APOD Firearms

BATFE - 41P - Rule date: June 2014...maybe?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Shorts

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 28, 2008
    4,607
    31
    Texas
    If that's the case does that mean all trusts created between now and then won't have to get CLEO signoff, printed and checked?
     

    grumper

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    2,993
    96
    Austin
    Doubt it.

    They don't care when your trust/corp was formed. Once the rule change happens legal entity transfers will all be treated the same whether your company is 20 years old or a brand new trust.

    The big question is whether they'll kick all the stuff already in the pipeline back out or let them go through.

    And whether they feel politically/judicially invincible enough to retroactively apply the rule and invalidate all tax stamps issued to entities under the current rules.
     

    rgwalt

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2013
    414
    1
    Houston Heights
    Doubt it.

    They don't care when your trust/corp was formed. Once the rule change happens legal entity transfers will all be treated the same whether your company is 20 years old or a brand new trust.

    The big question is whether they'll kick all the stuff already in the pipeline back out or let them go through.

    And whether they feel politically/judicially invincible enough to retroactively apply the rule and invalidate all tax stamps issued to entities under the current rules.

    I would be shocked if they invalidated all current stamps. That would be a logistical nightmare. I also doubt everything in the pipe will get kicked back.
    Historically new ATF rules grandfather existing applications.
     

    1slow01Z71

    Well-Known
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Jun 24, 2012
    2,404
    21
    Kyle
    On the plus side it seems efiled forms are coming back in a hair over 3 months for now at least. So now is the time to get your shit in if you don't want any possibility of having to deal with this. I believe Im going to register a couple more lowers and 4 more cans then Im done. I don't feel like this is really going to go through due to the wide reaching effect it will have on all trust law not just NFA stuff. As I understand it, if this rule does go into effect then when someone files a lawsuit challenging it then an injunction will be issued suspending it until a ruling has been made so it would seem there is a grace period for us even after the June deadline. Lets hope they scrap the whole damn thing but just in case some of you are on the fence.
     

    Shady

    The One And Only
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 24, 2013
    4,656
    96
    You realy think that the government would not roll out a plan that is a logistical nightmare. You might want to look into that thing they just did known as Obama care. For or against it everyone has to admit it was a clustermess :)
     

    wakal

    Just Some Guy
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 88.9%
    8   1   0
    Mar 20, 2011
    1,538
    46
    Zephyr
    Talking to a NFA clerk last week about this; the term "fiasco" came up several times. They said that they expect this to be a complete nightmare, as the folks who have Decreed From On High That This Will Be So have never, ever talked to anyone who actually works or deals with NFA items (on the government side, even) and could not in any way care less about any Americans.

    This is one piece of the ongoing punishment for "gunnies" because they did not back The One. And that was what the NFA clerk said...just their opinion, of course, but it was very amusing hearing what sounds like this (and other) board's usual echo chamber of complaints coming from that side of the discussion.


    Alex
     

    FlashBang

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 7, 2012
    584
    1
    Bastrop TX
    I find it so typical of the government that they spend millions creating the eFile system in order to comply with the Federal Paperwork Reduction Act and to save money via increased efficiency.... and then the clowns on high want to blow it all away with this ridiculous proposal.
     

    Shorts

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 28, 2008
    4,607
    31
    Texas
    Talking to a NFA clerk last week about this; the term "fiasco" came up several times. They said that they expect this to be a complete nightmare, as the folks who have Decreed From On High That This Will Be So have never, ever talked to anyone who actually works or deals with NFA items (on the government side, even) and could not in any way care less about any Americans.

    Fiasco sounds about right. That's the intention of course. When you don't agree with an activity, do all you can to interfere with it. That has to be a chapter from Sal Alinksky's book right?

    This is one piece of the ongoing punishment for "gunnies" because they did not back The One. And that was what the NFA clerk said...just their opinion, of course, but it was very amusing hearing what sounds like this (and other) board's usual echo chamber of complaints coming from that side of the discussion.

    Alex

    Yeah. He does the same to Texas, gives anything Texas a harder time that should be done. It's the whole enemies list and punish them as much as you can when you can.
     

    The Lox

    Well-Known
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,248
    21
    Farmers Branch
    Doubt it.

    They don't care when your trust/corp was formed. Once the rule change happens legal entity transfers will all be treated the same whether your company is 20 years old or a brand new trust.

    The big question is whether they'll kick all the stuff already in the pipeline back out or let them go through.

    And whether they feel politically/judicially invincible enough to retroactively apply the rule and invalidate all tax stamps issued to entities under the current rules.

    That is complete speculation and a total waste of a post. You have absolutely no idea that this would be the case. People like you spread BS posts like this for no reason at all. I am curious as to why you even posted something like this...
     

    grumper

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    2,993
    96
    Austin
    That is complete speculation and a total waste of a post. You have absolutely no idea that this would be the case. People like you spread BS posts like this for no reason at all. I am curious as to why you even posted something like this...

    If the questions make you all butthurt, don't read them then.

    Judging from some of the subsequent posts these same questions have been on other people's minds as well.
     
    Last edited:

    The Lox

    Well-Known
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,248
    21
    Farmers Branch
    If the questions make you all butthurt, don't read them then.

    Judging from some of the subsequent posts these same questions have been on other people's minds as well.

    Not butthurt at all, but there are a fair number of people on forums who think that someone posting seemingly correct information like you posted know what they are talking about. Clearly based on your post, it is just an opinion, and as such maybe next time you should just add "in my opinion" instead of stating your opinion like a fact. Same thing happens in politic posts and other posts, but most people have the common courtesy to state opinions are just opinions...
     

    Mexican_Hippie

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 4, 2009
    12,288
    21
    Fort Worth
    MY OPINION is that they'll go with whatever option collects the most taxes, takes away the most freedoms, is the most inefficient and grows their agency.

    Just my opinion, but that seems the be the rule rather than the exception.
     

    The Lox

    Well-Known
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,248
    21
    Farmers Branch
    MY OPINION is that they'll go with whatever option collects the most taxes, takes away the most freedoms, is the most inefficient and grows their agency.

    Just my opinion, but that seems the be the rule rather than the exception.

    Agree with the sentiment. If we look back to the last AWB and the last one they proposed though, the plans were to grandfather what was already out there. The ATF is a poorly run organization as it is, and surely there is some oversight committee that would be monitoring what would have to happen if every outstanding NFA item had to go back through the background check process. You aren't looking at months at that point, you are looking at years to get things approved. Given that this measure would not generate any new revenues, but rather increase costs with the number of employees to cover the work, I find it hard to believe that they would do anything other than grandfather what is currently outstanding. Of course that is just my opinion and thinking...
     

    wakal

    Just Some Guy
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 88.9%
    8   1   0
    Mar 20, 2011
    1,538
    46
    Zephyr
    but rather increase costs with the number of employees to cover the work

    My guess (like an opinion, only guessier) is that they will use the same nine people they have now to do the vastly increased workload. After all, they don't care that turnaround is now 10-14 months instead of a few weeks...why would they care that the new workload would be three to five years?

    The intent is not customer service. The intent is thwarting customers ;)
     

    rgwalt

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2013
    414
    1
    Houston Heights
    Agree with the sentiment. If we look back to the last AWB and the last one they proposed though, the plans were to grandfather what was already out there. The ATF is a poorly run organization as it is, and surely there is some oversight committee that would be monitoring what would have to happen if every outstanding NFA item had to go back through the background check process. You aren't looking at months at that point, you are looking at years to get things approved. Given that this measure would not generate any new revenues, but rather increase costs with the number of employees to cover the work, I find it hard to believe that they would do anything other than grandfather what is currently outstanding. Of course that is just my opinion and thinking...

    The sheer volume of NFA items out there is staggering, and would require a massive amount of effort on the behalf of the ATF to send out notices demanding background check info on all current owners. Furthermore, I don't know if that sort of move would stand up to legal challenge. Basically the government would be making a swath of law abiding citizens into criminals over night. While people are saying "That is just what the government would do!", it would generate a large amount of bad press and law suits over night. While "Obama wants to punish the gun owners", he doesn't want to stir the pot enough to create more court cases that could challenge the NFA or the gun control act of 1968.

    The ATF did hire more people, but no additional people who can do the final approval (from what I understand at least). The additional warm bodies are there to help plough through the added paperwork.

    I am hoping for a TX state law that would require CLEO sign-off within a certain period of time after the local sherif conducted a background check. This check would have a small, set cost assigned to it (similar to the fee we pay when renewing a CHL).
     

    The Lox

    Well-Known
    BANNED!!!
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 6, 2010
    1,248
    21
    Farmers Branch
    The sheer volume of NFA items out there is staggering, and would require a massive amount of effort on the behalf of the ATF to send out notices demanding background check info on all current owners. Furthermore, I don't know if that sort of move would stand up to legal challenge. Basically the government would be making a swath of law abiding citizens into criminals over night. While people are saying "That is just what the government would do!", it would generate a large amount of bad press and law suits over night. While "Obama wants to punish the gun owners", he doesn't want to stir the pot enough to create more court cases that could challenge the NFA or the gun control act of 1968.

    The ATF did hire more people, but no additional people who can do the final approval (from what I understand at least). The additional warm bodies are there to help plough through the added paperwork.

    I am hoping for a TX state law that would require CLEO sign-off within a certain period of time after the local sherif conducted a background check. This check would have a small, set cost assigned to it (similar to the fee we pay when renewing a CHL).

    Effectively requiring them to approve without a failed BG check or something? Essentially turning them into an shall issue type of deal? That is something I could get behind. Missouri has some rules that you have to have some sort of FFL in order to get NFA stuff I believe. So a C&R takes care of that deal..

    I think the best thing would be if folks who have already gone through the process of being fingerprinted and checked could therefore bypass that part of the check. Similar to the CHL deal and firearms purchases...
     
    Top Bottom