Thread muzzle pay ITAR
- Thread starter guncrank
- Start date
I’ve considered that and I’m more than sure it’s left to the discretion of the inspector. They don’t seem to want to define their own laws. Luckily my product, if I can even do it without the crazy fee, will be for hunting so big production numbers aren’t a great concern. A single stage will be adequate. My plan is to ease in and hopefully make it a fulltime thing. Crunching some numbers and I believe it’s feasible.
weaselfire
New member
First, the rule is in effect. Has been for decades. How it's applied is all that changed, about six or eight years ago.
Second, there is an ongoing process to move enforcement from Dept of State to Dept of Commerce that will alleviate this issue somewhat. Also, since the 2016 election, enforcement efforts are way down.
Now, as to what constitutes manufacturing, the ATF interpretation and the Department of State interpretation are different. An 07 FFL, manufacturing, is required to assemble a firearm from parts for sale, as in building an AR and selling it. To ATF, that is manufacturing. To Dept of State, it is not and there is no ITAR fee required.
If a customer brings parts to a gunsmith for assembly, that is not manufacturing for sale as far as ATF is concerned and merely requires an 01 FFL.
All of this is spelled out in numerous decisions and determination letters by State and ATF. ITAR is administered by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, which is part of the Dept of State.
So, is this clear? Of course not. It's a product of bureaucracy. But, if a simple $2,250 annual fee stands between you and becoming a professional, you need to rethink your desire to go pro. It's a cost of business, insurance will cost you more.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Second, there is an ongoing process to move enforcement from Dept of State to Dept of Commerce that will alleviate this issue somewhat. Also, since the 2016 election, enforcement efforts are way down.
Now, as to what constitutes manufacturing, the ATF interpretation and the Department of State interpretation are different. An 07 FFL, manufacturing, is required to assemble a firearm from parts for sale, as in building an AR and selling it. To ATF, that is manufacturing. To Dept of State, it is not and there is no ITAR fee required.
If a customer brings parts to a gunsmith for assembly, that is not manufacturing for sale as far as ATF is concerned and merely requires an 01 FFL.
All of this is spelled out in numerous decisions and determination letters by State and ATF. ITAR is administered by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, which is part of the Dept of State.
So, is this clear? Of course not. It's a product of bureaucracy. But, if a simple $2,250 annual fee stands between you and becoming a professional, you need to rethink your desire to go pro. It's a cost of business, insurance will cost you more.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Weaselfire:
First,I'm not a lawyer,I don't know the answers and I'd really like to understand,for sure,how this applies.
With all due respect,your post leaves me more confused.
You wrote with confidence,I'm sure you were giving your best in good faith.
My problem with what you wrote is your timeline. You suggest this information is years old.
My guess your information was accurate then,but it may not be now.
In July 2016 President Obama sent out a memo that changed some critical definitions and requirements.
The concerns we express and the answers we need will not be answered by what was true before July 2016.
Perhaps this will be enlightening.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...tration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control
I come from a time when the small mom and pop local gunstore was often a gunsmith and his wife,and maybe an hourly worker or two.
I think your characterization that an extra few thousand dollars a year and overwhelming paperwork requirements shouldn't be any big deal for a "professional" is not accurate.
These shops face online and big box competition. Part of their niche to survive is gunsmithing.
This memo makes drilling and tapping or threading and chambering a barrel into the equivalent of international arms trading.
Your local gunsmith is an endangered species.
First,I'm not a lawyer,I don't know the answers and I'd really like to understand,for sure,how this applies.
With all due respect,your post leaves me more confused.
You wrote with confidence,I'm sure you were giving your best in good faith.
My problem with what you wrote is your timeline. You suggest this information is years old.
My guess your information was accurate then,but it may not be now.
In July 2016 President Obama sent out a memo that changed some critical definitions and requirements.
The concerns we express and the answers we need will not be answered by what was true before July 2016.
Perhaps this will be enlightening.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...tration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control
I come from a time when the small mom and pop local gunstore was often a gunsmith and his wife,and maybe an hourly worker or two.
I think your characterization that an extra few thousand dollars a year and overwhelming paperwork requirements shouldn't be any big deal for a "professional" is not accurate.
These shops face online and big box competition. Part of their niche to survive is gunsmithing.
This memo makes drilling and tapping or threading and chambering a barrel into the equivalent of international arms trading.
Your local gunsmith is an endangered species.
Last edited:
weaselfire
New member
HiBC -
The information is old, this thread started two years ago. But even more than that, the actual law is the Arms Export Control Act from 1976. Any manufacturer, broker or exporter of controlled arms is required to register with the Department of State, currently at $2,250 a year. In the Department of State, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, administers ITAR.
Anything listed on the US Munitions List, which changes regularly and includes firearms, as well as things like submarines, guided missiles and technical data (think plans for 3D printing of guns), currently falls under the DDTC authority.
President Obama never sent any memo, it came from the DDTC, and the memo mentioned merely clarified what DDTC had been practicing for decades. The increase in enforcement actually started in the late 1990's when the State Department took control over the export of satellites. Until the mid 2000's, nobody paid attention to gunsmiths. Then the DDTC started sending notices to any newly registered 07 (Manufacturing) FFL, whether a major manufacturer or your mom and pop shop, about the required registration. And yes, drilling and tapping has always been, since 1976, the equivalent of international arms dealing, by definition of the laws. There's no distinction between drilling and tapping a hole to mount a scope on grandpa's single shot .22 and drilling and tapping a hole to mount a camera pod to the underbelly of a B52.
ITAR has no application for private individuals. It actually hasn't been applied to 01 FFLs (Dealers), which includes many gunsmiths. And it doesn't apply to all 07 FFLs either. And the reason for that is one of the reasons DDTC issued the clarification memo.
As defined by ATF, assembling a firearm from parts for sale is considered manufacturing and requires an 07 FFL. As defined by DDTC, assembling a firearm from parts is not manufacturing and does not require ITAR registration. The various functions listed in the memo are what DDTC considers typical of manufacturing.
As for payment of the fee being a cost of business, for thousands of gunsmiths across the country, it is. Compared to rent, insurance and other professional fees, it's in the smaller range of required payments. The paperwork is already required for any 07 FFL, it's a manufacturers report filed annually along with the excise taxes on each firearm manufactured. If that's an "overwhelming" regulation for your gunsmith, tell him not to perform manufacturing operations, many gunsmiths don't. Keeping the gunsmith's bound book and filling out occasional 4473 forms and background checks is a lot more paperwork.
As for the current situation, 07 FFLs haven't been receiving notices from DDTC about ITAR registration for over a year. The NSSF has been working with congress since 2016 to get responsibility for a lot of the US munitions list, including small arms and ammunition, transferred to the Department of Commerce, which deals with almost all other trade. The completion of this process is near.
As for the local gunsmith being endangered, every year there are more registrations for new gunsmiths than the prior year. Gunsmithing is actually back into an upswing. But the local gunsmith being doomed is a story that's been repeated for the last five decades. Just like the ATF not granting FFLs for home-based operations.
Lastly, don't assume every gunsmith threads barrels. Or performs machining operations. Most suppressors and muzzle brakes are sold for firearms with existing threaded barrels. And, in a few states, that muzzle brake is illegal anyway, unless it is welded or pinned on. Most scopes are mounted to existing rails or mounting holes in the rifle. Over the last five years or so, ATF has even pushed gunsmiths toward the 01FFL since it doesn't require ITAR registration, even for those gunsmiths who do thread a barrel.
Jeff
The information is old, this thread started two years ago. But even more than that, the actual law is the Arms Export Control Act from 1976. Any manufacturer, broker or exporter of controlled arms is required to register with the Department of State, currently at $2,250 a year. In the Department of State, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, administers ITAR.
Anything listed on the US Munitions List, which changes regularly and includes firearms, as well as things like submarines, guided missiles and technical data (think plans for 3D printing of guns), currently falls under the DDTC authority.
President Obama never sent any memo, it came from the DDTC, and the memo mentioned merely clarified what DDTC had been practicing for decades. The increase in enforcement actually started in the late 1990's when the State Department took control over the export of satellites. Until the mid 2000's, nobody paid attention to gunsmiths. Then the DDTC started sending notices to any newly registered 07 (Manufacturing) FFL, whether a major manufacturer or your mom and pop shop, about the required registration. And yes, drilling and tapping has always been, since 1976, the equivalent of international arms dealing, by definition of the laws. There's no distinction between drilling and tapping a hole to mount a scope on grandpa's single shot .22 and drilling and tapping a hole to mount a camera pod to the underbelly of a B52.
ITAR has no application for private individuals. It actually hasn't been applied to 01 FFLs (Dealers), which includes many gunsmiths. And it doesn't apply to all 07 FFLs either. And the reason for that is one of the reasons DDTC issued the clarification memo.
As defined by ATF, assembling a firearm from parts for sale is considered manufacturing and requires an 07 FFL. As defined by DDTC, assembling a firearm from parts is not manufacturing and does not require ITAR registration. The various functions listed in the memo are what DDTC considers typical of manufacturing.
As for payment of the fee being a cost of business, for thousands of gunsmiths across the country, it is. Compared to rent, insurance and other professional fees, it's in the smaller range of required payments. The paperwork is already required for any 07 FFL, it's a manufacturers report filed annually along with the excise taxes on each firearm manufactured. If that's an "overwhelming" regulation for your gunsmith, tell him not to perform manufacturing operations, many gunsmiths don't. Keeping the gunsmith's bound book and filling out occasional 4473 forms and background checks is a lot more paperwork.
As for the current situation, 07 FFLs haven't been receiving notices from DDTC about ITAR registration for over a year. The NSSF has been working with congress since 2016 to get responsibility for a lot of the US munitions list, including small arms and ammunition, transferred to the Department of Commerce, which deals with almost all other trade. The completion of this process is near.
As for the local gunsmith being endangered, every year there are more registrations for new gunsmiths than the prior year. Gunsmithing is actually back into an upswing. But the local gunsmith being doomed is a story that's been repeated for the last five decades. Just like the ATF not granting FFLs for home-based operations.
Lastly, don't assume every gunsmith threads barrels. Or performs machining operations. Most suppressors and muzzle brakes are sold for firearms with existing threaded barrels. And, in a few states, that muzzle brake is illegal anyway, unless it is welded or pinned on. Most scopes are mounted to existing rails or mounting holes in the rifle. Over the last five years or so, ATF has even pushed gunsmiths toward the 01FFL since it doesn't require ITAR registration, even for those gunsmiths who do thread a barrel.
Jeff
weaselfire
New member
He was either misinformed or misinformed you. At worst, he could have opened under a new name and FFL.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Weaselfire:
Thank you.I have a little better understanding.
I get it that you are telling me the way the law is.
Where we seem to differ is in how to look at it.I know,that makes me the joke. There is something to being able to adapt and accept.
But,NO! I don't think its OK. I prefer its a legislative priority to fix it.
I don't have a shingle out that says "Gunsmith",I don't have an FFL,and I don't take in gunwork.
But I am a guncrank.I spent 30 years in the machine trades and I have machine tools.
The law may not apply to me,but to someone like me who ,as a retiree would want a side business building a few custom rifles or 1911's,it is an oppressive burden to tax as much as the years income might be.
IT IS TYRANNY to tell me I cannot drill and tap a hole.
And it seems another front to eliminate the firearms tradition and freedom from the USA.
Perhaps I misunderstand you, but you seem to be saying "Don't worry,its all good" to the frog in the pot that is slowly being boiled.
I'm alarmed by the idea of control of munitions being shifted to The NSSF and Dept of Commerce.
IMO,the EPA's focus on lead is another threat to the availability of ammunition.
The direct efforts of anti-gunners to take down the 2A have failed,but the indirect strategies continue on other fronts.
Roadblocks to transferring firearms to family members or youth,restrictions on shooting on public land,demonization of lead ammunition,
And now the attack on the local gun crafter.
Our natural,God given rights are not limited to those written in the Constitution.
One of my God given natural rights is to be able to take a piece of wood and a piece of steel and craft any object or device that is legal for me to own.
I reject the notion that I should accept bureaucratic efforts to eliminate a competency from the Citizen.
I will teach my Grandchildren ,my niece, and my nephew how to run a lathe,a mill,a grinder,thread and chamber a barrel,drill and tap holes,and fit one part to another if they show any interest.
I have done a lot of rapid protoype work (3 D printing). IMO,the available materials are not quite ideal for making safe and durable firearms,(with a few exceptions)
But I applaud and support the Gentleman who is fighting for our rights to share databases and create.
The point is Freedom vs Government Control.
Thank you.I have a little better understanding.
I get it that you are telling me the way the law is.
Where we seem to differ is in how to look at it.I know,that makes me the joke. There is something to being able to adapt and accept.
But,NO! I don't think its OK. I prefer its a legislative priority to fix it.
I don't have a shingle out that says "Gunsmith",I don't have an FFL,and I don't take in gunwork.
But I am a guncrank.I spent 30 years in the machine trades and I have machine tools.
The law may not apply to me,but to someone like me who ,as a retiree would want a side business building a few custom rifles or 1911's,it is an oppressive burden to tax as much as the years income might be.
IT IS TYRANNY to tell me I cannot drill and tap a hole.
And it seems another front to eliminate the firearms tradition and freedom from the USA.
Perhaps I misunderstand you, but you seem to be saying "Don't worry,its all good" to the frog in the pot that is slowly being boiled.
I'm alarmed by the idea of control of munitions being shifted to The NSSF and Dept of Commerce.
IMO,the EPA's focus on lead is another threat to the availability of ammunition.
The direct efforts of anti-gunners to take down the 2A have failed,but the indirect strategies continue on other fronts.
Roadblocks to transferring firearms to family members or youth,restrictions on shooting on public land,demonization of lead ammunition,
And now the attack on the local gun crafter.
Our natural,God given rights are not limited to those written in the Constitution.
One of my God given natural rights is to be able to take a piece of wood and a piece of steel and craft any object or device that is legal for me to own.
I reject the notion that I should accept bureaucratic efforts to eliminate a competency from the Citizen.
I will teach my Grandchildren ,my niece, and my nephew how to run a lathe,a mill,a grinder,thread and chamber a barrel,drill and tap holes,and fit one part to another if they show any interest.
I have done a lot of rapid protoype work (3 D printing). IMO,the available materials are not quite ideal for making safe and durable firearms,(with a few exceptions)
But I applaud and support the Gentleman who is fighting for our rights to share databases and create.
The point is Freedom vs Government Control.
HiBC, eloquently stated!
While I believe Weaslefire is correct in detail, what HiBC said is correct in principle. We should not have to be hanging on the twist of every word regulators say in fear of our rights and futures. I have to believe the founding fathers would be turning over in their graves if they knew of the power Congress would cede to regulators. It is unfathomable that they would have approved.
What struck me about the posts from two years ago was the notion that a common understanding of the meaning of manufacturing was being applied. It may be common understanding inside the beltway, but if you asked the average American citizen if he believed his local tire shop is an automobile manufacturer because they have an air sander that removes material from the tire sealing surface of a wheel and a special tool with lasers that helps them do a wheel alignment, they would say "no". Theirs was not a common understanding of manufacturing, it was a special new definition of the word. I can't recall who said to beware the purposes of government when it changes the meaning of words, but he was certainly correct; it could have been George Orwell.
Their definition of manufacturing was and is a manipulation of meaning to accrue decision making power to unelected persons who in no way have earned or deserve it. But Congress ceded power to them just the same. I consider that an abrogation of duty designed to put distance between the representative and the consequences of his decisions. It is the action of cowards desperately trying to avoid the appearance of tyranny, while nonetheless executing it.
While I believe Weaslefire is correct in detail, what HiBC said is correct in principle. We should not have to be hanging on the twist of every word regulators say in fear of our rights and futures. I have to believe the founding fathers would be turning over in their graves if they knew of the power Congress would cede to regulators. It is unfathomable that they would have approved.
What struck me about the posts from two years ago was the notion that a common understanding of the meaning of manufacturing was being applied. It may be common understanding inside the beltway, but if you asked the average American citizen if he believed his local tire shop is an automobile manufacturer because they have an air sander that removes material from the tire sealing surface of a wheel and a special tool with lasers that helps them do a wheel alignment, they would say "no". Theirs was not a common understanding of manufacturing, it was a special new definition of the word. I can't recall who said to beware the purposes of government when it changes the meaning of words, but he was certainly correct; it could have been George Orwell.
Their definition of manufacturing was and is a manipulation of meaning to accrue decision making power to unelected persons who in no way have earned or deserve it. But Congress ceded power to them just the same. I consider that an abrogation of duty designed to put distance between the representative and the consequences of his decisions. It is the action of cowards desperately trying to avoid the appearance of tyranny, while nonetheless executing it.
This message sponsored by Unclenick and HiBC for Congress..
I actually was looking at opening a gun shop with smithing services and some firearm manufacturing. Broke down like this.
Building lease. Old bank with vault and drive through.
$2,200 mo.
Electric with updated service and more 220 lines.
$150 +- mo.
Water/sewer. $120 mo.
Insurance $110 mo.
The really surprising thing to me was the insurance, as it was cheaper than the 2 cars i'm payng now. And about 1/5th of our health insurance.
I don't recall how much the liability insurance covered. Would have to pull out quote again.
The biggest issue with the ITAR definitions would be for manufacturing.
I can do what i want to my own guns, i just can't do it with the intent to sell them.
I actually was looking at opening a gun shop with smithing services and some firearm manufacturing. Broke down like this.
Building lease. Old bank with vault and drive through.
$2,200 mo.
Electric with updated service and more 220 lines.
$150 +- mo.
Water/sewer. $120 mo.
Insurance $110 mo.
The really surprising thing to me was the insurance, as it was cheaper than the 2 cars i'm payng now. And about 1/5th of our health insurance.
I don't recall how much the liability insurance covered. Would have to pull out quote again.
The biggest issue with the ITAR definitions would be for manufacturing.
I can do what i want to my own guns, i just can't do it with the intent to sell them.
weaselfire
New member
I appreciate the opinions of posters like HiBC and others, and understand them. My question would be how your conversations with your local legislators went. I know how mine went, the changes to ITAR being made are a result of my, and many others', conversations with those that could help alleviate the burdens.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Alas, my "conversations" with my local representative have been one sided.
I have yet to be able to talk with a human being on the phone.
No calls have been returned, no e-mails i have sent have been coresponded to.
Looking to see whom my next vote for representative is going towards.
I have yet to be able to talk with a human being on the phone.
No calls have been returned, no e-mails i have sent have been coresponded to.
Looking to see whom my next vote for representative is going towards.
weaselfire
New member
Not sure my voting choice won't be "Always vote against the incumbant" at the rate things move around here.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk