The ruling is a little bit ambiguous, but the prohibition on "associations" is not regarding multiple equal-part owners, but rather folks who pay a smaller sum to be part of the "bubba joe's milling machine association".  This is also where the "dominion and control language comes into play.  Look at it the way it was with the FAA situation; they put the kybosh on "associations" that had dozens of people paying a paltry sum to stake some small claim in an aircraft, and then paying "for fuel and maintenance" when they were flying it.  The reality was, there was an owner, and then there were a bunch of people who paid him rental fees.

Same thing; you can't buy a $3,000 mill and then offer $50 "association dues" for countless people to be permitted use of it in the same way a rental would work, but if you and two buddies legitimately went in $1,000 each on a $3,000 machine, and any of you can access it and use it however you see fit at any time, then all three people have "dominion and control" over "their machine".




Wrong.   A business does not have to generate a profit to be considered a business by the IRS.  And where ATF is concerned, money is irrelevant, profit, loss or otherwise.  If you started cranking out guns and literally giving them away, just because you're not making anything (losing, in fact) does not change the fact that you are manufacturing for distribution without an FFL.