View Full Version : DOJ release pistol stabilizing brace rules
funkymonkey1111
01-13-2023, 14:52
Press release and link to rules within this link:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-new-rule-address-stabilizing-braces-accessories-used-convert
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/factoring-criteria-firearms-attached-stabilizing-braces
Rucker61
01-13-2023, 14:59
So free SBR tax stamps?
So free SBR tax stamps?
Gotta read the Fine print. Anyone who avails themselves of the Free SBR Tax Stamps gets to Federally register their property, restriction of travel rights, and they get to be called a Giant Pussy for the rest of their life by those who refuse to comply.
colorider
01-13-2023, 16:03
It looks like it means free sbr stamps. But it also reads that you can still have a pistol brace on a pistol So, I'm going to wait and let the legal teams and gun dealers figure out what the fuck it all means. Then I will decide what to do. If anything. Bowers posted it on facebook a little bit ago and they said they are trying to figure out what it all means. He also posted a link to the 245 page document.
DenverGP
01-13-2023, 16:14
Surprised they released this now with the bumpstock rule getting slapped down... I can't see any way this isn't reversed with the exact same ruling...
electronman1729
01-13-2023, 19:45
Rules? Rules are not laws.
Surprised they released this now with the bumpstock rule getting slapped down... I can't see any way this isn't reversed with the exact same ruling...
Let?s hope they keep giving themselves enough rope to hang themselves with.
Rucker61
01-13-2023, 21:10
Gotta read the Fine print. Anyone who avails themselves of the Free SBR Tax Stamps gets to Federally register their property, restriction of travel rights, and they get to be called a Giant Pussy for the rest of their life by those who refuse to comply.
I already have multiple SBRs and no AR pistols. I'm aware of the rules and don't give a rat's ass about your opinion.
Linkless
01-13-2023, 21:53
I've wanted to SBR mine anyways so apparently I may save 200 bucks.
bellavite1
01-13-2023, 22:10
So, who offers this service?
I am ok with a free SBR (ATF already knows me), but I would like to simplify the process, kind of like when I got my suppressor through Silencer shop, but they no longer offer the Form 1 service...
I already have multiple SBRs and no AR pistols. I'm aware of the rules and don't give a rat's ass about your opinion.
92611
https://youtu.be/Xg4RnTWiazE
Rucker61
01-14-2023, 07:32
So, who offers this service?
I am ok with a free SBR (ATF already knows me), but I would like to simplify the process, kind of like when I got my suppressor through Silencer shop, but they no longer offer the Form 1 service...
Order copies of your fingerprints from Silencershop. Get a digital photo headshot. Create an account with ATF online at their sire. Create an eFile Form 1. Attach photo. Press submit. Mail in fingerprints.
A friend of mine is developing an application to assist in creating the Form 1, including the RPQ portion.
I don't know how many will comply but even if it's a small percentage this will backlog nfa approval rates significantly more.
kidicarus13
01-14-2023, 09:53
I don't know how many will comply but even if it's a small percentage this will backlog nfa approval rates significantly more..92619
Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk
BPTactical
01-14-2023, 10:26
Pretty reasonable take on it IMO, I think taking some time and making a rational and measured decision would be prudent. I would approach the “Free Registration” with extreme skepticism.
https://youtu.be/-uJLBvgUtPQ
BPTactical
01-14-2023, 11:08
92621
Exactly
Does the atf have the power to waive the fees set by the nfa?
They already have a registry of gun sales since the background check form is not destroyed after approval and that FFLs maintain a log book.
Even if the background check doesn't send the serial number or model numbers, they know each background check was for at least 1 firearm.
I am hoping for total defeat of anti 2A laws in the next few years. End the GCA, NFA, Hughes & Brady.
Does the atf have the power to waive the fees set by the nfa?
Do they have the power make or change laws?
I have some that I was going to SBR anyway. May as well file if they can actually waive the tax. Gotta get the short 308 running.
I don't know how many will comply but even if it's a small percentage this will backlog nfa approval rates significantly more.
As it is illegal to be in possession of NFA items before the approval...what is the odds that any of these will be approved before that 120 day limit runs out? They cannot handle the normal cue in a timely manner. What will adding an additional 50k...100k...500k applications do?
What about AR pistols with just buffer tubes instead of braces?
Run away from a free SBR stamp so fast it makes your head hurt.
Seriously. Just dont do it.
Run away from a free SBR stamp so fast it makes your head hurt.
Seriously. Just dont do it.
The cheese in the mousetrap is always free...
92637
Run away from a free SBR stamp so fast it makes your head hurt.
Seriously. Just dont do it.
Curious behind the reason here.
Disclaimer: I do not currently have any braces, but have some stuff to SBR
kidicarus13
01-14-2023, 18:52
Curious behind the reason here.
Disclaimer: I do not currently have any braces, but have some stuff to SBRGovernment, specifically ATF, has a poor record of standing behind their decisions.
Government, specifically ATF, has a poor record of standing behind their decisions.
I mean, what are they gonna do? I have a lower without a serial number, so I just pencil in a model and 69-420 as the serial. The lower isn't engraved yet, so.....
eddiememphis
01-14-2023, 21:13
...I have a lower without a serial number.....
Knock, knock, knock...
Knock, knock, knock...
I don't have a dog to shoot, oh well.
I have a hobby, and my hobby involves spending more money on tooling than simply buying an AR off the shelf. So be it.
Most of my glocks don't have serials either.
Edit: I'd consider a stamp for a 3d printed receiver or frame if it was free. Just sayin'
I've wanted to SBR mine anyways so apparently I may save 200 bucks.
Kinda my thought. However now it?s a principle thing?.. gonna wait and see how it plays out I guess.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Does the atf have the power to waive the fees set by the nfa?
Does the ATF how the power do half the things they do? They seem to think so
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Great-Kazoo
01-15-2023, 09:00
Does the ATF how the power do half the things they do? They seem to think so
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Power or not. One forgets with (what's the number?) 87K irs "agents" roaming the hallways of America. You get popped for failing to pay the tax, then the nfa penalties .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj8n4MfhjUc
What are the travel rules for an SBR? I like a pistol as a truck gun, can keep it loaded legally in my vehicle in all the states I travel to. I know I can not travel with a loaded rifle in the cab in many states.
What are the travel rules for an SBR? I like a pistol as a truck gun, can keep it loaded legally in my vehicle in all the states I travel to. I know I can not travel with a loaded rifle in the cab in many states.
In CO, the law is the same as a rifle. Can't keep it "loaded" because of poaching laws.
With a SBR, interstate travel requires ATF notification and approval.
In CO, the law is the same as a rifle. Can't keep it "loaded" because of poaching laws.
With a SBR, interstate travel requires ATF notification and approval.
But...a braced pistol...at least for now...is legal to have loaded. I really do not want that to change.
bellavite1
01-15-2023, 14:55
Well FAQ clearly states that ATF doesn't regulate accessories.
Possession of an uninstalled brace is not illegal or regulated.
So for now this is it, hoping the courts overturn this bullshit.
Store your braces in a different location than the firearms, to make it harder being charged with constructive intent.
Learn to use sling and buffer tube...92646
926579265892659
Massive participation of peaceful non compliance is the way forward, combined with massive legal pushbacks. And mutual defense, (nothing off the table here), of anyone they attempt to use as an example.
No more Ruby Ridges.
No more Wacos.
We must all hang together or we will surely hang separately.
Until then, I will unilaterally declare and defend my Independence from an offensive strategy until I am dead.
hollohas
01-16-2023, 22:07
So if a guy or gal was to take the free stamp and SBR their pistol with brace, then can they turn around and put a real stock on it?
Suppose a guy or gal has lots of pistols with braces. Why not SBR one or two of them for free? Perhaps one day when SBR's become illegal the feds come and confiscate one or two. This guy or gal still has plenty more. (At least until the feds decide to make all guns illegal and confiscate all of them.) It doesn't seem anymore risky to add a couple free stamps than it does to already have stamps for other things.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230117/7305fcf795d1055dc7ee6648d0c49b27.jpg
kidicarus13
01-16-2023, 22:45
.
92669
I wouldn't call a guy a pussy. At least if you do you shouldn't even own a brace. You should have stock and a third hole you drilled.
SouthPaw
01-19-2023, 13:07
ATF also notes that there are legal issues created by simply removing the brace from the affected firearm because this may result in a ?weapon made from a rifle,? which would normally be subject to the NFA. The rule claims that ATF will use its enforcement discretion to not enforce the NFA against users who remove a brace and reconfigure the firearm as a pistol.
While the agency may be attempting to apply various cases that say possessing a disassembled NFA firearm is the same as possessing a complete NFA firearm, that case law generally does not prohibit someone from possessing the components for an NFA firearm if the components can also be assembled into a non-NFA configuration. ATF must make this clear before many law-abiding gun owners destroy lawfully-acquired property to comply with the rule.
Source: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20230117/atf-posts-final-rule-on-stabilizing-braces
Lol
More info from a GOA attorney.
https://youtu.be/DggOmUXxVWY
https://youtu.be/MbsHuWeEJQs%5B/url%5D
Great-Kazoo
01-27-2023, 08:52
don't forget this tidbit.
Further, the addition of an optic on a pistol that requires eye relief in the same fashion as a rifle will be an SBR. So simply putting an optic on a pistol will likely change it from a pistol to an SBR.
electronman1729
01-27-2023, 09:25
don't forget this tidbit.
Further, the addition of an optic on a pistol that requires eye relief in the same fashion as a rifle will be an SBR. So simply putting an optic on a pistol will likely change it from a pistol to an SBR.
So does this mean putting a red dot on a FN509 is now a no-no? ��
So does this mean putting a red dot on a FN509 is now a no-no? ��
Yep...........
They also in the new rules will investigate manufacturer's advertising to see if they encourage use as a SBR and also look at trends on how the public is using the product. SO there is going to be an ATF person that scours through youTUbe videos to see now consumers are using the Pistol.
Talk about Orwellian.....................
I have already posted the summary version but Washington Gun Law did a nice video going over the whole new rule.
https://youtu.be/WnvPdE75qZs
eddiememphis
01-27-2023, 10:07
This entire thing is ridiculous.
I hate government curtailing one's rights as much or more than the next guy.
However, the "pistol brace" was simply a way to own a short barrelled rifle without having to pay the NFA tax and register it.
People are upset because they were taking advantage of a loophole that has been closed.
So does this mean putting a red dot on a FN509 is now a no-no? ��
No. A regular pistol red dot optic doesn't have eye relief like a scope, and it doesn't have a stock.
Youtubers/twitters are already shoulder firing handguns and tagging the ATF asking if it is now an SBR.
The ATF is the punching bag of the internet.
Did the ATF sabotage itself to get rid of tax stamps?
electronman1729
01-27-2023, 11:41
No. A regular pistol red dot optic doesn't have eye relief like a scope, and it doesn't have a stock.
I was being sarcastic
This entire thing is ridiculous.
I hate government curtailing one's rights as much or more than the next guy.
However, the "pistol brace" was simply a way to own a short barrelled rifle without having to pay the NFA tax and register it.
People are upset because they were taking advantage of a loophole that has been closed.
No. People are upset because Constitutionally recognized pre-existing Natural rights have been consistently violated since 1934, the ATF decided for whatever reason to allow stocks not called stocks to be legally owned and sold for 10 years, now they are trying to rewind the clock. You do not need permission to own any weapon.
eddiememphis
01-27-2023, 22:03
You do not need permission to own any weapon.
That's what Randy Weaver thought as well.
That's what Randy Weaver thought as well.
And he was right. The fear of a potential violent death as an excuse to submit to tyrants runs contrary to the very concept of being an American.
eddiememphis
01-28-2023, 11:49
The outcome of his situation proves he was not right.
There are concessions to one's idealism that must be made to live in a society.
Without the fear of state sanctioned violence, there would be anarchy.
While I share your admiration of the concept of American individualism, a rational person will likely reconsider their zealotry when there is an MRAP parked on the front lawn.
The outcome of his situation proves he was not right.
There are concessions to one's idealism that must be made to live in a society.
Without the fear of state sanctioned violence, there would be anarchy.
While I share your admiration of the concept of American individualism, a rational person will likely reconsider their zealotry when there is an MRAP parked on the front lawn.
Might does not make right, and the Good guys do not always win the Wars. Each person gets to choose what concessions they wish to make with regards to their own liberty, no one must make these concessions. The society we have today is pretty terrible, the only thing preventing our full descent into darkness and tastelessness are those few continuing to be light and salt.
Only the People get to sanction violence. The State is just a group of People working on the behalf of the rest of the People.
Anarchy is no Law.
Tyranny is bad Law harming good People, imposed and enforced by bad People due to the apathy of cowardly People.
If someone has not counted the cost of what might happen to them, either because of complying with, or refusing to accept tyranny they are woefully unprepared mentally for the future ahead of them. Facing slavery with regret, or death with a smile, is everyones choice.
We all have free will, how one deals with the consequences or the actions of others free will against you is up to you.
hollohas
01-28-2023, 19:05
Youtubers/twitters are already shoulder firing handguns and tagging the ATF asking if it is now an SBR.
Sounds loud.
eddiememphis
01-28-2023, 19:44
Sounds loud.
WHAT???
https://youtu.be/gMCAK5qlH68
Ken Buck wrote back,
House of Representative Letterhead
Dear Mr. Joe_K
Thank you for writing me about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF)?s rule 2021R-08F, Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces. This is a serious issue and I appreciate that you have taken the time to write what I know are passionate views. Your input in the legislative process helps me effectively serve the Fourth District of Colorado, and I welcome the opportunity to reply to your letter.
On January 13, 2023, the ATF released its final guidance on its new stabilizing brace rule. The Bureau amended its regulations to include pistol stabilization braces as Short-Barreled Rifles (SBRs), Short-Barreled Shotguns (SBSs), or Any Other Weapon (AOWs). These braces, originally approved by the ATF, are designed to be outfitted to pistols, allowing disabled shooters to fire with one hand. However, as a part of President Biden?s gun-grabbing agenda, the ATF will require law-abiding gun owners to mail their weapon to the Bureau, have it registered, and then either confiscated or returned but entered in a database. This must be done in a 120-day window, or the ATF will consider these otherwise upstanding citizens as felons in violation of the law.
The Gun Owners of America estimate that this will cost Americans $5 billion in registration, shipping, and compliance costs. They also assert compliance will require nearly 160,000,000 total hours from firearm owners to register over 40,000,000 firearms outfitted with a pistol brace. During a time when Americans are already struggling to survive in our tumultuous economy and are uncertain about the future, this burden is unconscionable.
The dubious use of old and obscure firearm regulatory statutes to create an illegal gun registry that paints hard-working, law-abiding Americans as felon criminals is one of the largest overreaches of federal power in our lifetimes. The ATF has already been caught going door-to-door without a warrant to ask gunowners about their firearm serial numbers.
The right to bear arms is a unique and fundamental aspect of American liberty. It makes our families safer and allows a vigilant populace to protect itself from a tyrannical government. As a strong supporter of private, individual ownership of firearms, I believe that Congress has a duty to defend the Constitutional right to bear arms. I am committed to defending your natural rights and will support any legislation that assists in that endeavor.
There are many potential routes Congress can take to stop this overreach. While I look into what actions I can take to combat this rule, I invite you to continue to write me with your thoughts about this issue.
I appreciate the time you have taken to share your concerns, and I invite you to stay in touch with me on any issues with which I may be of assistance. It is truly an honor to serve as your United States Representative.
Sincerely,
Rep. Ken Buck
Member of Congress
hollohas
01-30-2023, 17:27
....However, as a part of President Biden?s gun-grabbing agenda, the ATF will require law-abiding gun owners to mail their weapon to the Bureau, have it registered, and then either confiscated or returned but entered in a database.
Hahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Haha.
NOBODY will be mailing anything. That's funny.
kidicarus13
01-30-2023, 18:11
Hahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Haha.
NOBODY will be mailing anything. That's funny.Peace. Love. Turn those death devices in.92821
Peace. Love. Turn those death devices in.92821
Oddly enough, destroying an AR like in that screenshot is actually manufacturing a SBR. Just like that politician woman did a few years back on camera, with no penalty
https://youtu.be/aT-DH4Zx54k
eddiememphis
01-31-2023, 17:48
https://youtu.be/aT-DH4Zx54k
Joe, you post a lot of links without any description.
Are you linking them because you agree or disagree with them? What is the content of the videos?
And how do we know the links you post are secure?
Youtube, and much of the internet is lousy with self anointed "experts".
Most people that post videos are looking to get paid. They get paid by views. The more extreme the view, the more potential revenue they may earn.
I'd much rather hear your take on these issues than what some fool on youtube has to say.
APEXgunparts
01-31-2023, 19:50
News from Reeves & Dola, LLP
ATF's New Brace Rule Takes Effect TODAY
*** What You Should Know ***
Today the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("ATF") published Final Rule 2021R-08F (the ?Final Rule?) amending its regulations to clarify when a rifle is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. Published more than 18 months after the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (86 FR 30826 (Jun. 10, 2021), the Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached "Stabilizing Braces" is effective immediately and requires registration of any weapons with stabilizing braces or similar attachments that constitute rifles under the National Firearms Act ("NFA") no later than May 31, 2023. The Final Rule includes a variety of alternative compliance measures, which we explain in more detail below.
I. Revised Definition of "Rifle"
According to ATF, the Final Rule does not create new law; rather it clarifies the definition of Rifle in the regulations in 27 C.F.R. Parts 478 and 479. With this Final Rule, ATF explains that it is not regulating the manufacture, sale, or possession of ?stabilizing braces? themselves (when braces are not attached to or associated with particular weapons), but persons in possession of firearms equipped with stabilizing braces will have to take certain action by May 31, 2023 to not be in violation of the NFA if the firearm plus stabilizing brace constitutes a short barrel rifle or shotgun.
The Final Rule amends the definitions of "rifle" in ATF's regulations at 27 C.F.R. ?? 478.11 and 479.11 by adding the factors ATF will consider when determining whether a firearm is designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder when equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment such as a stabilizing brace. The added text to the respective definitions reads as follows:
(1) For purposes of this definition, the term ??designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder?? shall include a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a ??stabilizing brace??) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors, as described in paragraph (2), indicate that the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.
(2) When a weapon provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, the following factors shall also be considered in determining whether the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder:
(i) Whether the weapon has a weight or length consistent with the weight or length of similarly designed rifles;
(ii) Whether the weapon has a length of pull, measured from the center of the trigger to the center of the shoulder stock or other rearward accessory, component or attachment (including an adjustable or telescoping attachment with the ability to lock into various positions along a buffer tube, receiver extension, or other attachment method), that is consistent with similarly designed rifles;
(iii) Whether the weapon is equipped with sights or a scope with eye relief that require the weapon to be fired from the shoulder in order to be used as designed;
(iv) Whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations;
(v) The manufacturer?s direct and indirect marketing and promotional materials indicating the intended use of the weapon; and (vi) Information demonstrating the likely use of the weapon in the general community.
II. Implications on Prior Classifications
CAUTION! As of today (January 31, 2023), all prior classifications of firearms equipped with a brace device are no longer valid. ATF is rescinding these classifications because they did not employ the "correct understanding" of the statutory terms. Firearms equipped with stabilizing braces or other rearward attachments may be submitted to ATF for a new classification determination, but the agency cautions that a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a stabilizing brace will likely be classified as ?rifles? "because they are configured for shoulder fire based on the factors described in the Final Rule. Because many of these firearms generally have a barrel of less than 16 inches, they are likely to be classified as short-barreled rifles subject to regulation and registration under the NFA and GCA." See Final Rule, p. 6480.
ATF does not have a list of specific braces that qualify as making a pistol into a short-barreled rifle ("SBR"), explaining that it does not regulate accessories such as stabilizing braces by themselves. However, ATF does provide examples of commercially available firearms and common weapon platforms equipped with a stabilizing brace that are short-barreled rifles.
III. Options for Affected Parties
The Final Rule is estimated to impact millions, from unlicensed individual possessors to federally licensed industry members and even certain government and law enforcement entities. Because of the enormous impact, the Final Rule specifies a "compliance period" during which affected parties may choose from a variety of options to come into compliance with the NFA. Affected parties are those currently in possession of firearms now classified as NFA-controlled short barrel firearms because of the stabilizing brace + barrel under 16 inches. These persons will have until May 31, 2023 to come into compliance with the NFA.
It is important to emphasize that the following corrective options apply only to firearms equipped with stabilizing braces in possession as of today. Because the Final Rule takes effect today, ATF will enforce the NFA registration and tax requirements for any newly made or transferred firearm with an attached stabilizing brace that constitutes an SBR. Further, as of today, only registered firearms with stabilizing braces may be transferred.
A. Options Available to All Possessors
Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer rifled barrel to the firearm, thus removing it from the scope of the NFA.
Permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the ??stabilizing brace?? such that it cannot be reattached. This action, as long as it is completed by May 31, 2023, will remove the weapon from regulation as a ??firearm?? under the NFA. According to ATF, making this change after May 31, 2023 will not remove the weapon from the NFA as it may be controlled as a ??weapon made from a rifle.??
Turn the firearm into a local ATF office.
Destroy the firearm. ATF will publish information regarding proper destruction on its website.
Register the weapon as specified for the particular category of possessor.
B. Registration Option for Non-Licensee Possessors
Submit through the eForms system by May 31, 2023 a Form 1 Application to Make and Register a Firearm (??E-Form 1??) for each affected firearm. The possessor may adopt the markings on the firearm for purposes of the E-Form 1 if the firearm is marked in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102. If the firearm does not have the markings under 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102, then the individual must mark the firearm as required. Proof of submission of the E- Form 1 should be maintained by all possessors. These registrations will NOT be required to pay the $200 making tax as long as the E-Form 1 is submitted by May 31, 2023.
C. Registration Option for Federal Firearms Licensed ("FFL") Manufacturers or Importers and Qualified as Special (Occupational) Taxpayer ("SOT") Class 1 Importer or Class 2 Manufacturer
For all affected firearms currently in inventory, submit through the eForms system by May 31, 2023 a Form 2 Notice of Firearms Manufactured or Imported ("E-Form 2").
D. Registration Option for FFLs Not Having Paid SOT as a Class 1 Importer or Class 2 Manufacturer Under the NFA (Including FFL/SOT Dealers)
Submit through eForms by May 31, 2023 an E-Form 1 for each affected firearm. The possessor may adopt the markings on the firearm for purposes of the E-Form 1 if the firearm is marked in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102. If the firearm does not have the markings under 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102, then the FFL must mark the firearm as required. Proof of submission of the E-Form 1 should be maintained by all possessors.
It is important to note that any FFL without a Class 2 SOT that is engaged in the business of manufacturing short-barreled rifles equipped with a ??stabilizing brace?? device should become a Class 2 SOT if they will continue to engage in the business of dealing and manufacturing NFA firearms. Once they obtain their SOT under 26 U.S.C. 5801, they must register their NFA firearms with ATF by completing and submitting the E-Form 2 by May 31, 2023.
E. Certain Government Entities
Submit through eForms by May 31, 2023 either an E-Form 1 or an E-Form 10 Application for Registration of Firearms Acquired by Certain Governmental Entities ("E-Form 10"). The government entity may adopt the markings on the firearm for purposes of the E-Form 10 if the firearm is marked in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102. If the firearm does not have the markings under 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102, then the government entity must mark the firearm as required. Further, any subsequent transfer of a firearm registered on an E-Form 10 is restricted to other governmental entities for official use. Proof of submission of the E-Form 10 should be maintained by all possessors.
IV. Tax Forbearance
As indicated above, ATF is forbearing NFA taxes on persons in current possession of firearms equipped with stabilizing braces that are SBRs. However, this forbearance applies only to new registrations submitted by May 31, 2023. All transfers will be subject to the NFA tax requirements of the NFA in 26 U.S.C. 5811.
V. ATF Resources
ATF has published on its website a variety or resources to aid the public in interpreting and operating under the Final Rule. These include: (1) the PowerPoint presentation given during SHOT Show; (2) a list of Frequently Asked Questions; (3) NFA Form 1 submission guidance with Q&A; (4) a chart depicting the affected parties and their options under the Final Rule.
For questions regarding the application of the final rule, contact the Firearms Industry Programs Branch at Firearms Industry Programs Branch: FIPB@atf.gov.
For technical questions regarding firearms, contact the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division at: Fire_Tech@atf.gov.
To register for an eForms account and/or submit an eForm 1 pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F, please visit https://eforms.atf.gov/login.
The above alert is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be construed or used as legal advice. Receipt of this alert does not establish an attorney-client relationship.
Questions about this alert may be directed to:
Johanna Reeves: 202-715-9941, jreeves@reevesdola.com
BPTactical
01-31-2023, 20:35
IV. Tax Forbearance
As indicated above, ATF is forbearing NFA taxes on persons in current possession of firearms equipped with stabilizing braces that are SBRs. However, this forbearance applies only to new registrations submitted by May 31, 2023. All transfers will be subject to the NFA tax requirements of the NFA in 26 U.S.C. 5811.
Forbearance is a curious word.
: a refraining from the enforcement of something (such as a debt, right, or obligation) that is due.
A forbearance is typically a temporary thing.
There is nothing to prevent a certain group from collecting that forbearance of tax in the future.
Joe, you post a lot of links without any description.
Are you linking them because you agree or disagree with them? What is the content of the videos?
And how do we know the links you post are secure?
Youtube, and much of the internet is lousy with self anointed "experts".
Most people that post videos are looking to get paid. They get paid by views. The more extreme the view, the more potential revenue they may earn.
I'd much rather hear your take on these issues than what some fool on youtube has to say.
I post them because of them being relevant to the topic at hand. The titles of the videos should give you a good idea as to the content. Some I agree with, some I don?t.
I am copying the links directly from the share feature on the YT app on my phone. I cannot guarantee anything with regards to international security, however I am not intentionally posting anything that I would not send my own Mother. It is the internet. I would suggest talking to an IT person on that, idk how any of that stuff works.
As far as YouTubers making money?I am not certain what you are asking/stating/or implying. Idk any of the people who are in those videos, they could be getting paid a lot of money, or none at all. They might be taking the clicks, likes, and shares and then using that money for nefarious purposes, then again every dollar I have ever spent or earned might be blood money, that is one of the many downsides to our foreign funny money monetary system.
Lastly, which video would you like my take on?
hollohas
01-31-2023, 20:42
"(iv) Whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations;"
^This reads that ALL standard AR pistols have been made to be fired from the shoulder, brace, stock or not. Because technically a buffer tube has plenty of surface area to shoulder it.
eddiememphis
01-31-2023, 21:45
https://youtu.be/aT-DH4Zx54k
What is the title of this video?
eddiememphis
01-31-2023, 21:54
The titles of the videos should give you a good idea as to the content. Some I agree with, some I don?t.
I am not certain what you are asking/stating/or implying.
Lastly, which video would you like my take on?
The links you post do not have titles.
I am saying there are a lot of fools making videos. Not everyone is an expert or has cogent arguments on the issues being discussed.
You do not give any take on any of the videos you post links to. That is why I was asking why you post them with zero descriptions.
You say some you agree with, some you don't. Why add a link without describing the video and what relevance it has to the issue at hand?
hollohas
01-31-2023, 22:42
I'm not a fan of video only posts either. Anywhere. If I follow a link about a topic I'm interested in reading more about and it sends me to a video with nothing more, I'm out.
I've read this entire thread and watched none of the videos.
Reading and writing are losing favor, that can't be good.
The links you post do not have titles.
I am saying there are a lot of fools making videos. Not everyone is an expert or has cogent arguments on the issues being discussed.
You do not give any take on any of the videos you post links to. That is why I was asking why you post them with zero descriptions.
You say some you agree with, some you don't. Why add a link without describing the video and what relevance it has to the issue at hand?
Lots of people making videos for sure.
I post things I believe others will find interesting. When there is a link for a picture in the Funny Pictures thread and some other threads here on the forum, there usually is not a description of what you are about to see, (the reason I seldom click on any photo links on this forum), if I need to put up the description I can easily do that.
When people post up a video with information and news or opinions presented in the video, I do not find that the poster making a statement or opinion on the content either way as being essential. Watch it, or dont, if you do choose to watch it, and inform or reform your own mind without someone you likely do not know telling you what they think about what someone you also don’t know thinks. Let the video stand or fall on its own.
What is the title of this video?
92834
The links you post do not have titles.
I am saying there are a lot of fools making videos. Not everyone is an expert or has cogent arguments on the issues being discussed.
You do not give any take on any of the videos you post links to. That is why I was asking why you post them with zero descriptions.
You say some you agree with, some you don't. Why add a link without describing the video and what relevance it has to the issue at hand?
Joe_K should be putting these in using the "insert video" button in the post editor so it shows the preview.
https://youtu.be/aT-DH4Zx54k
Joe_K should be putting these in using the "insert video" button in the post editor so it shows the preview.
https://youtu.be/aT-DH4Zx54k
Nice! Did not know how to do that, thanks!
bellavite1
02-25-2023, 13:31
Any update on this bullshit?
Any update on this bullshit?
A bunch of lawsuits are in the works with attempts to put it on hold till they get resolved. No decisions either way yet on any of it. One lawsuit does have more than 25 of the states attorney generals signed on fighting against the ATF. Particularly sounds promising when more than half the states say the ATF is wrong.
APEXgunparts
02-27-2023, 17:55
People who applied for a tax exempt SBR Form 1 have been receiving them back approved.
The first people to apply have been running about 32 days from the E-Form submission to getting the approved Form 1 back.
Richard
kidicarus13
04-01-2023, 08:43
But still legal to possess after submission while you wait on Form 1 approval.
What?s the easiest way to do fingerprints? Was contemplating using SilencerShop
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What?s the easiest way to do fingerprints? Was contemplating using SilencerShop
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Order the fingerprint cards for free from the ATF and get an ink pad from Office Depot and roll them yourself.
Alternatively, pay $65 to Printscan and get .eft files from your nearby UPS store.
eddiememphis
04-01-2023, 16:42
What's the easiest way to do fingerprints? Was contemplating using SilencerShop
A strong will and a sharp knife.
People who applied for a tax exempt SBR Form 1 have been receiving them back approved.
The first people to apply have been running about 32 days from the E-Form submission to getting the approved Form 1 back.
Richard
What is the AFT asking for? Are they requesting photos of the weapons?
Or just a Normal form 1?
kidicarus13
04-02-2023, 09:45
What is the AFT asking for? Are they requesting photos of the weapons?
Or just a Normal form 1?Photo of the mfg's markings on the receiver. Pistol brace --> SBR Form 1 is a different page if you are e-filing.
What?s the easiest way to do fingerprints? Was contemplating using SilencerShop
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The SilencerShop Kiosk has a scanner where you can scan/make your fingerprints and then they have them if file through SilencerShop. It will tell you if your scan is ok and if it isn't you can keep doing it until you get a set of good prints. It does one at at time so you don't have to do the whole thing over.
The Silencer Shop web site has a map of FFLs that have one of there Kiosks'.
The SilencerShop Kiosk has a scanner where you can scan/make your fingerprints and then they have them if file through SilencerShop. It will tell you if your scan is ok and if it isn't you can keep doing it until you get a set of good prints. It does one at at time so you don't have to do the whole thing over.
The Silencer Shop web site has a map of FFLs that have one of there Kiosks'.
I believe SS charges a $50 fee to file through them unless you are making a purchase.
I (think) the use of a kiosk for recording prints carries a small charge from the FFL if you're not buying, or maybe it's just having them print the cards that they charge for. I'm going to do this (long overdue) kiosk printscan thing Monday at iron Horse (closest) so I'll find out. I've had a form1 sitting in draft so long, I have to redo the RPQ docs.
Photo of the mfg's markings on the receiver. Pistol brace --> SBR Form 1 is a different page if you are e-filing.
If you go to the main page, they popup a warning and redirect to the page for a 'free" stamp. Once submitted, it will show up on the main site.
But still legal to possess after submission while you wait on Form 1 approval.
I see the rules says you must also show proof that it was acquired before Jan 23 if you want a freebie. My one and only pistol was acquired a very long time ago and acquired by/assigned to the trust when purchased.
I assume if I were to go buy the GHM9 I've been eye f'kng, I could still get it with the brace and just pay to SBR it? Or are dealers no longer allowed to sell them. They're still showing that model on all the sites.
kidicarus13
04-02-2023, 13:42
I see the rules says you must also show proof that it was acquired before Jan 23 if you want a freebie.
I've not seen that anyplace.
I've not seen that anyplace.
I should have clarified that for a TRUST free tax exempt stamp... requires prior possession by the trust.
The way I read it is, unless you want to register and then form4 from yourself to your trust, the trust has to have posessed the item prior to Jan 2023.
"Q. Can I register my firearm equipped with a “stabilizing brace” that is a short-barreled rifle pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F to my trust?
A trust may not register a firearm equipped with a 'stabilizing brace' that is a short-barreled rifle pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F unless the trust can establish through documentary evidence that the trust possessed the firearm before January 31, 2023.
Under the final rule, the Attorney General has authorized a tax forbearance that allows current possessors of firearms equipped with a 'stabilizing brace' that meet the definition of 'rifle' and have a barrel or barrels less than 16 inches to register the firearms tax-free. A current possessor is a person who possessed the firearm with an attached 'stabilizing brace' prior to January 31, 2023.
Accordingly, any trust that seeks to register a firearm with an attached 'stabilizing brace' that is a short-barreled rifle pursuant to Final Rule 2021R-08F must include with the eForm 1 application evidence that establishes the trust is the current possessor of the firearm and possessed it before January 31, 2023. This evidence will generally include the signed, dated, and notarized terms of the trust or trust schedules that list or provide a description of the property held in trust. Accordingly, for trust applicants, ATF will perform a thorough review of the trust documents provided with the eForm 1 application to ensure the firearm sought to be registered to the trust was property possessed by the trust before January 31, 2023. Therefore, an eForm 1 application to register a firearm equipped with a 'stabilizing brace' to a trust will be disapproved if the applicant fails to demonstrate the trust possessed the firearm before January 31, 2023."
My pistol lower has been listed on my Schedule since 2014 and submitted along with all the form1/form4 approved since. I also have a signed and dated firearm use certification when the lower was purchased by the trust (not individual).
Photo of the mfg's markings on the receiver. Pistol brace --> SBR Form 1 is a different page if you are e-filing.
They are not asking for pictures of the complete pistol? So essentially a close up of the markings for the original manufacturer?
kidicarus13
04-03-2023, 15:48
They are not asking for pictures of the complete pistol? So essentially a close up of the markings for the original manufacturer?Correct. That is what some who have already been approved have reported.
<2 months to submit if that is your chosen path.
I have a some decisions to make. I'm too invested in my pistol lower between parts, multiple uppers, and a suppressor that I will be allowed to take home one day. Otherwise I'd just get a 16 inch upper and move on with my life. Before this I never intended on doing and SBR. I'm doing my homework so I'm ready to submit in the middle of May if that's the direction I end up going. Please pardon my ignorance. I'm genuinely asking questions about a confusing system. I hope that this will answer my questions and help others as the deadline gets closer.
Speaking of multiple uppers I see the "Line Item" portion of the process and it asks for a barrel and OAL. Will this limit me to one upper or is this left blank since I'm submitting a lower?
Are there any advantages to getting a new lower over doing a Form 1 for my only pistol lower? Maybe process a rifle I already have?
Am I understanding this right that I can E-File with a photo of a small portion of the lower and fingerprints? I'm already in the system after the suppressor purchase.
Is it worth trying to get my fingerprints from my Form 4 (done at Damage Factory), find a Silencer Shop kiosk and just paying the fee, or is there an easier option I'm unaware of?
kidicarus13
04-03-2023, 19:37
Speaking of multiple uppers I see the "Line Item" portion of the process and it asks for a barrel and OAL. Will this limit me to one upper or is this left blank since I'm submitting a lower?
Are there any advantages to getting a new lower over doing a Form 1 for my only pistol lower? Maybe process a rifle I already have?
Am I understanding this right that I can E-File with a photo of a small portion of the lower and fingerprints? I'm already in the system after the suppressor purchase.
Is it worth trying to get my fingerprints from my Form 4 (done at Damage Factory), find a Silencer Shop kiosk and just paying the fee, or is there an easier option I'm unaware of?
I am not an attorney, and this is not legal advice:
You are applying to complete an SBR, so what is the overall length of your SBR? You can swap a different upper after your original approval and then notify the ATF of the new configuration, and you'll be fine.
Technically, you can't use a new lower (one that you do not currently possess). This process is for a braced pistol(s) in your possession as of 01/31/23.
Yes, you can e-file with just a close-up picture of the manufacturer's markings on the receiver.
Buy an ink pad and fingerprint cards from Amazon, watch a YouTube video on how to fingerprint yourself, and print yourself to save some money versus the SS kiosk.
I have a some decisions to make. I'm too invested in my pistol lower between parts, multiple uppers, and a suppressor that I will be allowed to take home one day. Otherwise I'd just get a 16 inch upper and move on with my life. Before this I never intended on doing and SBR. I'm doing my homework so I'm ready to submit in the middle of May if that's the direction I end up going. Please pardon my ignorance. I'm genuinely asking questions about a confusing system. I hope that this will answer my questions and help others as the deadline gets closer.
Speaking of multiple uppers I see the "Line Item" portion of the process and it asks for a barrel and OAL. Will this limit me to one upper or is this left blank since I'm submitting a lower?
You submit with the upper you build it with (I use a 7.5" upper). With the upper, I specify 26" OAL. I have done this for every form1 SBR and never had any issue. My one and only pistol will be submitted (soon) the same way. You can change the caliber or upper length at will once you have your stamp, you just have to be able to return it to the approved config if you sell/transfer.
Are there any advantages to getting a new lower over doing a Form 1 for my only pistol lower? Maybe process a rifle I already have?
The tax-exempt brace to SBR form1 is a special submission that is offered during the 120 day period Feb-May and only for braced pistols acquired before 1/31/2023 and you must show proof of possession prior. If you buy a pistol lower after 1/31/2023 you'll submit a regular form1 to SBR and pay the $200 tax. If you form1 SBR a rifle, $200 tax.
Am I understanding this right that I can E-File with a photo of a small portion of the lower and fingerprints? I'm already in the system after the suppressor purchase.
There is a 24 month exemption option if you're filing on a trust for the trust paperwork/RPQ. You still need to provide all the other docs - ownership proof, picture of lower rollmark model/serail/caliber.
Is it worth trying to get my fingerprints from my Form 4 (done at Damage Factory), find a Silencer Shop kiosk and just paying the fee, or is there an easier option I'm unaware of?
You can send prints to SS and they'll scan them in. Problem with using SS is they won't share your fingerprint EFT (file) and charge a $50 fee to submit through their system. If damage factory used an electronic scanner, they may be able to print you another set of cards, best to ask them. Tim @ Dangerlee always did it for me if they were not more than 2 years old. If more NFA is in your future, make an appointment at one of the printscan places and pay for the prints and EFT file on a USB, $65 total.
Thanks to both of you. Those were extremely helpful replies and I think I'm good to go. Can't say I'm terribly excited but that's a whole other thing.
There is no such thing as a free stamp.
There is no such thing as a free stamp.
true
kidicarus13
04-05-2023, 16:53
There is no such thing as a free stamp.Still $200 less than a standard Form 1.
Still $200 less than a standard Form 1.
Maybe.
I would rather do a form 1, pay the $200 and not have to worry about someone changing their minds like they have done in the past.
kidicarus13
04-05-2023, 20:01
Maybe.
I would rather do a form 1, pay the $200 and not have to worry about someone changing their minds like they have done in the past.Who knows what the courts or ATF will decide or when. If the less-than-$200 route doesn't work, Plan B may be the $200 route. Or maybe just return the SBR to a braced pistol. Voluntarily giving the ATF $200 x SBRs does not feel like the noble option for me at this time, but your your mileage may vary.
Who knows what the courts or ATF will decide or when. If the less-than-$200 route doesn't work, Plan B may be the $200 route. Or maybe just return the SBR to a braced pistol. Voluntarily giving the ATF $200 x SBRs does not feel like the noble option for me at this time, but your your mileage may vary.Like
DenverGP
04-06-2023, 09:29
Who knows what the courts or ATF will decide or when. If the less-than-$200 route doesn't work, Plan B may be the $200 route. Or maybe just return the SBR to a braced pistol. Voluntarily giving the ATF $200 x SBRs does not feel like the noble option for me at this time, but your your mileage may vary.
I'm pretty clueless on the ATF rules, but I didn't think it was legal to convert a rifle into a pistol, so not sure you can return the sbr back to pistol.
kidicarus13
04-06-2023, 10:27
I'm pretty clueless on the ATF rules, but I didn't think it was legal to convert a rifle into a pistol, so not sure you can return the sbr back to pistol.It was never converted, I only applied to convert it but never did, so there is no rifle to pistol issue. See how that works?
If it started as a pistol, it can go back to being a pistol if so configured.
kidicarus13
04-06-2023, 10:41
If it started as a pistol, it can go back to being a pistol if so configured.That too [emoji16]
SouthPaw
11-09-2023, 17:53
Federal Judge Blocks Nationwide Enforcement of Pistol-Brace Ban
https://thereload.com/federal-judge-blocks-nationwide-enforcement-of-pistol-brace-ban/#:~:text=That's%20the%20outcome%20of%20a,t%20regis tered%20earlier%20this%20year.
https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/09/federal-judge-blocks-atf-from-arresting-millions-of-pistol-brace-owners/
SouthPaw
11-09-2023, 17:55
Yippie ki yay
https://i.postimg.cc/6qbHb4HK/38-D6-E96-B-4965-4-ABE-B86-A-4-B52948-B231-F.jpg (https://postimg.cc/p58Yprbc)
https://youtu.be/3WoUUVvSLBE?si=aA1qt6HfreEnjz7p
3WoUUVvSLBE
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TEAMRICO
11-10-2023, 09:28
Where did I bury my braces again……
SouthPaw
11-10-2023, 16:11
November 9th, 2023: The Fifth Circuit overturned the ATF's "frame or receiver" rule in the VanDerStok v. Garland case, criticizing the ATF for overstepping its regulatory authority by effectively rewriting the law. The court utilized a creative cake analogy to clarify its point on gun regulation. Drawing parallels to the recent internet craze where cakes are designed to mimic other foods, the court compared the legal status of actual gun frames and receivers with items that simply look similar. The analogy served to demonstrate the ATF's flawed approach, which applies regulations to genuine frames and receivers but fails to consider items that merely resemble them, indicating that appearances should not be the primary factor in regulatory decisions.
Judge Oldham writes an opinion supplementing the majority's findings in order to explore additional problems with the Final Rule, where he says it "doesn’t stop regulating the metal or plastic until it's melted back down to ooze." Judge Kurt Engelhardt, representing the court's stance, also stated, "The agency rule at issue here flouts clear statutory text and exceeds the legislatively-imposed limits on agency authority in the name of public policy." He further clarified that the expansion of firearm regulation and the criminalization of actions that were previously legal are not sanctioned by Congress, rendering the proposed rule an unlawful agency action that goes against legislative intent.
The court firmly concludes that until Congress modifies the Gun Control Act, the ATF must adhere to the existing statutory limits. The Final Rule, according to the court, crosses those boundaries, resulting in the ATF essentially rewriting the law, a move that is not permissible, particularly when it leads to the broad imposition of criminal liability without legislative input.
However, it's important to note that despite the court's ruling, the "frame or receiver" rule remains active due to a stay by the Supreme Court from August 8th. The Supreme Court's intervention means that the rule will stay in effect until the legal proceedings are concluded.
Source: https://www.80percentarms.com/ATF-RULE-FAQ/
kidicarus13
06-13-2024, 19:30
Mock v. Garland. As of 06/13/24, pistol braces are now legal again.96755
SouthPaw
06-14-2024, 13:41
Mock v. Garland. As of 06/13/24, pistol braces are now legal again.96755
Now everyone is going to have to remove their stocks and put the braces back on.
And some people got SBRs with free tax stamps. All the youtube conspiracies surrounding that just flew out the window. It's inarguably just free SBRs now.
Anyone can argue about NFA registration (valid), of course. But this paid off for those that wanted SBR's, I suppose.
I got a free SBR and I'm not ashamed. I was already in the NFA system with a suppressor and have a CCW so the gov can already surmise that I had two guns. Can't make the argument that I just put a target on my back.
Also, that's a super confusing sentence just to say that braces are allowed again.
Great-Kazoo
06-14-2024, 20:08
Now everyone is going to have to remove their stocks and put the braces back on.
Back On? never removed them, nor have i seen anyone else in AZ either
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.