Printable View
To throw out another form of ownership.
When I collected Class 3 items as investments that I could enjoy while they appreciated, more than 20 years ago, I used an LLC.
Only extra paperwork was sending in the Articles of Incorporation with the Form 4. Also, need to do the annual update of Secretary of State registration for the LLC, for $10.
I can pontificate on the advantages or disadvantages, but no need in the forums.
There is a tremendous amount of money tied up in NFA, owned by quite powerful people who are ordinarily quite peaceful. Some multi-millionairs and billionaires included. It's also not on the public radar and has an incredibly low rate of criminal offense. It's also outside of the legislative radar which ordinarily targets GCA firearms.
I'm not worried, at all. Suddenly going after NFA act firearms would be akin to the president announcing they are going to tax billionaires at 99%. Sure, some people want it, but it's not healthy for a political career. Or in general.
What should you be more concerned about? 50 BMG. AR lowers. Unique triggers.
I am concerned about the inexorable slide into leftism the country is on. One of their tenets is disarming the population.Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
Can't happen?
To the left, the Constitution is a "living document" that can be interpreted how they wish. They are already undermining it by eroding the reputation of it's writers- they were slave owners, progenitors of our white, racist, patriarchy, etc., making it much more palatable to toss that pesky second amendment in the dust of history where it belongs.
It only takes one pebble to cause an avalanche. I can imagine some unforeseen event, causing a cascading effect resulting in confiscation of all privately owned weapons. What would be an easier place to start then the peaceful law abiding citizens that have their name on a list?
But Americans would fight that to the death, you say. Don't be so sure. You had to take off your shoes last time you got on a plane. Four years ago, it was very difficult to obtain food without putting on a mask.
Leftist government employees and sympathizers could employ massive coercive tactics on individuals to comply.
Do I think this could happen? Yup.
Do I think this will happen? Not soon, but possibly sooner than we all think.
As recently as 2008, Obama said marriage is between a man and a woman. Now we have trannys in high school girls' showers and tampons in boys' bathrooms.
That slippery slope is steep and greased with good intentions.
Remember as always, it's for the children!
Honestly, if it gets that bad and there?s not an uprising, we deserve it.
Every man must decide for himself what he is willing to tolerate in lieu of death or the gulag. Most regret choosing the gulag and almost all regret toleration.
I'll tell you confiscation is not happening in the US in our lifetimes. They grandfather weapons.
They can't find enough willing people to confiscate, and the PR is horrible on all sides of that fence. They know it, we know it. There will never be outright confiscation. (It also runs afoul of deprivation without compensation, etc. too).
Balance your decision making on the extreme end of the spectrum being they say "pretty please will everyone voluntarily turn that in".
Individuals with registered NFA tend to be some of the most law abiding citizens you ever could meet, you need to jump through a lot of hoops to purchase those items, and especially with full auto such items tend to be incredibly expensive, and often are bought as "investments" because the value keeps increasing for the limited number of pre-86 registered full auto. Makes no sense for the government to target NFA owners. I doubt very much that will happen.
Didn't stop the 'dems from effing with our concealed carry laws...Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
O2
Ok........ to be honest.......... I'm confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by CS1983
Firstly in 2016 the ATF changed the filing requirements to have all members of the trust to submit personal info so they had the identities of the trust members.
And so you are saying that you have an existing trust (prior to that change) and so simply add items to it, without being "challenged" (for lack of better word) to update the trust with that personal info?
But the OP is "....thinking of getting my first tax stamp item............" so he'd fall under the new requirements and in setting up a trust, he'd need to submit the personal info of all involved.
Or?????
PS:
Right here............. was this struck down? Or?.........since it requires background/fingerprint etc for all parties, and it seems any transfer :
Background Checks for Responsible Persons (Final Rule 41F) | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (atf.gov)
That assumes they are on the trust at the time of the application. Once a trust receives an approved tax stamp, there is no mechanism for adding or removing people from a trust that requires their involvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oscar77
ETA:
trust: 1 person - the person’s BG, FP, Pic must be submitted
trust: 2 people - same but for 2
trust: 1 person, X stamps - add 1 more person - just add them. There is no requirement to send in that info UNLESS AND UNTIL the stamp count goes to X+1, at which point the +1 stamp application requires whoever is on the trust at the time of application
Oh.......... ok I get you.......... I see what you are saying........... thanks for the explanation!Quote:
Originally Posted by CS1983
(That and now that I understand your comments, the Q/A section has that very situation addressed).
How would that help the OP? Being a new applicant?