Hearing Protection Act - will it pass?
- Thread starter TXAZ
- Start date
JoeSixpack
New member
Rwilson but for how long? with the increased demand there would not just be the existing mfg's but new ones coming into the market to compete.
I grant you could find a lot of OOS and jacked up prices as the market expands and demand explodes but it would not last, not without some sort of collusion.
I grant you could find a lot of OOS and jacked up prices as the market expands and demand explodes but it would not last, not without some sort of collusion.
rwilson452
New member
Darned if I know. Way to many variables.
dogtown tom
New member
The "hassle of the paperwork"? What hassle? Your dealer/SOT will fill that out, not you.
I have more than one customer that doesn't want to wait......guess what? A year from now they still won't have a silencer. If you want one, waiting for the HPA is silly......'cause your going to have to wait on that as well. I guess I'm too practical....wait six to eight months and get a silencer or wait until whenever for the HPA to pass.
I agree $200 isn't peanuts.........but it isn't $3,600+ either is it?
If the manufacturer paid for your stamp at the time of manufacture would you complain? That's how Federal Excise Taxes are paid on Title I firearms and ammunition.....10-11% of the sales price. Does FAET cause you to not acquire new firearms? After all YOU ARE PAYING TAX IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
You make it sound like there are only 5 or 6 silencer manufacturers, when in reality there are 20-30 major ones and hundreds of small ones. Heck, there's a guy here in Plano that makes them in his garage.
If you think the price will go down when there are hundreds if not thousands of silencer manufacturers.........then why do Glocks cost the same as they did fifteen years ago? When S&W, Walther, Sig, etc came in with polymer framed pistols did Glock suddenly drop their price? No, they didn't. "Economy of scale" isn't the only factor in production or manufacturing.
How much do you really know about silencer pricing, manufacturing costs and the firearms industry? I ask because you think that "deregulation" would have a significant impact.........so tell me what needs to be deregulated to lower the current cost of a silencer. And I'm not talking about the tax.
As I wrote above ANYONE can get an FFL, SOT, register for ITAR for less than $3000. If $3000 is too darn much for a manufacturer.....they aren't really much of a manufacturer.
Manufacturers DON'T PAY for a tax stamp. They pay a yearly SOT and can manufacturer a billion silencers for that $1000 fee.
Could you produce a silencer for less? THEN KNOCK YOURSELF OUT. There are a number of rimfire silencers with a retail of $99.......can you make a better one for that? I'm not talking about a one off, but manufacture them AS A BUSINESS?
What gets me in these types of threads is guys assume cost of raw materials are the only expense. That sheer volume will pay for employees, CNC machines, advertising, etc. Sure you could make 'em in your garage by yourself from Maglite tubes and freeze plugs.....but who wants to buy that? Not many.
Can you pass a background check? Then they are as "accessible" as a Glock.
If by "accessible" you mean less expensive? Well of course....but accessable and affordable aren't the same thing.
People would Form 1 machine guns, manufacturers would manufacture machine guns.........and that $200 tax would be the least of their worries and not in any way shape or form a hindrance to the process. But it's a pipe dream.
dogtown tom
New member
Several manufacturers have warned dealers and distributors of this. If the HPA passes, you'll see a run on factory made silencers that will deplete inventories for as much as two years. With limited supply prices will skyrocket. If you really want the latest and best technology then expect to pay through the nose.
And no, the Form 1 home made silencer will have little effect on the market. Just like the homemade 80% guns have little real impact on the gun market now.
dogtown tom
New member
There are new silencer manufacturers entering the market every month. Some lose their shirt and leave. Competition with AAC, Dead Air, Silencerco, Rugged, Gemtech? They try, but then they have to cut corners. Evey heard of Huntertown? Makes inexpensive silencers with the worst customer service in the industry. That alone makes paying for one of the big boys cans a bargain.
Collusion?
The manufacturers/distributors/dealers will charge what the market will bear......that's capitalism. It will last until demand subsides.
The tax stamp has everything to do with the price. I would bet that fewer than 25% of gun enthusiasts (people who shoot frequently, own numerous firearms, and are a member of gun forums) are willing to actually go through the paperwork hassle of a suppressor. Gun enthusiasts themselves, as defined in above, are a fairly small percentage of the population in general. BUT... if it was so much easier to purchase through de-regulation so that virtually all gun enthusiasts would buy one or more, you open up your market by nearly 400%. Don't forget you may also attract a significant number of casual firearms owners to the market.
That's actually quite easy to explain... volume. Glocks in the US alone probably outnumber all the suppressors in existence in the world by a 2 to 1 margin. The same was probably true 15 years ago. Glock sells so many firearms that making just $50.00 a pistol after all expenses justifies their existence. Lower volume companies must make a greater final profit to keep in business, but none-the less it's an apples to oranges comparison. A better way to explain it is this: Pistols in the US never have been burdened with the same cumbersome regulations that Suppressors have. You can just go out, fill out a form 4473, and go home with it. If they were added as an NFA item tomorrow, the price on a Glock (and all pistols) would skyrocket. Why? Because far fewer people would jump through the hoops to purchase one, and Gaston Glock would need to make $500.00 per pistol instead of $50.00 to justify his business. Another great example is the AOW tax stamp. It's only $5.00, but you don't see huge volumes of those items because folks simply would rather do without than fill out the ATF paperwork.
Glocks, with complex moving parts and rifled barrels (a feat in machining, BTW), currently cost less than almost all suppressors on the market. A crude but effective suppressor could be made with a welder, grinder, drill press, and less than $20.00 worth of steel. A Glock can not be made in a similar manner. The regulations do, in fact, inflate the price of suppressors by a good bit.
Both statements here are absolutely true. If it passes, you will see the prices likely double in short order because of low supplies. But ramping up production would not be that difficult either... it just would take a little time. And once production increase, companies would start competing over price, and once their production volume has increased by 1000% they can afford to make only $50.00 per suppressor instead of several hundred. I also don't believe the homemade market will truly impact manufacturers market share.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
New member
No, it doesn't.
The manufacturer decides what price point to charge for his silencers. The manufacturer takes the cost of labor, raw materials, equipment, etc into consideration and doesn't for one single second think about that tax stamp....because he doesn't collect that tax or remit it to the government.
Like many, you confuse "price" with what a consumer pays in total.
In fact not a single silencer manufacturer advertises their products with the $200 tax stamp cost included.
Again, "ease of purchase" has absolutely nothing to do with the cost to manufacture a silencer. If you don't think the silencer market is already competitive you really need to do some research.
More buyers may mean more silencer manufacturers ....but that doesn't necessarily equal cheaper silencers. Cost of labor, materials and equipment won't go down if more manufacturers enter the market. More manufacturers also means greater demand for raw materials......and increasing the cost to manufacture.
That's funny, you think S&W doesn't have "volume"? Good grief. Research....you need to do it.
The "cumbersome regulations" to manufacture a silencer are exactly the same as manufacturing any other firearm.
Which has NOTHING to do with the cost of manufacturing.
Nonsense.
What you might see is manufacturers getting out of the business completely if handguns were added to the NFA.
There are states (California for example) where the purchase of a firearm entails additional paperwork, fees, waiting periods etc. that are no less onerous than a Form 4...............yet Glock, Inc doesn't charge CA dealers any more than they do dealers in Texas.
Ever stop to think that's because no one really wants those types of firearms?
I don't have any use for a Serbu Shorty, I prefer an 870 SBS. I don't need a pen gun, a cane gun or a gun disguised as a watermelon either. That's why there are so few AOW transfers.Your lack of research and knowledge of the firearms industry is showing, not to mention merchandising and marketing.
The actual retail price of any item is exactly what the manufacturer wishes to charge. It matters not one bit that it costs $87 to make and retails for $500........that's called capitalism. Don't like it don't buy it or buy a Hi Point.
And a crude zip gun could be made for less without needing a welder, drill press and grinder. Just a nail and a piece of lead pipe..........what's your point?
If you think a market exists for a $20 "crude but effective suppressor"......go for it. How many do you think you will need to sell to cover your liability insurance? Your rent? Your utilities? Your employees dental plan? How much will it cost you to ship that $20 silencer?
Good grief....if it's so easy a cave man could do it.........then do it and get back to us.
Of course not. Again what's your point?
Again, no they don't. Rebel Silencers makes a $99 rimfire silencer, yet has the same regulatory oversight as AAC, Silencerco, Q, Sig, Gemtech, etc.........why do you think those companies charge 2.5-5 times as much as Rebel? It's not regulations my friend.
Last edited:
No one spoke of selling $20 suppressors. You do understand the difference between material per unit production cost and retail (or wholesale actually) price per unit right? If I have 20 bucks in materials and a hundred bucks in labor and overhead (we're beyond crude at this point), I can double that and sell my suppressors for 240 bucks wholesale. Dealers will then sell them for 350ish. That's a might cheaper than 1k. Now, if the market is opened up to the point where 2 million people are in the market for suppressors, I'm making good money and living large. If only a few hundred thousand people are in the market, and they have to plan their purchase 6 months in advance, then I'm not so much living large. At that point I raise my wholesale price because volume will not let me make the money I want, so I have to do that through a price increase.
As for the bold, selling 1000 units at a 100 dollar profit is the same as selling 100 at a 1000 dollar profit. I make the same money, but the consumer benefits from lower prices. That's my entire point.
While not going on a diatribe or chastising you, I will just say that your lack of knowledge in the machining and manufacturing industry is showing, along with some economic principles. You preach of capitalism but do not appear to understand its economic principles. FWIW, I have experience with helping create integral suppressors for a family member who has a manufacturing license. My experience goes beyond interactions with a suppressor sales rep or working in retail.
dogtown tom
New member
Then why bring a $20 silencer into the conversation? If it was to show how "regulation" affect silencer prices you didn't do that.
Then what is stopping you?
Again I'll ask.........Rebel Silencers makes a $99 rimfire silencer, yet has the same regulatory oversight as AAC, Silencerco, Q, Sig, Gemtech, etc.........why do you think those companies charge 2.5-5 times as much as Rebel? It's not regulations my friend.
Please answer that. With your experience that should be easy.
I didn't, you did. The $20.00 in my example was RAW MATERIAL COST, not finished product cost.
You are missing the point entirely. I am not saying that regulations have increased the price of raw materials, or production methods, of a suppressor manufacturer. On the manufacturer side, it is regulated much the same way that pistols are. Regulations have nothing to do with the overhead, labor, raw material, or distribution cost of Silencerco.
What I AM saying is that the market for suppressors is less than 10% than what the market is for a pistol. I would actually lay money down saying it's less than 2%, but 10% is a conservative estimate. Because the DEMAND is much more specialized (niche market), manufacturers are not producing a volume that allows economy of scale to influence prices. This DEMAND environment is artificially created by government regulation. Small manufacturers can still make money making suppressors one at a time with a very small mill, because they can charge $600.00+ for something that has less material cost than a cheap brake rotor. Were the DEMAND to increase and the market were to open up, companies could start affording to try and undercut one another. Why? Because they're selling 4 times the product, they can afford to make less money per unit. They will start aiming at market share by trying to undercut prices of other manufacturers. Small shops will have to lower prices, automate, and increase production or go out of business once they start losing market share.
Rebel actually proves my point that suppressors can be made much cheaper with the company still making a profit. Rebel is trying to acquire market share by undercutting Silencerco and company. Obtaining this market share will increase their volume. The issue is they are doing this in a niche market, and their volume will still only allow for only so small of a profit margin per unit. A rimfire suppressor is quite easy to get right as you can get away with using aluminum. It will be both light weight and durable enough. Why do the others charge 2.5 times as much for a rimfire can? R&D spent in noise reduction, better materials for lighter weight and greater durability, LOWER VOLUME and a need to make more profit per unit, and marketing are some of the possible answers. This is conjecture on my part.
5Whisky said:
Well put.
Asserting that a $200 and delay are a market barrier should not be controversial. How the current government barrier distorts the market may not be entirely understood until it is removed.
Of course, the barrier increases the cost of the transaction. That the dealer doesn't get the stamp cost doesn't mean that it isn't a cost of the transaction; that's pertinent to the buyer.
That barrier also serves to screen out the most price sensitive buyers. The remaining ones are all people with at least a spare $200. That's a population more likely to tolerate $1000 suppressors. Remove that barrier and the buying population is both larger and different. It is unlikely that new producers wouldn't arise to address that larger and different demand. I believe there will always be a market for excellent suppressors made from exotic materials. However, that isn't the only kind of suppressor.
$3 oil filters are repurposed as suppressors. Somehow oil filter manufacturers are able to cover their rent and utilities. Current suppressor buyers will have scant interest in a $3 suppressor that takes a year of waiting and a $200 stamp. A wider population might be quite happy to stop by Walmart to pick up a simple $50 item on the way to a range.
Zukuphile there will always be a high end market. Even the high end market prices will come down a good bit though. Steel, or should I say the right kind of steel, is good enough for even heavy caliber suppressors. The problem. Is steel is heavier than other equally durable materials (titanium being one). So you could still have a reasonably priced durable suppressor, bit it will be heavy.
At any rate, you will still get many thousands of rounds out of a cheap aluminum suppressor on a pistol. It could easily be sold for 200 bucks, with the manufacturer making good money. At that price, most folks won't be upset if it only lasts half as long as the 600 dollar suppressors of our current time (600 plus tax stamp price actually...).
Which brings up another point. Because buying a suppressor is such a pain, they are made to very well last, because if you have to replace it then you start your atf paperwork all over. If you could buy one like you could a glock, it wouldn't be a big deal to replace a 150 to 200 dollar can that was made a little cheaper.
At any rate, you will still get many thousands of rounds out of a cheap aluminum suppressor on a pistol. It could easily be sold for 200 bucks, with the manufacturer making good money. At that price, most folks won't be upset if it only lasts half as long as the 600 dollar suppressors of our current time (600 plus tax stamp price actually...).
Which brings up another point. Because buying a suppressor is such a pain, they are made to very well last, because if you have to replace it then you start your atf paperwork all over. If you could buy one like you could a glock, it wouldn't be a big deal to replace a 150 to 200 dollar can that was made a little cheaper.
Bingo. Given the difficulty and expense in purchasing a suppressor, it makes sense to for them to be manufactured at an heirloom-grade quality.
If you could buy one stamp-free on a 4473 in 10 minutes, there would be a place for $50 rimfire suppressors and $100 pistol suppressors, even if they needed a new baffle stack (over the counter) in a few thousand rounds.
Also, I don't think the HPA was seriously intended. I think it was intended to be symbolic only, as NFA reform is a nuclear hot potato.
And that's really a shame. Turk's leaked white papers suggest that even the ATF would be willing to play nice.
If you could buy one stamp-free on a 4473 in 10 minutes, there would be a place for $50 rimfire suppressors and $100 pistol suppressors, even if they needed a new baffle stack (over the counter) in a few thousand rounds.
Also, I don't think the HPA was seriously intended. I think it was intended to be symbolic only, as NFA reform is a nuclear hot potato.
And that's really a shame. Turk's leaked white papers suggest that even the ATF would be willing to play nice.
Double Naught Spy
New member
Yes they have. In fact, I have gotten emails for several months now about the pending shortage looming just over the horizon and how I should buy any suppressors I may want or need NOW while they are still available. Nothing like "Chicken Little" marketing. You would think HPA should have passed back in February the way the manufacturers were talking. Of course, they faced and have now dealt with layoffs because demand dropped so much after Trump was elected. The general public isn't in fear anymore that a Democratic is about to be in office and legislate future sales into oblivion.
I don't think this is the case at all. I think once it passes, you are going maybe see a shortage from some of the current name brand makers and only in the short term, but then you are going to see countless machine shops and other such business blossoming in states where suppressors are allowed. Competition is going to be stiff and it will happen fast because suppressors are not exactly highly complicated machinery. Prices will fall quickly. There will be innovation with competition.
armoredman
New member
I feel it is a dead issue and MIGHT be half heartedly brought back up next year, with even less fanfare and chance of success.
Of course it's a dead issue.
The Republicans don't need us, (our votes) until the mid term elections, and they aren't going to push it.
Bills will get introduced, but when it comes to passing one, or even getting it to floor vote, expect nothing but lame excuses and little or no real action.
We are in a very poor position, with one political party actively working against our rights, and the other being able to take our support essentially for granted, because, after all, where else are we gonna go?
The Republicans don't need us, (our votes) until the mid term elections, and they aren't going to push it.
Bills will get introduced, but when it comes to passing one, or even getting it to floor vote, expect nothing but lame excuses and little or no real action.
We are in a very poor position, with one political party actively working against our rights, and the other being able to take our support essentially for granted, because, after all, where else are we gonna go?
muzzleblast...
New member
I do not think it will ever happen. The only experience the vast majority of people have with suppressors is from Hollywood movie "silencers." IMO there simply isn't enough advocacy to overcome resistance.