ATF Rule 2021R8 goes into effect January 31, 2023

Status
Not open for further replies.
illinoisburt said:
@MachIVshooter

They set up a specific e-form for the tax free filing. Go to the ATF website for instructions.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of how to file, but that I am not convinced ATF can legally waive the tax and marking requirements.

I'm an 07/02 SOT; if I want to SBR something, I just transfer it to my business, do the work and file F2, F4 transfer to myself later if I feel like it.
 
MachIVshooter said:
It's not a matter of how to file, but that I am not convinced ATF can legally waive the tax and marking requirements.

I'm an 07/02 SOT; if I want to SBR something, I just transfer it to my business, do the work and file F2, F4 transfer to myself later if I feel like it.
Click to expand...


This is a good point. The law says you have to pay a $200 tax to register an SBR. How can the ATF just not follow the law and waive the tax???
 
What needs to happen with this is ALL of the small gun stores, firearm manufacturers, SB Tactical type businesses need to band together and file for an injunction on this regulation as they have been operating under ATF consults that what they were manufacturing, stocking and selling was LEGAL. Provide all the ATF documents stating such as well as the monetary inventory amounts that are represented on what will be affected by this regulation.

This needs congressional oversight on so many levels. Make our representatives show their true colors and have to discuss this in session as the reach of this is FAR and WIDE; it's not just joe-schmoe with his braced AR in Arkansas who gets a "free" $200 tax stamp and a change of how he can utilize his previously legal pistol braced AR.

Not to mention what @MachIVshooter has brought up about ATF's ability to establish an amnesty program waiving a tax without Congress.
 
I searched and could not find anything stating that the SHORT Act has been reintroduced in this session yet.
 
I just checked the websites of both Marshall and Clyde and also did not see anything about reintroducing this bill in the current session. I wonder if they have some strategic reason for waiting...
 
Spats McGee said:
The final rule is here: https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regul...armswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download

I'll go update the OP to include it there, too.
Click to expand...
So is the clock ticking now on the 120 day "amnesty"? Or once it is submitted to the federal register?
From NRA-ILA:
The text posted to ATF’s website has not yet been submitted to the federal register, so it is not technically a “final” rule yet, but it likely will be posted in the coming week.
Click to expand...
Okay, I see:
Whichever option is selected, it must be exercised before the date that is 120 days after the rule is posted in the federal register.
Click to expand...
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20230117/atf-posts-final-rule-on-stabilizing-braces
 
This is the ATF's justification for the 120 day waiver of the $200 transfer tax (emphasis added):

In addition, the Department will forbear from collecting any transfer tax for the transfer of a weapon with a “stabilizing brace” that is an NFA firearm for any transfer that occurred before the effective date of this final rule.

With respect to the Department’s authority to seek taxes retroactively from individuals and FFLs (regardless of SOT status), the Departments notes that Congress in 1996 amended 26 U.S.C. 7805(b) to generally prohibit regulations relating to the internal revenue laws from applying retroactively “to any taxable period before” the date on which such regulation is filed with the Federal Register; in the case of a final rule, the date on which any related proposed or temporary rule was filed with the Federal Register; and the date on which any notice substantially describing the expected contents of any temporary, proposed, or final rule is made public.

When Congress made this 1996 amendment, however, it stated that “[t]he amendment . . . shall apply with respect to regulations which relate to statutory provisions enacted on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.” Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104–168, sec.1101(b), 110 Stat. at 1452, 1469. Because the NFA was enacted in 1934 (i.e., before the 1996 amendment), the pre-1996 version of 26 U.S.C. 7805 applies. That section provides: “[T]he Secretary may prescribe the extent, if any, to which any ruling or regulation, relating to the internal revenue laws, shall be applied without retroactive effect.” 26 U.S.C. 7805(b) (1994). Section 7805(b) did not include other restrictions on retroactive regulations. Thus, the Department has broad discretion regarding the retroactivity of taxes in this rule. However, the Department believes it is appropriate to forbear this retroactive tax liability. Doing so is appropriate because of past public confusion about what sorts of weapons are in fact NFA firearms and because attempting to collect past making or transfer taxes would impose a substantial administrative burden on ATF to determine which individual or entity did in fact make or transfer the NFA firearm in question.
​
Pages 277 and 278 of the FACTORING CRITERIA FOR FIREARMS WITH ATTACHED “STABILIZING BRACES” document.​
 
Balrog said:
This is a good point. The law says you have to pay a $200 tax to register an SBR. How can the ATF just not follow the law and waive the tax???
Click to expand...

The same way they can just not follow the law and create a gun registry, not follow the constitution and create de facto law as if they were legislators, not follow their own prior rules and definitions, etc. They are not held accountable.
 
SKILCZ said:
The same way they can just not follow the law and create a gun registry, not follow the constitution and create de facto law as if they were legislators, not follow their own prior rules and definitions, etc. They are not held accountable.
Click to expand...
While I share your sentiment, I think we need at least one thread that covers this ruling, and stays current (timelines etc), without our opinions on things.

I say that, because I've been trying to follow what's actually going on, and info is hard to come by. I would have thought there would be a stickied thread on this forum by now.
 
lsudave said:
While I share your sentiment, I think we need at least one thread that covers this ruling, and stays current (timelines etc), without our opinions on things.

I say that, because I've been trying to follow what's actually going on, and info is hard to come by. I would have thought there would be a stickied thread on this forum by now.
Click to expand...

Yes that would be nice to have one thread for this. Currently there are three threads going on, this one, in General hand guns and the NFA sections.
 
12Bravo20 said:
As usual, the NRA is late to get anything out. I received emails on the 13th from other 2A groups but did not get anything from the NRA until the 17th.

I looked this morning and have not seen the brace rule posted to the federal register yet.
Click to expand...
All the DOJ release says is the rule has been submitted to the Federal Registry. With bureaucrats being bureaucrats and lawyers being lawyers I don't know if "submitted" is the same as "published". I would think not but who knows.
 
12Bravo20 said:
Submitted in not the same as published.
Click to expand...
That's was my thinking but again we're dealing with federal bureaucrats and lawyers so one never knows.
If it's not been published yet then people are freaking out over nothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F-111 John
  • Locked
Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces” [ATF Proposed Rulemaking]
Replies
9
Views
755
GEM
G
O
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Direct Link to Stabilizing Brace Ban
Replies
1
Views
502
hso
hso
F-111 John
  • Locked
Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms (Final Rule)
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
DoubleMag
D
someguy2800
  • Locked
ATF brace rule is out
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Replies
264
Views
10K
JohnKSa
JohnKSa
someguy2800
  • Locked
New ATF pistol brace ruling
Replies
8
Views
609
Robert
Robert
Back
Top