October 9, 2013

ATF claims lack of funds and shuts down eforms

It appears that the ATF has entered politics.

While there is no cost to continue and not make any changes to a website, there is surly a cost to change a website and post a message stating that a service has been suspended.

Perhaps someone at the ATF volunteered their time to make the change, or perhaps it was a paid employee trying to make a point for the benefit of others.

If you visit the eForm at the atfonline.gov website it states

----------
eForms Outage

Due to the lapse in appropriation of federal funds, the e-Forms system is temporarily suspended until further notice.

We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you in advance for your cooperation and patience.

ASSISTANCE:
Please direct questions to the OST Customer Support Help Desk at 1-877-875-3723 or Helpdesk-OSTCS@atf.gov.
_____

Kind of like hiring police to inforce no fishing in a park in the ocean. Can't the government find better things to waste money on?

October 9, 2013

Are Silencer Manufactures shooting themselves in the Foot over 41P

Last week many people in the industry met in Washington DC to discuss issues and concerns with 41P. Besides discussing what happened leading up to 41P, the main topic of discussion was regarding that 41P this was a legal issue within rulemaking and that inappropriate or inaccurate responses could cause problems. The most important part of any response is accuracy and addressing the issues with facts in such a manner as to allow for an appeal if the ATF approves their current recommendations.

Within the next week, I expect to make my comments public. While many are waiting until the last moment to present as complete a set of comments as possible, I would like to provide proper guidance to many who our clients and others whom read our blog on a regular basis. Our comments will cover many topics and come with some details on how to use them to create your own comments but we would never suggest that you simply copy someone else's comments even with very minor modifications. Remember comments are part of the rule making process and not a popularity contest. If you want to see our comments when they are published and be kept up to date on 41P and our efforts, I would suggest that you subscribe to our blog by clicking the subscribe button in the upper right of this page.

I was surprised to see that a major silencer company appears to be sending proposed letters to their dealers or others in the industry to provide others with a suggested letter for individuals to submit to ATF with respect to the current rule making. Remember this is rule making and not a popularity vote. There are serious problems with ATF's proposal but, to read the suggested text the Silencer Company has provided to others which is being posted on the Internet you would think they merely opposed extending the requirement for a chief law enforcement officer ("CLEO") to "gun trusts." Let's be clear about a few points.

First, this Silencer company suggests that you state: "Requiring background checks for trusts would ensure NFA items do not fall into the hands of criminals and makes law enforcement sign off unnecessary." Let's keep in mind that the proposed rule is not limited to trusts but also encompasses corporations, LLCs, and other legal entities. Shouldn't the objection to ATF address the CLEO certification requirement for all legal entities?

Second, by raising the issue of CLEO certification requirements and even suggesting a change in the wording of the certification, ATF has opened the door to addressing the CLEO certification requirement with respect to individuals. If you are opposing an extension of CLEO certification to trusts would you not make the point that the existing certification requirement for individuals should be eliminated?

Third, it is not clear to me why one would endorse "background checks for trusts" without explaining what that would entail. There are different ways to do background checks but the suggested language could be understood as endorsing the proposal that all "responsible persons" for legal entities submit photographs and fingerprints. Why support that approach? As many, many of the comments submitted to ATF have already observed, a NICS check should be more than sufficient. By requiring photographs and fingerprint cards, ATF is taking a step backward in the processing of applications. Practically all the effort put into the eForms initiative will have been wasted, as the eForms are not set up to handle applications that require photographs and fingerprints. In fact eForms are not available when those are required.

Fourth, as many comments already submitted to ATF make clear, the definition of a "responsible person" is absurdly broad and vague. Will a settlor of a revocable or irrevocable trust who does not serve as either a trustee or a beneficiary have to submit photographs and fingerprints? Will individuals designated as successor trustees who have not assumed the powers of an acting trustee have to do so? Will beneficiaries who are not entitled to receive any distribution from the trust until the death of the settlor, possibly decades in the future, have to do so? Does it matter that some of those beneficiaries may be infants? And what will happen if just one of that extended group of people who do not have the authority to possess trust assets happens to be a prohibited person? Will the entire application be denied because someone who at some future date may receive the cash value of the firearms has his name on the trust as a conditional beneficiary?

Fifth, as some comments submitted to ATF have already argued, there is no reasonable basis to regulate silencers to the same extent as some other NFA firearms. Silencers are legal in thirty-nine States and legal for use in at least some form of hunting in more than thirty States. In certain settings they are the only practical means of hearing protection. They provide protection from hearing loss that in just about any other context the government would mandate. The medical literature on hearing loss due to recreational shooting strongly advocates the use of silencers. While ATF lacks the authority to exempt silencers from the NFA, why in the world would a company that makes them not urge you to demand ATF impose minimal regulation upon them even if ATF were unwilling to treat other NFA items in the same manner?

Remember that now is not the time to be shortsighted. Remember we are dealing with items that are legal to acquire, possess, and in most State legislatures and that the US Congress has said we have the right to own possess and use these items for more than 75 years. Lets hope that we do not end up with unnecessary regulations because of the shortsightedness of a few.

October 3, 2013

How to Fill Out an ATF Form 5 (5320.5) for Tax Free Transfers

We just posted a page http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/form5.html on completing an ATF Form 5 (5320.5). Remember a Form 5 is used for a tax-free transfer to a lawful heir. If you own NFA firearms individually, you can give your lawful heir the choice of taking the item individually, in trust, or as permitted by the ATF under the NFA and creating properly drafted documents can help make this process unnecessary or easier than using the default methods found in most wills and estate planning documents that are not drafted to consider firearms.

Additionally you can avoid this entire process with a multi generational asset protection gun trust. We have Gun Trusts that can be setup to last form generation to generation without future transfers or the tax stamp fees.

We also have pages on
How to complete an ATF Form 1 (5320.1)
How to complete an ATF Form 4 (5320.4)
The Certification that should be included with each
and How to complete an ATF Form 20 (5330.20)

To learn more about how to update your documents contact a Gun Trust Lawyer® by using the form at the top right of this page.

September 16, 2013

Comments for ATF 41P Starting to Accumulate

While close to 400 applications have been received by the ATF 95 of them have been posted on the regulations.gov website, where you can file a public comment. If you would like to file a comment, you can review other comments and post your own online at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=ATF-2013-0001

It is important to proofread your comments before posting so that your message is clear and makes sense. A few of the comments actually appear to argue the opposite because of missing words or the way they are phrased.

Most comments seem to be centered around the following topics:

  1. Trusts and other Legal Entities have a legitimate purpose.
  2. ATF's Cost and Benefit Analysis is Flawed
  3. Legitimate Uses of NFA Firearms
  4. ATF uses false assumptions for CLEO refusals. My CLEO will not sign new Forms
  5. Criminals do not use Registered NFA firearms and NFA Firearms are not used for Crimes.
  6. ATF's Proposals will not prevent crime nor stop what they fear from being able to happen.

Recommendations
Check with your CLEO as well as the CLEOs in other areas around you to find out if they will sign the new proposed CLEO signature. If you have a responsible party in a state where the items are not legal, let ATF know that it would be impossible to obtain a modified CLEO signature because the items are illegal where the person lives, but the person would only use or have access to them where it is permitted. If you have more than 2 responsible parties, let the ATF know that their sample of trusts is inaccurate and that you as well as others you know of have more than 2 responsible parties. Let them know that Trusts help protect against constructive possession have other legitimate estate planning and management purposes.

If you are a FFL or manufacture, you may want to address the effects on your business and employees in addition to the above topics.

September 9, 2013

Letters to the ATF

Comments from our clients and others who will be affected by the proposed changes to the ATF will be important. Remember there is little to be gained by rushing to file comments or filing comments that do not raise an issue supported by facts.

Take some time to understand the proposed rule and understand how this may affect you and your family. You should discuss your views with your federal and state legislators and urge them to submit comments on how this will apply to FFL dealers, manufactures and citizens that they represent.

Your local dealers should submit comments on how this will impact their business.
You can discuss the new CLEO requirements with your CLEO and see if they would be willing to sign and if so what limitations they would place on obtaining a signature. Will they charge a fee like in Alaska, or refuse to sign as many CLEOs currently do because of the costs associated with the process.

Is it a cost issue, or will the CLEO not sign because they do not believe anyone has the right to own Title II firearms.

Any comments you submit should be supported by facts and not simply based on opinions.

If you have a gun trust with more than 2 responsible parties let them know and that their projections may be inaccurate because of their invalid assumptions over 2 responsible parties per trust. If you have 5, 10, or more let the ATF know.

It is important to be civil with your comments and avoid rhetoric that will distract from the points you are trying to get across.

We have previously posted a sample letter for individuals to use to express their experience with local CLEO signatures. You may download the FICG's letter here

Below are some additional situations you may consider and if any of them fit your situation you may consider including them and the relevant facts in your letter to the ATF.

Some Additional Potential problems with New Responsible party and CLEO requirements.

  1. What if my CLEO will not sign the new requirement because they have no way of knowing that the fingerprints are mine or that the photograph was taken within 1 year?
  2. What if I get married and my CLEO will not allow my spouse to be added?
  3. What if an elderly but competent parent moves into my house and needs to be added to protect from constructive possession and the CLEO will not sign?
  4. What if my son is under age now but when he turn 21, I want to add him on my trust. The CLEO will not sign for him even though they are not a prohibited person and would pass all other requirements?
  5. What if I add a friend to my trust as a responsible party so that we can go shooting together and am unable to get a CLEO for my friend within the 30 days as required?
  6. What if my spouse is the military and deployed overseas when I want to make a purchase and a CLEO cannot be obtained?
  7. What if a really large family that is located across several counties and states. Some CLEOs will sign but others will not. We keep the items on a family property where they are legal to own. Besides the cost of obtaining 10-20 CLEO signatures and fingerprints, how do we deal with the fact that some CLEOs will sign and others will not?
  8. What if a Responsible Party is in a coma or otherwise physically incapacitated for an unknown time period when I want to make a purchase? Are they considered a responsible party and must I obtain a CLEO for them?
  9. What if I have several Responsible persons who can obtain CLEO signatures but others who cannot.
  10. What if my spouse or other co-trustee lives in a state where the items are not legal but will only be using them in states where they are legal and as such the CLEO will not sign because they are not legal in the state where the CLEO is sought?

Remember the importance of submitting comments which are based on facts.

September 8, 2013

Gun Trust, LE Advanced SBR, and Engraving Special

IMI SBR Right Side.jpg

If you have been thinking of buying an SBR, now is the time to do it before the ATF changes the CLEO requirements. On Monday September 9th ATF will be publishing proposed changes to the CLEO requirements for Gun Trusts and changes are expected after the expiration of the 90 day comment period.

I have personally purchased one of these guns and am awaiting approval from the ATF.

This special is good while supplies last. Currently there are 1500 units in stock and ready to ship.

This is an incredible deal on a SBR for our Clients. This gun uses IMI Parts ( Israel Military Industries). The IMI parts are M16 Nickel Baron bolt carrier group, Flip up gas block sight with quick deployment points on both sides, 7 1/4 polymer quad rail with QD attachment on the bottom front, MilSpec trigger parts group, Buffer Tube with 6 position stops, buffer, and buffer spring. This SBR is manufactured by GPI in Jacksonville using the GPI 7075 Precision ambi marked lower receiver. Bullet pictograms with save, semi, and auto, black type 3 anodize matching precision 7075 A3 flat top upper, also type 3 anodized.

Standard Features also include:

  • GPI QD stock place - picture below
  • Billet winter trigger guard
  • 11.5 inch 1/9 twist, 4150 CMV match barrel with 1/2 x 28 standard threads.
  • A2 Flash hider

Riffle comes complete with 1 IMI 30 round Battle Magazine, This bundle include engraving of your Trust Name meeting ATF requirements, the $999 Price include a Base Gun Trust, and Form 4 for those who pick up from GPI in Jacksonville or Form 3 to your local dealer included.

$899 for Package for our existing gun trust clients or
$999 including a Base Gun Trust which can be upgraded to our Advanced or Professional Trust.

Up to 10 additional IMI battle Magazines can be purchased for $12 each with each firearm.

LE price on this gun without ATF paperwork, engraving, or Gun Trust is $1375
Retail price with everything is $1795

Place your order by sending and email to sales@gpigun.com or calling (904) 425-2791.

Click the link below for additional images

Continue reading "Gun Trust, LE Advanced SBR, and Engraving Special" »

September 7, 2013

ATF to Publish Proposed Changes for Comment on Monday September 9th

Here is a Link to the proposed changes that is expected to be published for comment on 9/9/2013. We will be updating this blog on this topic later this weekend. If you would like to compare it to the original posting that can be found here

September 2, 2013

What is the status of my Gun Trust?

Over the last week, we have had many people asking as series of questions. The have primarily been questions like the following

  1. What is status of my current Gun Trust?
  2. Is ATF eliminating Gun Trusts?
  3. What would happened to my current Form 1 and Form 4 applications that are in process?
  4. Should I form a Gun Trust now given the recent proposal by the ATF?
  5. Should I put my regular firearms in my Gun Trust?

This blog will address Gun Trusts and their current use as well as if the ATF implemented the changes as outlined in their Proposal. While we feel that it is unlikely that the ATF will implement everything suggested in their proposal we will use this as a worst case.

What is status of my current Gun Trust?
Your current gun trust is still valid and as of this time nothing has changed. You can still submit Form 4 and Form 1 applications, add and remove authorized users, and add non NFA firearms to your Gun Trust. If fact, if there is anything you are thinking of purchasing, you should do so now. We expect there to be a rush to buy NFA firearms over the next 90 days. To reduce the time associated with approval, you should submit your Form 1's electronically and you should ask your dealer to submit your Form 4's electronically.

Is ATF eliminating Gun Trusts?
ATF cannot eliminate gun trusts, only congress would have this power. THe National Firearms Act defines a person as an individual, trust or business entity. A Gun Trust is a special type of trust. While many so called gun trusts are nothing more than traditional trusts, a Gun Trust by a Gun Trust Lawyer® has been rewritten from the ground up to deal with firearms and their unique set of circumstances. While other gun trusts are really a traditional revocable trust, they can also be used to purchase NFA firearms but may place your family and friends of risk of violations of the NFA if they do what the trusts say to do.

What would happened to my current Form 1 and Form 4 applications that are in process?
We expect based on history that the ATF will continue the processing of all applications submitted before changes take place (at least 90 days). Given this, you may want to submit additional applications for purchases you would have made in the next 6-12 months at this time, in case the proposal is approved and requires a CLEO signature in the future as this may be hard to obtain. Remember online sumittions may be as much as 8 weeks faster

Should I form a Gun Trust now given the recent proposal by the ATF?
If you are thinking about buying firearms restricted by the NFA, now may be the time to purchase them. Using a Gun Trust will make the process simpler and currently it does not require a CLEO signature, fingerprints, or photos. If privacy is a concern to you, now may be the last opportunity to obtain Title II firearms under the current regulations.

Should I put my regular firearms in my Gun Trust?
Yes, A properly designed Gun Trust should be able to handle normal firearms without the use of a Schedule A or B. The problem with using Schedules is that ATF requires all schedules mentioned in the trust to be submitted with your trust. This means that you will create a de facto registration of all of your firearms. I have heard that some people with Schedule Bs have been told to send a fake or blank Schedule B to the ATF. I think you face serious consequences if you send an untruthful representation or false documents to the ATF regarding firearms and or the associated taxes. Remember the penalties for violation of the NFA are tax based penalties which are similar to other IRS violations. Our Trust do not use Schedules to list the firearms and as such are fine to use for your regular firearms as well as NFA FIrearms. Many people who do not even own NFA firearms use our trusts to protect and manage their firearms and related items.

September 1, 2013

National Firearms Act Day of Reckoning

Joshua Prince with the Firearms Industry Consulting Group has declared September 3rd the National Firearms Act Day of Reckoning in response to the recent proposal by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to implement Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) signatures for fictitious entity applicants, as well as, instituting a Responsible Person (RP) definition applicable to the different roles within those fictitious entities.

They have prepared several sample letters to be submitted to your State and Federal Representatives, as well as letters for FFLs to submit to the US Small Business Administration.

Before simply sending out the sample letters that FICG has drafted and which are downloadable below, we are asking that you take time to review the sample letter and modify it, explaining your own background and circumstances, how this proposed rule, if enacted, would effect you and include other personalization, especially if you have a prior relationship with your Representative. Form letters have very little impact on our Representatives. Therefore, it is imperative that we ALL take the time to ensure that our Representatives are aware that we took time and effort in preparing the communication and expect a coherent and thoughtful response. You should also be extremely clear to all of your Representatives that you are their constituent and their decision on this matter will have an effect on the next election cycle.

For individuals who have been denied a CLEO signature, you can download a sample copy of the letter FICG has prepared for you to submit to the ATF here.

For FFLs, you can download a sample copy of the letter FICG has prepared for you to submit to the SBA here.

They have also provided sample letters for your Senators, House Representatives and State Representatives and officials

To read the entire blog in its entirety click here.

I would suggest that everyone check with their local CLEO and see if they would be willing to sign and submit the appropriate letters once the comment period has begun.

August 31, 2013

NFATCA Issues Statement Regarding CLEO and ATF

It seems that there has been a lot written about the NFATCA recently because of the recent proposed changes to the way NFATCA wants to deal with Trusts and define responsible parties. While it is clear that the NFATCA did not request the changes that have been proposed, it might be fair to say their efforts opened the can of worms and perhaps given the current political client, it might not have been the best time to try to eliminate CLEO. Imagine the shock to President Obama and the Administration to find out that Machine guns were legal. For years Obama has been stating that everyone knows that Machine Guns are illegal.

The proposed changes are not in anyones best interest. I do expect to see changes to what we have seen and the NFATCA will be active in helping to justify the absurdity of the current proposal. In addition, we will be working on proposed actions and responses to the ATF once the comment period opens.

Follow this link for the NFATCA_Statement_083113.pdf or you may read the statement below.

Continue reading "NFATCA Issues Statement Regarding CLEO and ATF" »

August 30, 2013

ATF Publishes intent to enter into rulemakeing for Trusts and Business entities

It looks like an attempt to remove the CLEO certification by the NFATCA which began in 2009 has backfired and now the ATF is wanting a modified CLEO signature, NICS check, fingerprint cards, photograph, certificate of citizenship for every responsible party of a fictitious entity. You can obtain a copy of the proposed rule here

While ATF already has a definition of responsible party for dealers, they are proposing the following for fictitious entities:

Depending on the context, the term "responsible party" includes any individual, including any grantor, trustee, beneficiary, partner, member, officer, director, board member, owner, shareholder, or manager, who possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority under any trust instrument, contract, agreement, article, certificate, bylaw, or instrument, or under state law, to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of the entity.

As far as the modified CLEO, the ATF seeks public comments regarding whcther it is feasible to ask CLEOs to certify that they are satisfied that the photographs and fingerprints match those of the responsible person.

For example, some responsible persons may bring their fingerprint cards to the CLEO once already stamped, and some legal entities may have the paperwork, fingerprint cards, and photographs for each of their responsible persons couriered to the CLEO office. In such instances, ATF seeks comments on whether CLEOs will have enough information to certify that they are satisfied that the photographs and fingerprints match those of the responsible persons, or if changes are needed to this proposal.

If you plan on submitting comments the ATF, the Prince Law Firm has a good guide and recommendations that they have posted. It might be a good idea to see if your CLEO would sign such a document, perhaps enough comments indicating that their CLEO would not sign such a document may make a difference.

Remember the ATF has not yet changed the rules and is only at the beginning stages of changing the rules and forms.

If you are considering purchasing a Title II firearm, you might want to do so before any changes are implemented. Several times in the past there have been proposed changes that were not implemented but it does seem likely that there will be some changes in the future.

If and when changes are made and implemented, we will be able to address them in our documents appropriately. Our ArmsGuard Protector allows us to make these types of changes even if your trust is irrevocable. If your trust does not have an ArmsGuard Protection you may want to contact us about adding one.

August 29, 2013

Whitehouse.gov posts inaccurate fact sheet on Trusts

Below is what was posted on the whitehouse.gov website. It is clear that the whoever wrote this does not understand the law and you will notice a lot of anti firearms language and an anti gun rights slant to the message.

Closing a Loophole to Keep Some of the Most Dangerous Guns Out of the Wrong Hands

  • Current law places special restrictions on many of the most dangerous weapons, such as machine guns and short-barreled shotguns. These weapons must be registered, and in order to lawfully possess them, a prospective buyer must undergo a fingerprint-based background check.

  • However, felons, domestic abusers, and others prohibited from having guns can easily evade the required background check and gain access to machine guns or other particularly dangerous weapons by registering the weapon to a trust or corporation. At present, when the weapon is registered to a trust or corporation, no background check is run. ATF reports that last year alone, it received more than 39,000 requests for transfers of these restricted firearms to trusts or corporations.

  • Today, ATF is issuing a new proposed regulation to close this loophole. The proposed rule requires individuals associated with trusts or corporations that acquire these types of weapons to undergo background checks, just as these individuals would if the weapons were registered to them individually. By closing this loophole, the regulation will ensure that machine guns and other particularly dangerous weapons do not end up in the wrong hands.

First I will address what was posted.

  1. The NFA imposes a restriction on the transfer and possession of certain firearms. Not all prospective buyers must undergo a fingerprint-based background check.
  2. Most people using Gun Trusts are purchasing suppressors, these are not dangerous weapons, in fact a suppressor is not a weapon unless you hit someone with it. Most suppressors are round and do not have a sharp edge. A butter knife is more of a weapon than a suppressor
  3. Next, prohibited persons and felons cannot easily evade the requirement of a background check to gain access to machine guns anymore than they can with a regular firearm. Most dealers will do a NICS check on anyone purchasing a Machine Gun. As far as transfers from non firearms dealers, there are stricter requirements on transfers to individuals and the same requirements as regular firearms to trusts or corporations. No criminal would subject themselves to notifying the ATF of their intent to purchase a machine gun, wait 6-12 month to be able to receive the firearm, pay a $200 tax, and pay an extra $10,000 - $20,000 to purchase a legal machine gun when illegal machine guns can be purchased or made easily without waiting or notifying the ATF. This logic is flawed.
  4. There is a process where the ATF can change the rules and requirements in the procedure for purchasing these items. This is not a done deal and as of now what might be proposed is unknown but it will likely include something similar to a NICS check or fingerprint cards.

So what does this mean for your current Gun Trust or one you are ready to create?

This does not mean Gun Trusts are dead or useless. NO. In fact, today many people who only own regular firearms use Gun Trust to manage their firearms. It is the responsible way to own firearms to prevent your family and friends from being subjected to an accidental felony.

Current estate planning and state laws are flawed when it comes to the disposition of firearms to those who survive you. They treat a firearm the same as a bank account. Firearms owners are generally very responsible people and would not want to put their family or friends at risk because of their death.

Our Gun Trusts deal with these issues and allow those who survive you to make smart and intelligent decisions based on the geographical, legal, and emotional issues that will be unknown until you die.

In addition, our Gun Trusts can be setup to last from generation to generation while providing asset protect for your firearms. Yes it is possible to protect your firearms from creditors, divorce, divorce of a child or grandchild, and even from the creditors of your descendants.

Any new requirements will likely slow down the process of obtaining approval from the ATF and may make the new electronic filing that the ATF introduced obsolete. If you are thinking of getting a gun trust to purchase a Title II firearm, now may be the time to do so before new regulations are enacted which change the way they work.

As we have not seen any of the proposal and once it is published there will be a 90 day comment period prior to the introduction of any changes, it is hard to speculate on how or what may be changed.

We do not think this will significantly make a difference to our typical gun trust client as we do not provide gun trusts to felons, domestic abuser, or other prohibited persons. In fact, our trust would not be valid if used by a prohibited person.

Our Gun Trusts are created so that if the law changes we can address the changes in law by changing the trust. It is likely that most if not all changes can or will be addressed as they are made known.

August 29, 2013

Gun owners with Trusts or Corporations and Obama Administration

Today there has been much news about an action or executive order to help ensure that people who should not be able to own NFA firearms are not permitted to do so using a Trust.

First, our Gun Trusts, have never allowed a prohibited person to legally purchase, or be authorized to use firearms or ammunition. This is one of the significant differences between a real Gun Trust from a Gun Trust Lawyer® like we provide, and other so called gun trusts or regular estate planning Trusts.

If you are a criminal, addicted to drugs, a user of illegal drugs(under federal law including medical marijuana), or prohibited to own firearms under local, state, or federal laws, you cannot use our documents to create a valid trust. In addition, any co-trustee or authorized users who are prohibited cannot be added and any attempt to do so is void.

In regards to what is being reported in the news today, at this time we have not seen anything in writing to indicate what was done, what will change, or how it or when any changes will be implemented. At this time, some reports indicate they are proposed changes that will go through a 90 day review at ATF, prior to ATF making any decision to implement any changes. Once we have seen the documents we will be in a position to comment.

The Prince Law Firm has a good article on the ATF Rulemaking Process and potential implications for Gun Trusts.

If you want to keep up to date on any changes or updates to this issue, you should watch this blog or subscribe to it by using the subscribe function in the upper right under the state map or clicking on the subscribe image below.
subscribe.jpg

Last Updated 8/29

August 29, 2013

Ohio Gun Trust- Ohio (OH) What NFA Firearms can I own?

Ohio NFA Class 3 firearms
In Ohio a NFA Trust or Gun Trusts can own all types of firearms including those regulated by the NFA.

There are several type of Class 3 items that are restricted by the National Firearms Act.

Each state can impose additional restrictions on the sale, purchase, and transfer of Title II firearms - (Those sold by FFLs with a Class 3 SOT) in addition to the compliance that is required with the National Firearms Act.

In Ohio you can own the following items that are regulated the the National Firearms Act

Machine Guns
Silencers
Any Other Weapon (AOW)
Destructive Devices (DD)
Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS)
Short Barreled Rifles (SBR)

Follow this link to find out more about Ohio and NFA restrictions on Title II Firearms

If you would like more information on What a Gun Trust is and why you might need one as well as how to identity bad gun trusts you can contact us.


Updated Aug 29, 2013

August 16, 2013

Gun Trust and Submitting ATF Forms online

Yesterday, I decided to try out the ATFonline.gov Eforms submission. I found the process very easy to do and while a little confusing the first time, it seems rather intuitive. Below are the steps I followed:


  1. Register for an account at ATFonline.gov. The system is very picky and must be used with IE 8 or a recent version of Safari on OS X. Sorry no Firefox, Chrome, or even IE 7.
  2. Log in.
  3. Select the Form 1. Better to use the bar and move it with the mouse, it is very difficult to scroll through the forms. ATF needs to switch this to a drop down menu.
  4. Application - this is where you state whether you are tax exempt or will be paying a tax.
  5. Applicant - Select that you are not a FFL and then complete your information. You should list the Trust name as the Licensee / Permitee Name.applicant.jpg
  6. Add line items. You can use one application for multiple items. I choose to only do one SBR. It walked me through the process of selecting the manufacture from a list.line-item.jpg
  7. Upload electronic documents. This is where I uploaded my scanned Gun Trust Documents.upload.jpg
  8. Certify that Under Penalties of Perjury, I Declare that I have examined this application, including accompanying documents, and to the best of my knowledge and belief it is true, accurate and complete and the making and possession of the firearm described above would not constitute a violation of Chapter 44, Title 18, U.S.C., Chapter 53, Title 26, U.S.C., or any provisions of State or local law.
  9. Enter credit card payment information
  10. Sign and Submit. By clicking a check box, your application will be submitted.

Within a few minutes I received a confirmation email showing that I had submitted my application and it was Pending Research because the manufacture I had selected was not listed in their database. This morning I received a new update saying that my status was changed to Submitted/In Process. I will keep updating this blog as I receive more information but it already feels faster than the paper system.

It was interesting to see that there was no certification of citizenship that was required my many ATF agents in the past. We had always taken the position that a Trust is not a person and as such cannot have a citizenship. If you are submitting the paper forms, we still recommend submitting the Certification, in case you agent wants it. For instructions see http://www.GunTrustLawyer.com/certification.html.

ATF Online submission of Form 1 Status Updates.


  • Thursday August 8, 2013 Electronic Form 1 Submitted to ATF online
  • Friday August 9, 2013 Status changed to Submitted/In Process
    (with paper it will take 1-2 months and as much as 6 months to cash your check and change the status to In Process