ATF Extending CLEO Sign Off to Trusts and Corporations

That is nonsense. Even more nonsense because the measure they are taking doesn't solve the problem they claim exists. It just creates an additional barrier for legal ownership.
Click to expand...

Well, the problem may very well exist, as there are examples even here of unscrupulous uses of the trust method. Although, really, is a felon going to actually get himself put on a trust for the purpose of owning an NFA item? "Ooh, can't get me now, copper--see, I'm legal now. Says so 'cause my name's on a trust!" Huh?

However, this new proposal , while it might stem some unintended uses of trusts is by FAR about the most backward and inefficient way to do so.

Now, IF there was a CLEO for every area (heard there isn't always?) and IF that CLEO could only refuse to sign if there was documented evidence the applicant had or was planning to stray outside the law, then the proposal wouldn't be so terrible.

As to the separate proposed tax increase, what they should do is offer an expedited service for that $500. You want it in 1-3 months, pay $500. Don't mind a 6-9 month wait, $200. Honestly, I'd bet that arrangement could really impact the national debt...
 
Well, the problem may very well exist, as there are examples even here of unscrupulous uses of the trust method.
Click to expand...
Could people have cheated? Maybe. Have there been any prosecutions? No. Have any violent crimes been traced to this? No.

As to the separate proposed tax increase, what they should do is offer an expedited service for that $500.
Click to expand...
If they can offer an "expedited" service at all, that shows they're dragging their feet on regular approvals. No can do.
 
Could people have cheated? Maybe. Have there been any prosecutions? No. Have any violent crimes been traced to this? No.
Click to expand...

True, but I can't fault them for trying to shore up a potentially loose system, especially when it comes to something like firearms. However, like I stated after that, I strongly disagree that the proposed way is the proper way to do this.

If they can offer an "expedited" service at all, that shows they're dragging their feet on regular approvals. No can do.
Click to expand...

My comment was really purely hypothetical. However, 6-9 months for basically a background check and filing a few papers? It's fairly obvious they're not exactly prioritizing anything when it comes to NFA approvals.
 
True, but I can't fault them for trying to shore up a potentially loose system, especially when it comes to something like firearms
Click to expand...
I certainly can. If a practice cannot be shown to have caused harm, why are we regulating it out of existence?
 
Well, the problem may very well exist, as there are examples even here of unscrupulous uses of the trust method.
Click to expand...

A felon cannot legally possess a firearm, even as a trustee of a trust. The only way for him to obtain one via a trust is if a trustee who can legally possess a firearm picks up the firearm for him and then turns it over to him. At that point, the only thing being a trustee might do is protect him from unregistered NFA weapon charges beng tacked on to all the other laws being violated.

Further, requiring CLEO sign-off on all trustees does not solve this problem since a trust can legally be amended after it has been approved by ATF. It is like every other gun control law proposed by this Administration. The law does nothing to solve the problem they claim they are trying to solve but it creates giant burdens for good, law-abiding citizens who are trying to stay law-abiding but still own firearms.
 
Further, requiring CLEO sign-off on all trustees does not solve this problem since a trust can legally be amended after it has been approved by ATF.
Click to expand...
The proposed rule would require a new form (with prints, pics and CLEO sign-off) to be submitted within 30 days of anyone being added to a trust/corp/LLC as a "responsible person." Presumably, this would not require another fee and would add to the backlog in the NFA section.
 
Some of the last few comments are really troubling to me. First off, if a felon or prohibited person were to try and circumvent any law by being on a Trust they would still be in violation of the law - i.e. breaking the law.

A prohibited person (Felon) in possession of an NFA item or any firearm for that matter is already AGAINST the law. It does not matter how that item was obtained. Why do we need any more laws, Executive Orders, Executive Actions, etc ??!?!?!? It is plain simple language that is already in place.

Second point. Why should I or anyone have to pay a fee for an "expedited" BATFE approval - i.e. Tax Stamp. Absolutely not, and one can make a strong argument that will all the taxes already in place, and the 2nd Amendment there should not even be a $200 tax stamp requirement to own NFA items.

Bottom line. This proposed action, be it law, Excecutive this or that, is a stupid feel good proposal that will - once again - ONLY effect us law abiding citizens.

Regards,

Rob
 
The proposed rule would require a new form (with prints, pics and CLEO sign-off) to be submitted within 30 days of anyone being added to a trust/corp/LLC as a "responsible person." Presumably, this would not require another fee and would add to the backlog in the NFA section.
Click to expand...

I don't want to go into detail for obvious reasons; but if you are a felon who is at the same time willing to pay a $200 tax stamp to the ATF and register the firearm that proves you are committing an illegal act, then the new regulation doesn't solve that problem. It can be circumvented easily enough if someone who is not a prohibited person is willing to commit a federal firearms felony for you (and if someone isn't, then a trust still doesn't help you).

And ATF seems uncertain on that rule yet. They discussed something like that in the proposal but were specifically asking for comments regarding how feasible that was. Realistically, I don't think it is that feasible - if you define responsible person broadly enough to make it useful in excluding the odd felon, you will blow away the ATF estimate of 2 people per trust by a large factor (In my trust it would be 7 responsible persons - and this is a fairly simple trust). If you limit "responsible persons" to only those who can alienate trust property, then there are still several loopholes that can still be abused by felons who are desperately seeking ATF attention that would allow them to escape the "Unregistered possession of NFA item" charge; but not the 20 other charges.

And for what? Hell, a Form 3 between dealers is taking months as it is right now. I could probably add a felon to a trust, submit the appropriate form to ATF notifying them of the fact in the exact fashion ATF wishes to be notified and it might be a year or more before they noticed it.
 
This all sounds like a giant pain in the arse for all parties involved.

I'd like to see them drop 'ol Cleo from the requirement and grandfather current tax stamps and trusts.

If they are hell bent on making changes then make the rookies getting their first NFA gun jump through the hoops or anyone wanting to add a new person to their trust or a new gun.

Just my 2 cents.

Serbu Super Shorty 12ga (my skeet gun)
Rock River SBR AR-15, 5.56mm, Sig red dot, GI sling
Yankee Hill 9mm suppressor (for my G-19)
 
rawiron1 said:
If they are hell bent on making changes then make the rookies getting their first NFA gun jump through the hoops or anyone wanting to add a new person to their trust or a new gun.
Click to expand...

See, I never understood the process to begin with. Once you go through the process once, it should be a relatively simple process to just verify everything's still valid. So, have thorough background checks, 6 month wait time, etc... Everytime after that should be able to be processed in a matter of weeks.
 
I am a newbie in the NFA area, and I have been working on learning more about the rules and regulations as I already have a Class 01 FFL. I have strongly considered obtaining my Class 03 tax stamp to be able to sell/transfer NFA items with my Class 01 FFL, but this has made me step back. The last thing I want to do is make a bad business decision with jumping in on that while these proposed changes are in the works.

I agree that it looks like they are trampling on our 2nd Amendment rights yet again and trying to make an already trying process even more difficult to push people away from NFA items including dealers...
 
The last thing I want to do is make a bad business decision with jumping in on that while these proposed changes are in the works.
Click to expand...
It won't directly affect you. The burden will be on your customers.
 
Tom Servo said:
bamaee04 said:
The last thing I want to do is make a bad business decision with jumping in on that while these proposed changes are in the works.
Click to expand...
It won't directly affect you. The burden will be on your customers.
Click to expand...
I think he's referring to the fact that it may be a bad business decision to get into NFA sales if they're about to make it much more difficult to buy an NFA item. If this new Executive Action ends up being as bad as we think it might be, it will be a lot harder to buy NFA items and sales will drop nationwide. Heck, they might even plummet.
 
Not only would this cut back on demand for NFA items, there is also the issue of what happens to all the already paid-for but still pending NFA applications when this goes into effect. A giant cut in demand + a huge dump of NFA items at the same time is going to hurt. It almost looks like this regulation was designed to put people out of business as its primary goal.
 
Not only would this cut back on demand for NFA items, there is also the issue of what happens to all the already paid-for but still pending NFA applications when this goes into effect. A giant cut in demand + a huge dump of NFA items at the same time is going to hurt. It almost looks like this regulation was designed to put people out of business as its primary goal.
Click to expand...

The bill was probably designed to close a loophole in the regs/laws that permitted the suppressor business to grow as big as it did over the last 3-5 years. I saw something like this coming several years ago when folks thought that Trusts were the best thing since sliced bread to avoid the CLEO requirement. It effectively returns things to the way they were before NFA Trusts and the expansion of the suppressor industry.

FWIW, I like suppressors, machine guns, and other NFA items. I think the CLEO sign-off requirement is simply bad law. But, the NFA Trusts permitted cowardly CLEO's to get into office or to stop signing because whether or not they would sign-off was no longer an issue. You couldn't not know this was coming.
 
Has anyone been following this? Seems like the thread/ topic died pretty much everywhere online, and it's a pretty serious topic for those looking to purchase NFA items as well as dealers that rely on sales for a living
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top