.  If as described, handle these new regulation thusly:

1) Place a statement in your trust that there is only one "responsible person" as described in ATF regs, and identify that person (probably the Settlor/Grantor).  Boom - one set of photos/prints.  Does it still suck?  Yes, but remember that no matter what rules ATF makes, you make your trust rules under State law, and THEY CAN'T CHANGE THAT OR TELL YOU WHAT THOSE RULES ARE.  They can't make a trust a human being or make a trust NOT a person without an act of Congress, period.

2)  Send your notification to a random judge in your AO marked up as a tax document that must be destroyed.  Send it to a different one each time.  Maybe pick a DA or your State AG every once in awhile. There, no registration list.

I'm pissed about the wait this will cause, and I think that this is worse than what we had, but the more people with NFA stuff, the faster we'll get things like Silencers, SBRs, and SBSs off the NFA, and I know a TON of guys who will buy now that they don't have to form a trust or ask permission.

I cant waite for the cleo sig to drop off. I will drop my trust like a hot plate and go back to the nontrust route

Then if you want to individually own all the items your trust owns, you will have to pay $200 apiece to transfer them out of the trust.

Why would anyone want to transfer items out of their trust?

Why would anyone want to go the individual route instead of the trust route?  Right now it's a no-brainer, but even if things change, it makes things easier for when you know, have kids... or die.

I was just saying that if he dissolved his trust, he would have to transfer the items out of it.

Wow, you sound like someone who got his CLEO sign off and said screw the other guys. Why not add in an interview and inspection process of the storage area of your NFA items, I think I'll push for that. I mean there should be storage requirements for NFA items, certain types of safes, and monitored alarm systems, I already have all that so it won't really affect me. How does that sound?

So tell me how trust are being discouraged, EVERY entity that submits a F1/4 will have to submit the same items! A trust would still be more beneficial since it provides additional protections.

How would this decrease the ATF's workload, it would drastically increase. Now not only do they have to check your trust they have to run your prints, and do whatever with your pictures. A trust still fills out the certification of compliance for the trustee, why couldn't they just add a block to ask if your'e a felon, then do a NICS check at the ATF.

A felon getting an approved form1/4 would still be ILLEGAL!!! The felon could still not legally posses a NFA item regardless of who owns it. So, its like a straw purchase on a bigger scale. What are you going to do when billy bob the felon has his cousin submit the forms for him and then billy bob commits a crime with the item.

Lets check the steps for a F1 w/trust:
1. engrave firearm
2. fill out forms
3. print forms and trust
4. mail w/completed forms and check.

With the new requirements for everyone:
1. engrave firearm
2. fill out forms
3. go and get passport photos, pay for them
4. go get fingerprints and pay for them
5. print out forms, maybe trust
6. mail w/completed forms, photo, fingerprints and check.
7. mail CLEO copy of app or approved form

So the trust route cost the price of ink to print the paper, and the grand new way will cost maybe $25-30 dollars plus the TIME to drive to Walgreens for photos, then to the Police dept for fingerprints. This is a classic example of, well those other guys have it easier, I think we should have it easier, cause I don't want to pay for a trust, its not fair:( The grand irony is that after a person applies for 5-6 NFA items with this new system, they could have had a trust, which seems to be the main problem people have with trust is that they have to pay to create one. Even though they could have a basic one with quicken will maker.

I can't wait for this change to be implemented.  It's going to piss off my local CLEO royally that I have all these weapons.  He wouldn't sign for "Public safety reasons."

This is BS.

I guess since I'm the only person in my trust (grantor) who can add or remove items from the trust, I'm the only responsible person?


I'll be fucking pissed if I have to drive all over Heaven to get prints from my old man anyitme I want something new.

I think it is a good thing that the CLEO sign off might be going away.  I don't much care for the possible new requirements for trustees, but it does make a certain amount of sense when one looks at the original intent of the law (other than to make people not want to bother, the making sure people are not felons, etc. part.)  That isn't to say I agree with the changes, primarily because I don't agree with the law, not because the changes to trusts don't make sense in and of themselves.

That said, if such changes go through, I will probably go back to registering as an individual.  I have a combination of trust registered and individual registered NFA stuff right now.  If I have to get prints and pictures either way, I'll just go as an individual, as a much prefer the forms to have my name on them.  There is nothing that says one cannot fingerprint and photograph one's self, and that is what I will do.  ATF provides the fingerprint cards, and an ink pad is cheaper than paying the local PD to do them.  With all the digital cameras and photo printers out there, pictures are not a problem.  I think I will take another posters advice and mail my notification to a different CLEO every time.

Yes, I'd much rather they just do away with the CLEO signature requirement, but I'll deal regardless.

You know you can take a picture of you and your trustees with a digital camera and print them with a inkjet (thats what I do)
Just order the FBI cards and take your own prints or your trustees.

it might work out ot be a good thing as far as NFA ownership in general is concerned

Anyone know when  the new changes are suppose to take place?

I'm sorry... But at this day in age with THIS ADMINISTRATION!! WHY IN THE HELL WOULD YOU CREATE A STIR IN THE NFA COMMUNITY???

For the most part as I've learned ANTI-GUN liberals don't know this world exists and organiziations like the one that started this just helps put us in the cross hairs... While their patting themselves on the back, I sure hope this doesn't backfire...  Sometimes people need to know when not to tip their hand..  

Personally I don't see a need to remove CLEO...  If you can't get a signature, and item is legal in your state, go with a trust..  More beneficial for me as my wife and father can use my toys without me having to be present.....

Where is the good part of this again? The part where we have to report our activity to local le or the part where the wait time gets even worse?

Am I correct in assuming this will not affect the four Form 4s I will be sending off this coming Thursday with my brand-spanking-signed-on-3JAN13 trust?

when is this supposed to happen? any clue?

Imagine the uproar if there was a law that required fingerprints and photographs be given to the government in order to vote?  

The only "good part" is that people that are either two lazy to get (or aren't buying enough items to justify getting) a trust will no longer be subject to their CLEO's whims.  The rest of us are getting shafted, and we would lose many of the advantages of having trusts.

Ever since trusts became popular I've been expecting this fingerprinting rule to come along and bring the background check to the process again.

In the current political climate, I don't think the NFA law will stand intact if the background check is not included in ownership

So sooner is better than later if the change was inevitable anyway.

I haven't sen any thoughts on adding a person to your trust after you have paid for your stamps and have them in hand.

That was my point, Bhart89 - ATF can't stop you from doing whatever you want to with your trust, including adding or removing whomever they determine are "responsible persons" immediately before or after a transfer takes place.  Even if they KNEW, they couldn't stop you from changing your RLT until it is no longer revocable (you're dead).