I seem to be a member of a minority that is not jumping on the trust bandwagon.

Trusts like all legal entities have their advantages and disadvantages. For NFA collectors, the biggest disadvantage I've read about is that they are not perpetual like corporations. There is also a limit on the number of trustees (unlike corporate officers) who can lawfully possess the weapons. The execution of a trust transfer at death involves real NFA transfers which will be subject to future federal and state laws at the time. This could mean a loss of grandfathering status (ask any Californian NFA owner). Currently, I hear that transfers from trusts to beneficiaries are treated like a direct inheritance. They are free from the NFA transfer tax and don't require a CLEO certification. They may not always be that way.

Transfer of a one's stake in a corporation during probate is just an economic exercise that will create a tax liability. Registration of the firearms themselves does not change and presumably future transfer laws and loss of grandfathering won't kick in unless the corporation sells the guns. Finally, all or part of the corporation can be sold without triggering a transfer of the guns. That presumably means they can continue to be "permanently" located wherever the corporation sees fit provided it retains control over them. This should make things more flexible given the way firearms laws are headed.

In the case of direct inheritance and inheritance from a trust, the beneficiary is a natural person who must receive the weapon or find a way to sell it if they live in a jurisdiction where possession is not legal. As stated earlier, such a transfer would be subject to the laws at the time of transfer - possibly including a very steep transfer tax that would erase the value of the weapon.

On the other hand, trusts are cheap and easy to set up.