The NFA Trust and the obunghole regulations

[SC-Texas]

I spent most of the day talking to my clients about the proposed changes coming by fiat from the executive branch of the Obomber administration. This is what we know (other than fact that the nfatca selling us down the river and lying about it):

"Closing a Loophole to Keep Some of the Most Dangerous Guns Out of the Wrong Hands


Current law places special restrictions on many of the most dangerous weapons, such as machine guns and short-barreled shotguns. These weapons must be registered, and in order to lawfully possess them, a prospective buyer must undergo a fingerprint-based background check.
However, felons, domestic abusers, and others prohibited from having guns can easily evade the required background check and gain access to machine guns or other particularly dangerous weapons by registering the weapon to a trust or corporation. At present, when the weapon is registered to a trust or corporation, no background check is run. ATF reports that last year alone, it received more than 39,000 requests for transfers of these restricted firearms to trusts or corporations.
Today, ATF is issuing a new proposed regulation to close this loophole. The proposed rule requires individuals associated with trusts or corporations that acquire these types of weapons to undergo background checks, just as these individuals would if the weapons were registered to them individually. By closing this loophole, the regulation will ensure that machine guns and other particularly dangerous weapons do not end up in the wrong hands.

And the link to the whitehouse website.View Rule

Title: Background Checks for Principal Officers of Corporations, Trusts, and Other Legal Entities With Respect to the Making or Transferring of a National Firearms Act Firearm
Abstract: The Department of Justice is proposing to amend the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) regarding the making or transferring of a firearm under the National Firearms Act. The proposed regulations would (1) add a definition for the term "responsible person"; (2) require each responsible person of a corporation, trust or legal entity to complete a specified form, and to submit photographs and fingerprints; (3) require that a copy of all applications to make or transfer a firearm be forwarded to the chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) of the locality in which the maker or transferee is located; and (4) eliminate the requirement for a certification signed by the CLEO.

So, the NFA trust is not going away. The effect of the new rules will largely depend on the definition of responsible person. If this the settlor only, them that is one thing. If ALL trustees are considered RPs, then the rule will have a much larger affect on the trust.


We will have to wait and see for a few more days.


What can be done? It's time to start getting the TSRA, the NRA involved in fighting this. it's time to start calling and emailing all of our congress critters and warning them that the Obomber administration is usurping the power of congress by back dooring anti-gun legislation and exceeding the authorit of the executive branch.


Sean Cody
Attorney
281-451-4175

 

[benenglish]

It's time to start getting the TSRA, the NRA involved in fighting this.

You're kidding, right? I've rarely (never?) seen the NRA or TSRA stand up for this segment of shooters. There's nothing about this matter on the NRA web site. There's nothing on the NRA ILA web site. There's nothing on the TSRA web site.

The apparently moribund NFA Owners Association has nothing on their site, either.

That leaves the NFA Trade and Collectors Association. They briefly address the issue with, in more than one place on their web site, a bit of "calm down, the sky isn't falling". Specifically, Trust Changes Ahead... says that

It STILL must go through the official rule making process in order to become real. As soon as it hits the Federal Register, everyone MUST voice their opposition. Otherwise, fingerprints and photos will be required for responsible persons, however that gets defined.

These are Executive ACTIONS, not orders. It is the President saying "hey, I wanna get this done." It is not circumventing the rule making process.

However, you refer to

the nfatca selling us down the river and lying about it

which leaves me really confused.

First, what is the NFATCA doing to sell us down the river and how are they lying about it?

Second, isn't the advice of the NFATCA to utilize the public comment period a valid course of action?

Third, what can we do that's actually effective? I do not trust the NRA to do squat on this and apparently you don't trust the NFATCA, so what's the alternative? Yes, I plan on personally contacting my congresscritters by mail and phone but beyond that, what do you suggest?

 

[SC-Texas]

Because they started this crap and were stupid enough to believe the obunghole/holder ATF would do something beneficial r gun owners

As the proposal states (starting on page 9 of the proposal), on December 3, 2009, the ATF received a petition for rulemaking from the National Firearms Act Trade and Collectors Association (NFATCA). “The NFATCA expressed concern that persons who are prohibited by law from possessing or receiving firearms may acquire NFA firearms through the establishment of legal entities such as a corporation, trust, or partnership.” It goes on to state “The Petitioner [NFATCA] expressed concern that an NFA firearm could be obtained by a prohibited person and used in a violent crime.” (emphasis added). And it gets worse. “Therefore, for applications for a corporation, trust, partnership, or other legal entity to make or receive an NFA firearms, petitioner has requested amendments to §§ 479.63 and 479.85 to require photographs and fingerprint cards for persons who are responsible for directing the management and policies of the entity, so that a background check of the individual may be conducted.” (emphasis added).

The ATF responds to this concern by stating that it agrees with the NFATCA’s concern and that further regulation is necessary. The ATF then goes on to state of a single alleged instance where an individual applied for a silencer, was denied, and then, again allegedly, applied again in the name of a trust, wherein the individual was settlor of the trust, which the ATF recognized and denied. (It must be noted that the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in US v. Miller, 588 F.3d 418, specifically held that a trust was a PROPER legal entity for holding a firearm, where the settlor was prohibited, provided proper safeguards were included in the trust to ensure that the prohibited individual did NOT possess the firearm).

 

[SC-Texas]

So he waiting is over. It's Cleo signoffs for all. That's right, expanded Cleo signoffs.

 

[HallisChalmers]

Because they started this crap and were stupid enough to believe the obunghole/holder ATF would do something beneficial r gun owners

So NFATCA ratted us out to the Feds...and the ATF said, "Oh, thanks for helping us **** everybody. We'll get right on it."

And so here we are.

****.

 

[Pilgrim]

So when does all this regulation officially start? In other words...

What are we now required to do?
Who is required to provide photos and fingerprints? Settlor only or Trustees as well?
When are we required to do it?

I guess I'm speaking for those that have NFA Trusts already...

 

[ScorpionHunter]

Sean, what's your best guess if I submit Trust paperwork next week, would it be kicked back for a CLEO sign off?

 

[benenglish]

...December 3, 2009, the ATF received a petition for rulemaking from the National Firearms Act Trade and Collectors Association...

I am nearly dumbfounded at the stupidity and gall. Thank you for the history lesson. I'm going to go off and be despondent for a while.

 

[Renegade]

Sean, what's your best guess if I submit Trust paperwork next week, would it be kicked back for a CLEO sign off?

Nobody knows.

My recommended course of action is to immediately get trust now, immediately get NFA items now, submit and hope for the best.

IMO there is going to be a NFA feeding frenzy to buy items before this goes into effect. No different than price run-ups in CO, and other states when bans go into effect.

NFA stockpiles at dealers are very, very low. And lead times to replenish are very, very long.

 

[ScorpionHunter]

I believe the multiple gun sale reporting requirement back in 2011 started as an executive order, and was implemented pretty quickly.

 

[breakingcontact]

Hate this. I don't want to have to freak out, run up a credit card and HOPE I don't get everything kicked back or otherwise get screwed over. I've been saving for some suppressors. Suppose I'll turn that into saving for an AK or something now.

 

[Pilgrim]

I sent a message to NRA-ILA asking them to weigh in on this...

Eagerly awaiting their response.

 

[1slow01Z71]

So is there an advocacy group that we can contact that could take this thing to court? Seems like by proxy they are taking away the rights of people who live in an area where the CLEO wont sign off.

 

[ScorpionHunter]

So is there an advocacy group that we can contact that could take this thing to court? Seems like by proxy they are taking away the rights of people who live in an area where the CLEO wont sign off.

There's the American Silencer Association. That's the industry group with companies like Silencer Co, AAC, Liberty, etc in it.

 

[ScorpionHunter]

This is a good site describing how rules are changed, and how to make effective comments.

Learn More - Regulation Room

 

[HallisChalmers]

http://www.nfatca.org/pubs/NFATCA_Statement_083113.pdf

[FONT]"While the NFATCA has acknowledged in our petition that there is concern regarding prohibited persons receiving firearms without background checks via trusts and corporations, the draft NPRM does not reflect any discussions or negotiations we have had with the Federal Government regarding same. We did not support or advocate for the efforts of the Executive Branch that were recently published as the proposed NPRM. The proposed NPRM is being used as a political expedient to address areas of negligible concern.[/FONT]"


Yeah, right. They slipped the knife in real good.

Reminds me of what Lyndon Johnson supposedly said about a political opponent "You and I both know he's a lying cocksucker - we just want to hear him DENY he's a cocksucker!"

 

[grumper]

I sent letters to Senators Cruz and Cornyn.

Let's see how/if they respond.

 

[HallisChalmers]

I sent letters to Senators Cruz and Cornyn.

Let's see how/if they respond.

I did the same with Cruz and am waiting on a response from Tommy Gage - Sheriff Montgomery Co SO re: his stance on the CLEO sign off.

 

[HallisChalmers]

I did the same with Cruz and am waiting on a response from Tommy Gage - Sheriff Montgomery Co SO re: his stance on the CLEO sign off.

Well this is a pleasant response to my email to Sheriff Gage.

First my email:

Name: Mr. XXXXXXXXX SPRING, TX 77386

Phone: XXXXXXXXX

Email:

Comments/Questions:

In light of Obama's desire to change ATF rules concerning NFA weapons transfers - and the requirement that the CLEO sign off on such transfers after a back ground check of the individual - will your office sign off on such requests?

I am an NRA, TSRA Life member and CHL holder, The slow dismantling of the country and the constitution is troublesome. Consequently, I hope you continue to stand with us and we can rest assured that you are on our side.

Respectfully,

XXXXXX

And now the response:

Yes sir...the Sheriff will sign off on these if your criminal history is clear.
I have attached a letter that the Sheriff sent out months ago.
Thank you

Deanne Riley
Executive Assistant
Sheriff Tommy Gage
#1 Criminal Justice Dr.
Conroe, Texas 77301
deanne.riley@mctx.org
936-760-5872
Fax: 936-538-7797

Wow. That's all I can say. I'm glad that Tommy Gage says he will, but it saddens me that other fellow Texans may be screwed by these bastards in Washington.

 

[benenglish]

And now the response:

I live in Spring, Harris County. There's a move in my future but I had not considered moving further north...until now. Thanks for the info.