• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Want a NEW Machinegun? The ATF may have just allowed you to make one!**Update Post 72

dcmdon said:
they aren't going to overturn the ban.

But it may force the ATF to reconsider its stand on whether or not a trust is a person.

- - - Updated - - -



And if you don't want to spend the $500/yr for the SOT, but have the 07, just make it and pay the $200 tax.
Click to expand...

Don't those with SOT's also have some ITAR thing to pay? IIRC something around $2200 a year.
 
drgrant said:
I don't have cites offhand, if you want you can go dig it up.

Pre-May 86 DS can be retained by a dealer when they close their business. (These are still pretty expensive, but not quite as expensive as pre-86 civilian transferables are) Post-86 DS has to be disposed of somehow. If the latter wasn't true, every other rich guy would just get an 07, run it for a year or two and load up their collection and then close up shop. Obviously if you "manufacture" stuff that isn't banned like SBR, AOW, etc, you can keep these when you give up your FFL. There may or may not be NFA tax ramifications when you go to do this, that's the only part that I'm not sure of. Never really looked into that end of it because even if you had to pay the taxes on individual transfers, that's probably a pittance compared to the value tied up in the guns.

-Mike
Click to expand...
You have to be careful if you get into quantity. Say you pay the SOT, pound out 50 Lightning Links and register them in one year, you have avoided paying $10,000 in transfer taxes. They frown on that. Jack.
 
My understanding with nfa stuff if you go to a shoot out of your home state . You need to tell the atf . Dose a 07 have to do this to? Like say I get it then make a drop in sear. If I want to go to a car shoot as a 07 can I just go ? Or do I need to do the same thing as a regular guy with nfa stuff.
 
warwickben said:
My understanding with nfa stuff if you go to a shoot out of your home state . You need to tell the atf . Dose a 07 have to do this to? Like say I get it then make a drop in sear. If I want to go to a car shoot as a 07 can I just go ? Or do I need to do the same thing as a regular guy with nfa stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if 07s are exempt from this, probably not, but I could be wrong. In any event, you just do what everyone else does and send the NFA branch a packet of 5320.20s every year that cover every state you're liable to bring the guns to for a year. It only costs postage. (I think at one time you could fax them in, as well. )

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
I don't have cites offhand, if you want you can go dig it up.

Pre-May 86 DS can be retained by a dealer when they close their business. (These are still pretty expensive, but not quite as expensive as pre-86 civilian transferables are) Post-86 DS has to be disposed of somehow. If the latter wasn't true, every other rich guy would just get an 07, run it for a year or two and load up their collection and then close up shop. Obviously if you "manufacture" stuff that isn't banned like SBR, AOW, etc, you can keep these when you give up your FFL. There may or may not be NFA tax ramifications when you go to do this, that's the only part that I'm not sure of. Never really looked into that end of it because even if you had to pay the taxes on individual transfers, that's probably a pittance compared to the value tied up in the guns.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike,
Forgot they also had a pre-86 ds class. That is what I was thinking of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Please remember the pre sample MGs can only be kept if you are a sole proprietor. LLC, Corp, etc all have to dispose of the Pre Samples. A few years ago the pre samples were way cheaper than transferrables. After a rumor ATF was going to magically classify all pre samples as transferrables, the prices are now only slightly cheaper than transferrables in some cases.

07 with SOT does not have to file 5320.20 (interstate transport) Bring all your other paperwork. = NFA Handbook 13.8: ...." A person, other than an FFL/SOT, may not lawfully transport in interstate or foreign commerce any destructive device, machinegun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, without prior written approval of ATF, specifically the NFA Branch."......

As mentioned, getting your 07 and paying SOT as a sole prop is a way of getting into post sample MGs but please realize unless you are a machinist and can weld, you will need either Law letters to buy post samples or will have to wait for an 07 to drop his SOT which allows him to sell them to other 07s with SOTs without a law enforcement "love letter". When this happens, the post samples sell for more than normal and they sell quickly. Expect first year setup costs of at least $5k: FFL, SOT reduced, ITAR, MA licenses, liability insurance. That is without rent, storage, cameras, alarm, data line required for MIRCS etc.


FYI: You have to do the manufacturing of the MG at your place of business, so going to a shop and having it done there (even while you wait) is illegal.

ITAR: Shops have been inspected and told to have ITAR paid by end of business day for that fiscal year and given X days to have ITAR paid for ALL years of operation or be prosecuted by the DOJ. I am not aware of an prosecutions immediately after the Fed finding out you have not paid it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info vert
One of the problems I see for me is renting a spot cheap enough with the power and water needs id grow into lol .
Sucks I couldn't just legally do the odd ball crap in the shop I have setup . But figure once I got cash I can buy a new one or move my mill...


I'll try to word this the best I can.
Can a FFl/sot cover two people like co owners. Like say me and a friend start the company would we both be covered bringing the toys to the range? It would just be me and the co owner and no one else.
I figure for manufacturing etc that would cover in the shop but wasn't sure how the FFl covers you if you wanted to go do testing or bring to a shoot.
 
The ATF denied it. Then approved it. And now realizing they opened a can of worms want it back.

But now there is a "taking" and now we have a plaintiff with standing.....

As the article says, this is going to likely be a long and drawn out court battle.


The audio confirming that the approval took place (and subsequent revocation) is in the YouTube video above.

The ATF have dug themselves into a pretty big legal pit over the last couple years. First they kicked the hornet’s nest that is SIG SAUER by classifying their muzzle brake as a silencer, which has led to a long and protracted legal battle that SIG SAUER is hell bent on winning. Then they decided to stick their noses into Ares Armor’s business, for which they have drawn some significant criticism and once again firmly ensconced themselves as the “bad guys” in the firearms industry.

This latest issue arose when President Obama demanded that the ATF close the “gun trust loophole” and make it harder for individuals to purchase legal firearms. They proposed a rulemaking change to make that demand a reality, and promptly received an avalanche of letters opposing any such move.

While the official rule change is probably more than a year away if ever (and the legal battle to follow such a change would take even longer), the ATF decided to try and make that change happen right now anyway by re-defining a couple things. Thanks to that definition — that a trust is not a person for purposes of a form 4473 — it opened the flood gates for trusts to build machine guns. In theory, anyway.

There’s already a legal fund coming together to fight this revocation and take the ATF to court over this issue. Stay tuned.
Click to expand...

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...oved-first-new-civilian-machine-gun-28-years/

[video=youtube_share;4s9GKoxnGcM]http://youtu.be/4s9GKoxnGcM[/video]
 
exodious said:
Anyone else think the ATF will try and Ruby Ridge this guy if he persists?
Click to expand...

I've been reading the thread (it is long). Someone said this:

There are several people out there with approved eF1s for an MG via a trust. They all got calls today revoking the approved status and emails changing their "approved" form status to "disapproved."

I was told the number of eF1 Trust MG applications was "several hundred."
Click to expand...

If true, there might actually be quite a few people out there with stamps...
 
soloman02 said:
If true, there might actually be quite a few people out there with stamps...
Click to expand...

That will make it substantially more difficult to RR the guy, though it wouldn't surprise me if the ATF selects someone to **** as an example to others.

soloman02 said:
The gun trust attorneys are now aware of this.

http://blog.princelaw.com/2014/09/1...un-and-then-rescind-it-contact-us-to-discuss/

All I can say is: Freedom Boner.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Liberty Erection... hope this works out in our favor.
 
drgrant said:
For what? Having a tax stamp? That'd be a new one.

-Mike
Click to expand...

There's a lot of talk on that Arfcom thread about persuading a pliant judge that possession of the "approved but disapproved" stamp would show intent to make a machinegun... warrant issued to rip his house apart at minimum doesn't seem that far fetched.

Honestly though Ruby Ridge is my knee-jerk reaction, because while the NFA branch doesn't seem to be run by jackboots, the ATF does have a lot of jackboots on hand.
 
This is a very interesting thread that I somehow missed, or just forgot about. Does anyone know if you need a specific NFA trust setup if you already have a corporate entity? I know there are a few attorneys on here as well as members that have a lot more knowledge of NFA matters than I do so hopefully someone will know. Don't want to derail this thread so if the mods feel I should start a separate thread, please let me know.
 
[video=youtube_share;qUccjCBuByE]http://youtu.be/qUccjCBuByE[/video]

I hope this goes our way. As soon as it does I will have stamps in on 2 AK's and an AR lower.
 
This is like someone "discovering" that the IRS has no authority to collect tax. Regardless (or irregardless) of what the words actually say, they will mean what the government wants them to mean.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
This is like someone "discovering" that the IRS has no authority to collect tax. Regardless (or irregardless) of what the words actually say, they will mean what the government wants them to mean.
Click to expand...

You're right, but you just got me thinking... maybe that's why they "need" to stockpile all of that ammo.[laugh]
 
edmorseiii said:
[video=youtube_share;qUccjCBuByE]http://youtu.be/qUccjCBuByE[/video]

I hope this goes our way. As soon as it does I will have stamps in on 2 AK's and an AR lower.
Click to expand...

[video=youtube_share;4hkI1t3Kuok]http://youtu.be/4hkI1t3Kuok[/video]

i'd need a lot of tape.

i really hope this goes the right way.
 
Want a NEW Machinegun? The ATF may have just allowed you to make one!**Update...

I'd be down for a ar, ak, and a glock so fast . Or one of the 54r belt fed kits that are under 500$.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
This is like someone "discovering" that the IRS has no authority to collect tax. Regardless (or irregardless) of what the words actually say, they will mean what the government wants them to mean.
Click to expand...


Yea, but they'll let us have new MG's before they give up their IRS cash cow.

Not saying we're going to get either out of this, but the IRS is more important to them.

Oh, and is it a specific type of corporation that can own a new MG, or can any old Subchapter-S or LLC or Inc. set up the paperwork to buy a new MG?

Or am I just daydreaming and that's strictly LEO and .mil?
 
The5thDentist said:
Yea, but they'll let us have new MG's before they give up their IRS cash cow.

Not saying we're going to get either out of this, but the IRS is more important to them.

Oh, and is it a specific type of corporation that can own a new MG, or can any old Subchapter-S or LLC or Inc. set up the paperwork to buy a new MG?

Or am I just daydreaming and that's strictly LEO and .mil?
Click to expand...

Great question, and what I asked a few posts above yours regarding the "type" of corp needed. I have a s-corp. so this is something I'm truly curious about.
 
The5thDentist said:
Yea, but they'll let us have new MG's before they give up their IRS cash cow.

Not saying we're going to get either out of this, but the IRS is more important to them.

Oh, and is it a specific type of corporation that can own a new MG, or can any old Subchapter-S or LLC or Inc. set up the paperwork to buy a new MG?

Or am I just daydreaming and that's strictly LEO and .mil?
Click to expand...

Basically, any NFA trust would work. That is why if this avenue works out, this is awesome. $200-$300 for an NFA trust written by an NH attorney plus the $200 tax plus the cost of a DIAS (at non FR prices) and you have a legal M16.
 
soloman02 said:
Basically, any NFA trust would work. That is why if this avenue works out, this is awesome. $200-$300 for an NFA trust written by an NH attorney plus the $200 tax plus the cost of a DIAS (at non FR prices) and you have a legal M16.
Click to expand...

89$ online trust .
200$ tax stamp.
15 mins on a bridge port 10$ worth of stock. Or 1 hour with a hack saw / bandsaw and files. Plus a m16 trigger .
You got a dias for your ar15.

Or 15-20 mins of mill time and convert a ar15 to m16/m4 lower.

Converting a ak little more of a pain.

I'd rather build a new ak then trying to remove the right side rail and then install a full auto rail. Weird how half the parts kits I've seen have semi auto bolt carriers yet included the full auto sear/ delay device .
 

Similar threads

ATF Redefines All Private Sales & Who Has To Have A FFL
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Flint
F
ATF new report shows FFLs are not the problem
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
SkilledSovereignty
S
Maine Gov. Mills Pushes to Make it Easier to Have Firearms Confiscated
Replies
3
Views
278
Uzi2
U
i was that guy...you know, the one we all hate
2
Replies
46
Views
1K
Broc
Broc
Want to know who has a monopoly of force in America?
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
2K
240Geezer
2
Back
Top Bottom