Silly Can Question...

Alabamacoastie

Adiutor vicinorum
Puddle Pirate
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
6,510
Location
Pittsboro, NC
Rating - 100%
74   0   0
Here it comes... I know, just because somebody is leo doesn't mean they REALLY know anything about firearms laws.

So, here goes...

I was just talking to a friend, who is recently retired leo, and he told me that before you can get a suppressor you have to get the local sheriff to sign something giving you permission to do so...

I've been reading these threads and I hadn't seen anything about a sheriff giving permission to fill out a tax stamp form and buy a can.

I told him I didn't think it worked that way, and he said, "When I got my can I had to get permission from my sheriff, but I was in uniform and he signed the form right away."

Sooooo...

Is this just more fudd? I hope so. We already jump through enough hoops. I don't need another one...
 
Prior to July 13, 2016 he was correct.

It wasn’t specific to suppressors, it was part of the NFA process for all 6 categories.

There even used to be a machingun permit in NC that was required for just that category, and specific verbiage need on the form(s). That went away prior to 41F (it was an unrelated state law).
 
7/13/16 is the date 41F went into effect. Before that, individuals had to submit fingerprints and photographs, and also get CLEO Certification. That wasn’t just the sheriff...there are all kinds of people that qualify at the city, county and state level. Entity applications (trusts/corps/LLCs/etc) didn’t have to do any of that...as an entity itself didn’t have fingers, a face, and wasn’t a resident under the authority of the CLEO. That’s why trusts got so popular. People would call it a “loophole” when it’s not, it was just the current set of regulations.

41F changed all that. Individuals still have to do prints & photos. But the ATF created the term “Responsible Person” as is related to an entity, and each of the RPs now has to also submit prints and photos. The CLEO Certification changed to CLEO Notification. Each RP (or the individual applicant) has to sent a copy of the form(s) to any of the qualified CLEO. This is supposed to be done at the same time you submit forms to the ATF. The CLEO doesn’t have to do anything with them, but is given the opportunity to reach out to the ATF if they have information on why the person(s) are legal to own the firearm.

Keep in mind the Responsible Person list only matters at the time of submission. So you can have a trust with 10 trustees, remove 9 of them, the remaining one does prints/photos, submit the forms, and then add everybody else back. If the “last one” is who does the 4473, nothing else happens. If any of the others do the 4473, they’d have to have a NICS check (or show permit) done at the final transfer. If the purchase was from a non-dealer, the 4473 issue doesn’t even arise.
 
nothing-left-to.jpg
 
Thanks BW! I don't know how you know so much about this stuff, but I'm glad you do.

Much appreciated!
 
Seriously...if you’d print out a Form 1, a Form 4, a 5320.23 (RPQ) and a 5320.20. Then sit down and read the form, definitions, and instructions, you’d know more than 75% of NFA owners.

And then one day if you’d do it again, but also look up and read any CFR (or other item) referenced, you’d know more than 95%.
 
Here it comes... I know, just because somebody is leo doesn't mean they REALLY know anything about firearms laws.
At least you've got that going for you.

Trigger warning, I have opinions on the topic...
Listening to "a cop" swing those big blue balls around while he tells you what "the law says" is like listening to the average soldier tell you what a firearms expert he is on all the guns he was never trained to use while changing tires. 90%+ of them would fail an NRA basic pistol/rifle class if the test at the end had anything more than suggested scoring guidelines (I know, some of the new ones have hard fails).
Nothing against cops or soldiers - but their job is following orders and letting somebody else sort it out afterwards and then try to protect them.
But yeah, listen to BigWaylon... he knows what he's talking about. The only thing I'd add is that you may get into questionable territory if you're removing people from the responsible persons schedule specifically to avoid the background check. Also, if you add people to the list of responsible persons after you've submitted but before the application has been approved, you're supposed to contact the ATF for guidance on possibly sending in additional paperwork.
Once an application has been approved, no documentation is required to be submitted to ATF when a new responsible person is added to a trust or legal entity. However, should a responsible person change after the application has been submitted, but before it is approved, the applicant or transferee must contact the NFA Branch for guidance.

Keep in mind that if you want to add somebody after it gets approved, you may be waiting for a year or so.
 
While we're talking about how to exist within todays laws set, what is the advantage (if any) of the "single shot" trust?

I see them discussed, don't know what they are.

I entered the game in 2011 after the clause was added to NC law to allow ownership of NFA items if the applicant is "in accordance with ATF reg blah blah " ( the NFA rule set) . I have to admit, getting that signed into law under the radar was absolutely brilliant work by---someone-----.
 
Last edited:
Also, if you add people to the list of responsible persons after you've submitted but before the application has been approved, you're supposed to contact the ATF for guidance on possibly sending in additional paperwork.
Once an application has been approved, no documentation is required to be submitted to ATF when a new responsible person is added to a trust or legal entity. However, should a responsible person change after the application has been submitted, but before it is approved, the applicant or transferee must contact the NFA Branch for guidance.

Keep in mind that if you want to add somebody after it gets approved, you may be waiting for a year or so.
I’m not saying this to contradict what you posted, and it’s entirely my opinion.

The snippet you posted was included in a Q&A the ATF published when 41F went into effect. I have a link to it in one of the stickies. That document has never been updated. I think they gave that answer because they didn’t have one at the time.

However, they also had this one on the document:

Q. Is an FFL required to conduct a background check prior to the transfer of the firearm for application submitted by trusts and legal entities after the effective date of July 13, 2016?
A. No. NICS background check will not be required prior to the transfer of the NFA firearm if the individual picking up the firearm on behalf of the trust or legal entity has undergone a background check as part of the application process. Responsible persons will be listed on the ATF Form 1, 4, or 5 so the licensee will know who has undergone a background check as part of the NFA application process.


So, the RPs that have had a background check done will be listed on the Form 1/4/5. If you add them after submission, whether that’s 30 seconds after you submit, or 30 seconds before it’s approved, it all falls into the “no background check done” category.

So then you can look at the 4473 for additional guidance. There you’ll find, in reference to Q20/21:

Questions 20 and 21. NICS Exceptions: A NICS check is not required if the transfer qualifies for any of the exceptions in 27 CFR 478.102(d). Generally these include: (a) transfers of National Firearms Act firearms to an individual who has undergone a background check during the NFA approval process; (b) transfers where the transferee/buyer has presented the licensee with a permit or license that allows the transferee/buyer to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm, and the permit has been recognized by ATF as a valid alternative to the NICS check requirement; or (c) transfers certified by ATF as exempt because compliance with the NICS check requirements is impracticable. If the transfer qualifies for one of these exceptions, the licensee must obtain the documentation required by 27 CFR 478.131. A firearm must not be transferred to any transferee/buyer who fails to provide such documentation.

A NICS check must be conducted if an NFA firearm has been approved for transfer to a trust, or to a legal entity such as a corporation, and no background check was conducted as part of the NFA approval process on the individual who will receive the firearm. Individuals who have undergone a background check during the NFA application process are listed on the approved NFA transfer form.


All that really means is you don’t get to skip the NICS because you already had a check done. You may still be exempt due to possessing a CHP, though.

That’s my take on it. I wouldn’t waste time contacting the ATF.
 
While we're talking about how to exist within todays laws set, what is the advantage (if any) of the "single shot" trust?

I see them discussed, don't know what they are.

I entered the game in 2011 after the clause was added to NC law to allow ownership of NFA items if the applicant is "in accordance with ATF reg blah blah " ( the NFA rule set) . I have to admit, getting that signed into law under the radar was absolutely brilliant work by---someone-----.
It goes along with the concept of starting with one RP, and adding more after approval. SilencerShop does it by using the serial number as part of the trust name.

The theory being you only file prints/photos for one person. Then you add as many as you want after the fact. Plus, you get to determine who those additional RPs are separately for each item. Maximum flexibility. I honestly see no reason to file as an individual. A one RP trust has advantages over an individual....and it’s really the same amount of work, just spread across two forms. What you skip on the F1/F4, you handle on the RPQ.

That make sense?
 
And FWIW...if you know what the forms say, you know more than 99% of the LEOs you’ll interact with. I think you’ll have much better results in those interactions if you come across as confident and knowledgeable.

And the sad news is you’ll probably know more than half of the dealers out there. I’ve had more than one call/email/PM me questions. (And before anybody starts pointing fingers and guessing, realize I’m the Mod in the NFA sections on AR15.com, which is where a majority of the questions come from)

Even sadder is the dealers that make statements based on what and ATF agent has told them. I got into a “discussion” when I first joined the Canadian site with a dealer that was convinced I was wrong...because of what his local ATF agent told him. My response was to post the federal regulation. It was right there in black and white.

Heck, I can copy/paste an email from either 2018 or 2019 where I emailed the NFA Branch to ask some questions. Admittedly one of the questions was one I knew the answer to, and had the CFR ready. They gave me an answer of “1 year”. I replied back with a copy of the reg that said “3 years”. They basically said, well I guess it’s three years then, I’ll make a note of it for the next time. But if that convo didn’t happen, how many other people would’ve been told the same thing? For anybody really curious, that particular question was how long I had to ask for a stamp to be canceled and $200 refund issued for a Form 1 if I decided not to make it. The fact you can do that is included in the instructions on the Form 1...but no timeframe is mentioned. You have three years from the day you paid the tax. You just have to provide a written statement saying the firearm was never made/modified, and return the original stamp. And yes, I asked about an EForm, and they said I still had to return one...not 100% sure how that would’ve worked? Print a copy of the form from their own system and mail it in? :rolleyes: (I ended up making the DIY silencer, so no story to wrap-up in the cancellation process)
 
While we're talking about how to exist within todays laws set, what is the advantage (if any) of the "single shot" trust?

I see them discussed, don't know what they are.

I entered the game in 2011 after the clause was added to NC law to allow ownership of NFA items if the applicant is "in accordance with ATF reg blah blah " ( the NFA rule set) . I have to admit, getting that signed into law under the radar was absolutely brilliant work by---someone-----.

Very flexible trusts that allow you to add/remove people as needed, and each NFA item is on its own trust instead of putting them all on one long trust like most do. It's great if you want to loan one item to a friend/family/associate without having to add them on to your main trust, which would also make them responsible for ALL your items on that trust.
Personally, if I can't trust you with everything, I'm not going to trust you with anything.

There has also been the discussion of single item trusts being flexible enough to essentially sell your item to somebody else by listing them as a trustee without having to go through the form 4 and wait a year, then have them remove you from the trust. Consult with your own gun attorney...
 
There has also been the discussion of single item trusts being flexible enough to essentially sell your item to somebody else by listing them as a trustee without having to go through the form 4 and wait a year, then have them remove you from the trust. Consult with your own gun attorney...


I'm pretty cavalier and hug as tight to the letter of the law as anyone but theres no way in hell even I would transfer a silencer to anyone by just signing the trust over to them.
 
I'm pretty cavalier and hug as tight to the letter of the law as anyone but theres no way in hell even I would transfer a silencer to anyone by just signing the trust over to them.
Agreed.

When you realize the entire NFA is really IRS tax code, and what they’d “come after you” for is some sort of tax evasion, and the penalty for illegally being in possession of an NFA firearm is up to 10-years and $250K...then a $200 transfer doesn’t seem that bad. :D
 
@Alabamacoastie

Have you:
1. Finished your homework?
2. Had a chance to have a follow-up convo with your ex-LEO friend?
 
@Alabamacoastie

Have you:
1. Finished your homework?
2. Had a chance to have a follow-up convo with your ex-LEO friend?
No, I totally forgot about this thread.

But, next time I see my buddy I'll let him know he's out of date on his can knowledge...
 
Back
Top Bottom