Filing a Form 1 -- and then sitting on it

[AlexanderA]

Suppose you file an ATF Form 1 -- and pay the $200 tax -- to "make" a Short Barrel Rifle (SBR) out of an AR-15 that you already have. Then, once the form is approved, you do nothing about actually converting the weapon. Is there a time limit within which you have to do this?

The recently passed Boulder, Colorado, AWB included a carve-out for weapons registered under the NFA. Whether or not this ban passes judicial scrutiny, it could be a model for other local, state, or federal AWB's. Registering guns as (potential) SBR's could be a form of insurance.

Remember that the Form 1 must be filed -- and approved -- before the actual work of conversion is started. So by necessity there's a time lag during which the gun is "on paper" -- registered -- while not meeting the legal definition of an SBR.

 

[Ryanxia]

As far as I'm aware (take that for what its worth lol) there is no time limit. You can wait as long as you'd like. I'd be very surprised if that were not the case.

 

[Elkins45]

I hope not because I have two stamps for 38 and 45 caliber silencers, and an 870 SBS I haven’t built yet. I do have the engraving done on the 870, I just haven’t chopped the barrel yet.

 

[AlexanderA]

I do have the engraving done on the 870, I just haven’t chopped the barrel yet.

As I understand it, an acceptable alternate site for the engraving is on the short barrel itself. That's what I would do, and leave the receiver unengraved. If you eventually go to sell it, it's more salable as a plain Title I weapon than as an NFA item. Of course you would "deregister" it before sale, but the buyer probably wouldn't want your information on his receiver. (There's a very weak to nonexistent resale market for SBR's, SBS's, and suppressors.)

 

[Elkins45]

As I understand it, an acceptable alternate site for the engraving is on the short barrel itself. That's what I would do, and leave the receiver unengraved. If you eventually go to sell it, it's more salable as a plain Title I weapon than as an NFA item. Of course you would "deregister" it before sale, but the buyer probably wouldn't want your information on his receiver. (There's a very weak to nonexistent resale market for SBR's, SBS's, and suppressors.)

That’s what I did with my Colt AR-15 SBR, but it wasn’t worth the bother for an 870 Express that you can pick up at any gun show for $175. Besides, engraving that big flat receiver was easier than a round barrel.

 

[pdsmith505]

I have been sitting on a Form 1, a piece of bar stock, and a tube for a 22 can for more than a year now.

Probably sit on it for a couple more years.

I'm unaware of any time limit. Sure hope there isn't one

 

[Theohazard]

It’s hard to provide evidence that something doesn’t exist, but in all my time being involved in NFA stuff I’ve never heard of any time limit on a Form 1. Besides, a time limit like that would be impossible to enforce even if it did exist, which I’m positive it doesn’t.

 

[TRX]

I have been sitting on a Form 1, a piece of bar stock, and a tube for a 22 can for more than a year now.

I'm building a replica of an Israeli Magal. (stubby AK in .30 Carbine with a plastic body) All the parts are in a plastic tub out in the shop and the Form 1 came back five years ago. Real Life(tm) got in the way of finishing it.

I've been to atf.gov a couple of times just to check; if there's anything there about a time limit, I haven't seen it.

 

[Varminterror]

We're free to "de-list" back to Title 1 format at any time, so what would be the point of forcing the build for the ATF?

For SBR's I've ended up selling, I've converted out of NFA format and sold as pistols. Keeping my lowers. $50-100 for a new lower, move the parts, sell with less restriction, and keep the lowers for other projects, NFA/SBR or otherwise.

 

[Hoxviii]

Nope, no time limit, and your build has to comply with your approval date. I form'ed a silencer and paperwork came back, then the "serial number has to be on the tube" came out from ATF afterwards. I serialed the muzzle mount since it was OK per my documentation.

 

[AlexanderA]

The reason I brought this up was that having an SBR registration "in your pocket," so to speak -- even if you have no intention of actually creating an SBR -- would be a way to get around an AWB, if it is worded like the recent one in Boulder, Colorado. Considering the long wait for ATF approval, it might be wise to file the Form 1 long before such AWB legislation is being considered. Always be looking for ways to hedge your bets.

 

[Elkins45]

Nope, no time limit, and your build has to comply with your approval date. I form'ed a silencer and paperwork came back, then the "serial number has to be on the tube" came out from ATF afterwards. I serialed the muzzle mount since it was OK per my documentation.

I don’t understand what you mean by “your build has to comply with your approval date”.

 

[AlexanderA]

I don’t understand what you mean by “your build has to comply with your approval date”.

He means that you can't start your SBR build until you have the approved Form 1 in hand. (I suppose you could engrave your information on the gun before receiving the approved form, but if you had a short barrel and a receiver -- even though unassembled -- that would be considered "constructive possession" of an unregistered SBR.) My question in the OP was exactly the opposite: what if you had the approved form and did nothing to proceed with the build?

 

[dbmjr1]

Suppose you file an ATF Form 1 -- and pay the $200 tax -- to "make" a Short Barrel Rifle (SBR) out of an AR-15 that you already have. Then, once the form is approved, you do nothing about actually converting the weapon. Is there a time limit within which you have to do this?

The recently passed Boulder, Colorado, AWB included a carve-out for weapons registered under the NFA. Whether or not this ban passes judicial scrutiny, it could be a model for other local, state, or federal AWB's. Registering guns as (potential) SBR's could be a form of insurance.

Remember that the Form 1 must be filed -- and approved -- before the actual work of conversion is started. So by necessity there's a time lag during which the gun is "on paper" -- registered -- while not meeting the legal definition of an SBR.

In the case you present, you would want to engrave the lower receiver as the registered item. Then you can put whatever upper receiver/barrel length you want on it.

 

[Hoxviii]

I don’t understand what you mean by “your build has to comply with your approval date”.

My approval date was XX/XX/XX, which was before FR Doc. 2016-10382. From reading up on it, it looks like the rule hasn't actually changed yet. Even though I didn't immediately build my silencer, I serialized the barrel mount and put it in my parts box.

If the reg passes that the tube has to be marked, it will be on a given date and going forward like how unserialized guns weren't required to be serialized in 1968. If your approval date is after that date and you don't have a marked tube, that will be a crime. If your approval date is before the effective date of the new reg and you have a serialized cap and not a serialized tube, that won't be a crime unless they specifically make part of the reg that previously serialized items will have to be reserialized.

That's what I mean by your build has to comply with the rules in effect when you get approved, like how guys registered machine gun receivers enmasse in 1986 before Hughes went into effect and were able to build on them after the registry closed.

 

[Elkins45]

^^^^^ Interesting that it was requested, and by whom.

On April 27, 2008, ATF received a petition filed on behalf of the National Firearms Act Trade and Collectors Association (NFATCA).

Wonder if this was in response to the emergence of the oil filter silencer adapters at around that time? Also interesting to note that the link took me to a "notice of proposed rulemaking" that is now 10 years old. Not exactly a speedy process, unlike 41P to 41F was.

As a practical matter it doesn't impact me. I never had any intention to serialize anyplace else but the tube. Since I do my own engraving with an electric pencil I need a big canvas upon which to do my magic

 

[Hoxviii]

^^^^^ Interesting that it was requested, and by whom.


Wonder if this was in response to the emergence of the oil filter silencer adapters at around that time? Also interesting to note that the link took me to a "notice of proposed rulemaking" that is now 10 years old. Not exactly a speedy process, unlike 41P to 41F was.

As a practical matter it doesn't impact me. I never had any intention to serialize anyplace else but the tube. Since I do my own engraving with an electric pencil I need a big canvas upon which to do my magic

That's exactly why it was requested and by whom. As always, "follow the money". But I serialized the thread adapter since it's the absolute least likely part to be damaged. front endcap is stupid since it's the most likely part to be damaged. Second? a tube split, accompanied by an endcap failure.

What never goes boom? The rear endcap.

EDIT:
That proposed rule was in 2016, based on ATF guidance from 2008 - the industry wanting ATF to promulgate their guidance into law regarding the filter adapter silencers, but in cloaked language. still slower than 41F/41P, but not a 10 year delay (yet).