Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 7/21/2015 1:53:16 PM EDT
I'm looking over a Form 1 to make an SBR. I see question 1 answer c reads:

Tax Exempt because firearm is being made by or on behalf of any State or possession of the United States, or any political subdivision thereof, or any official police organization of such a government entity engaged in criminal investigations
View Quote


Would it be possible for Kentucky to do something like create a "strategic NFA reserve" which would state that any non-prohibited Kentucky resident making an NFA item is part of the militia or aiding the State Police in having NFA weapons available for purchase?

I'm pretty sure this is a stupid idea and an awful lot of legislative effort and contortion to avoid a $200 tax. I wouldn't want to go as far as deputizing an NFA maker or conferring a right to the Commonwealth to "own" my NFA items. Its also a grammatical stretch to turn "on behalf of" into "it'll be there if some day the state police ever happen to need RotaryJihads SBR".

Bored at work and this ran through my head. Ya'll feel free to tell me why its a dumb idea
Link Posted: 7/21/2015 4:46:06 PM EDT
[#1]
It's been done in other states, the BATFE doesn't like it.

"Montana Made"
Link Posted: 7/21/2015 5:56:55 PM EDT
[#2]
Link Posted: 7/21/2015 8:23:25 PM EDT
[#3]
Which in itself wouldn't work because that's exactly what Blackwater got busted for. It's a straw-man purchase no matter how you look at it.
Link Posted: 7/21/2015 10:24:35 PM EDT
[#4]
Thanks for articulating what I suspected. The legislature would basically have to create some sort of goofy "civilian reserve" or something like that and even then that group would have to actually own the NFA item. It wouldn't work.

If the legislature was going to invest that kind of time and legal bending I'd rather they did it on something that saved more than $200 in taxes for us!
Link Posted: 7/22/2015 5:27:44 AM EDT
[#5]
I have less a problem with the tax (although it DOES SUCK) than
about LEO sign offs and the fact that suppressors are NFA in the
first place.
Link Posted: 7/22/2015 5:43:05 AM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I have less a problem with the tax (although it DOES SUCK) than
about LEO sign offs and the fact that suppressors are NFA in the
first place.
View Quote



A trust will get you past the LEO sign off. (plus no pictures or prints) It also has the added benefits of multiple trustees. So that once you have paid your tax, you can at least allow your NFA items to be possessed by anyone that you put on your trust.
Link Posted: 7/22/2015 9:25:39 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I have less a problem with the tax (although it DOES SUCK) than
about LEO sign offs and the fact that suppressors are NFA in the
first place.
View Quote


Me too, but I don't see suppressors getting off the NFA without a huge legislative hurdle at the national level.

Sure you can bypass the CLEO sign-off with a trust. However the point is you shouldn't have to.

Whats really fun is when kind of anti-gun folks start their shit. I then ask "can we work together on this one? Its better for safety and civility we should both want over-the-counter suppressors like those countries in Europe you like".
Link Posted: 7/22/2015 1:25:54 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I have less a problem with the tax (although it DOES SUCK) than
about LEO sign offs and the fact that suppressors are NFA in the
first place.
View Quote


What is the problem with the CLEO sign off? Its almost automatic, now. I know it is inconvenient, but the whole process is inconvenient. I guess its a pain in Jefferson or Fayette Cos., but where I live, it not a problem. The last one I did, I saw the Sheriff walking down the street and told him I was on the way to his office with a Form 4. He took it and signed on the hood of my car. 2 mins. total.
A $200 tax on a $600 suppressor is a big tax, $200 on a $20,000 Thompson is nothing.

Link Posted: 7/22/2015 1:57:10 PM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


What is the problem with the CLEO sign off? Its almost automatic, now. I know it is inconvenient, but the whole process is inconvenient. I guess its a pain in Jefferson or Fayette Cos., but where I live, it not a problem. The last one I did, I saw the Sheriff walking down the street and told him I was on the way to his office with a Form 4. He took it and signed on the hood of my car. 2 mins. total.
A $200 tax on a $600 suppressor is a big tax, $200 on a $20,000 Thompson is nothing.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have less a problem with the tax (although it DOES SUCK) than
about LEO sign offs and the fact that suppressors are NFA in the
first place.


What is the problem with the CLEO sign off? Its almost automatic, now. I know it is inconvenient, but the whole process is inconvenient. I guess its a pain in Jefferson or Fayette Cos., but where I live, it not a problem. The last one I did, I saw the Sheriff walking down the street and told him I was on the way to his office with a Form 4. He took it and signed on the hood of my car. 2 mins. total.
A $200 tax on a $600 suppressor is a big tax, $200 on a $20,000 Thompson is nothing.




Well you got me there (2 bills on a 6 bill suppressor) but in this day and
age with NICS or a  CCW license it really should be a 4473 item.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top