User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 7:29:57 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tax laws are all hilarious! Until you're in prison. Cite ONE case of someone in prison for lawfully selling a LLC or reassigning a trust who was convicted of evading a whopping $200 in taxes in the 83 year NFA history. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 7:35:56 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You seem to know a lot about prison. Enough to know I don't want to go! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 7:49:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Dude, what are you talking about?
Even if you filed as in individual, there is a tax free transfer option depending on how your will/estate is setup, etc. You still pay the $200 tax. You still are setting up a trust, just without other trustees. A Form 4 still has to get processed. You still have to get fingerprinted and have a photo taken. Why do you think thats being avoided? This just seems a simpler way to do the trust route without the entire group of trustees getting fingerprinted before submission. Unless, I am completely stupid. Please enlighten me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 7:52:11 PM EDT
[#4]
You guys crack me up . Who's going to buy a suppressor and pay the 200 dollar tax stamp just to resell it after waiting a year ?
Now if a dealer put all his inventory on trusts THEN offered them for sale maybe . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 7:57:32 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cite ONE case of someone in prison for lawfully selling a LLC or reassigning a trust who was convicted of evading a whopping $200 in taxes in the 83 year NFA history. My guess it doesn't exist. I am not, however, going to be the test case. I think my position is clear - if this becomes common place as a result of it being an advertised function of the product of subject - I think it has great potential to gain enough interest that there will be such a test case. I'd like to hear input from the lawyers on thsi - such as Nolo - etc. I can see it's been debated by lawyers as far back as 2012 with no clear conclusion - and IMO not worth the risk: https://www.mdshooters.com/archive/index.php/t-81437.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:00:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Trust name for silencers will be fixed. For Form 1's it will be limited to around 20 characters. If you have an idea we are open to suggestions. However the purpose of this is to be quick and simple. Allowing people to name the trust is one more step that is required on the end user. Something quick and simple based on info provided. Like ABC## Trust, using the customer's initials. The first could have 01, and automatically increase as it goes. Not sure what the odds are for somebody to need three digits, but you could also start with ABC001 Trust. I personally would be opposed to formatting it with "gun" or "NFA" or "firearms" in the name. ETA: and make it usable for items the dealer sells out of their local stock |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:04:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cite ONE case of someone in prison for lawfully selling a LLC or reassigning a trust who was convicted of evading a whopping $200 in taxes in the 83 year NFA history. Here you go. it was actually you who posted this in an archived thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:05:23 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Something quick and simple based on info provided. Like ABC## Trust, using the customer's initials. The first could have 01, and automatically increase as it goes. Not sure what the odds are for somebody to need three digits, but you could also start with ABC001 Trust. I personally would be opposed to formatting it with "gun" or "NFA" or "firearms" in the name. I would add don't force the word 'TRUST" to be in the name of the trust. It's not required. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:06:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryHere is one obama pardoned from 1980 https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/05/20/president-obama-grants-pardons |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:09:33 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think my position is clear - if this becomes common place as a result of it being an advertised function of the product of subject - I think it has great potential to gain enough interest that there will be such a test case. Pretty much what folks said when trusts were used to bypass CLEO and background checks. Nobody went to jail for that "evasion", though we did get 41F. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:11:28 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryNo, Fleming did NOT do what I asked for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:13:08 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here is one obama pardoned from 1980 https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/05/20/president-obama-grants-pardons Nope, not the example I asked for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:29:00 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys crack me up . Who's going to buy a suppressor and pay the 200 dollar tax stamp just to resell it after waiting a year ? Now if a dealer put all his inventory on trusts THEN offered them for sale maybe . Yeah, unless a dealer transfers stuff to single-shot trusts, then offers the trusts for sale, it shouldn't get too much attention. The other scenario possible would be someone doing this, then transferring the trust to someone unable to own a firearm, a trust-enabled straw purchase. This could send ATF into a "we need to redefine!" thing, like the supposed case of the guy that failed to buy the silencer as an individual, then submitted a trust with his name, which theoretically led to 41f. I'm not sure what legal basis they would have for "if the thing that owns the thing changes hands, it's the same as the thing changing hands", but ATF likes to make up their own stuff sometimes. I'm again not sure of the legalities, but selling a corporation seems a "normal" function of a corporation, whereas selling a trust seems different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:41:51 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, Fleming did NOT do what I asked for. Not in the exact context, but he used a "loophole" to skirt around paying a tax stamp and he is now a felon because of it. Hell, even the resident NFA lawyers on arfcom have all said this is a bad idea and would be considered tax evasion by definition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:50:53 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not in the exact context, but he used a "loophole" to skirt around paying a tax stamp and he is now a felon because of it. The case had NOTHING to do with selling a LLC or TRUST. He is a felon for lying on an NFA form about who the transferee was and conspiracy and a host of other stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 8:54:52 PM EDT
[#16]
Selling an LLC and all assets is legit and not tax avoidance/evasion, companies do it everyday. Now, selling a trust and assets is relatively uncharted territory. There are other types of trust than the usual revocable living trust that we usually see in the NFA world. Perhaps that is the case here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:08:01 PM EDT
[#17]
People are flipping out over nothing here. The Trust owns the supressor. No person does. The ownership never changes. The trustee's do. This is not tax evasion, in fact, it is the purpose of most Trusts.
If you amend your trust to a different Trustee/Trustees you are legal to do so. It does not sound like it is a bright idea of you are changing the Trustee to a stranger to avoid a "sale", as other property in said trust is now under their control as well. Using this method to add a spouse or other friends/relatives after approval is well within the law and would likely pass any measure of scrutiny. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:12:02 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People are flipping out over nothing here. The Trust owns the supressor. No person does. The ownership never changes. The trustee's do. This is not tax evasion, in fact, it is the purpose of most Trusts. If you amend your trust to a different Trustee/Trustees you are legal to do so. It does not sound like it is a bright idea of you are changing the Trustee to a stranger to avoid a "sale", as other property in said trust is now under their control as well. Using this method to add a spouse or other friends/relatives after approval is well within the law and would likely pass any measure of scrutiny. Q: Will new responsible persons, added after the making or transfer, be subject to the same requirements? A: Once an application has been approved, no documentation is required to be submitted to ATF when a new responsible person is added to a trust or legal entity. However, should a responsible person change after the application has been submitted, but before it is approved, the applicant or transferee must contact the NFA Branch for guidance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:13:47 PM EDT
[#19]
Ok I have never owned a suppressor but was planning on getting one or several of the HPA passed.
But let's look at the law as it is currently Please bear with me : So what is the process if I walk into my local class 3 gunshop and find one I want or find one online? Can I use this trust and not have to wait forever? Do I still have to pay $200 for a tax stamp I don't care if I get printed I had to to get my Concealed carry permit |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:28:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The case had NOTHING to do with selling a LLC or TRUST. He is a felon for lying on an NFA form about who the transferee was and conspiracy and a host of other stuff. Crazy, that's not what you said in the other post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:34:03 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Crazy, that's not what you said in the other post. "other stuff". |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 9:44:40 PM EDT
[#22]
Maybe I'm missing something, but why would I have 5 NFA items on 5 different trusts?
thats a lot of paperwork to keep track of. If someones already got a trust nothing keeps them from taking everyone off to do the purchase then put them back on again. Or even having two different copies of the trust, one with all the trustees and one with only one trustee that's used just for purchases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:01:01 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe I'm missing something, but why would I have 5 NFA items on 5 different trusts? thats a lot of paperwork to keep track of. If someones already got a trust nothing keeps them from taking everyone off to do the purchase then put them back on again. Or even having two different copies of the trust, one with all the trustees and one with only one trustee that's used just for purchases. Well if you take everyone off and send a copy of your trust in for a new suppressor you have to wait what 300 days before the new can comes in ? So only you could use the items during that time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:06:53 PM EDT
[#24]
This tax evasion discussion is a hoot. If you form your trust and acquire an NFA item you pay the tax. No tax evasion there.
If you subsequently sell the trust... No tax evasion there either, since the sale of a trust does not require a transfer tax. If ATF wanted to impose a transfer tax on the sale of an NFA item within an LLC or trust, I am sure they could. And maybe they will, but it isn' the case now. Fwiw, many states impose gain and sales taxes or recordation taxes when an entity like an LLC, trust, partnership or corporation has a change of controlling ownership. JPK |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:07:17 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well if you take everyone off and send a copy of your trust in for a new suppressor you have to wait what 300 days before the new can comes in ? So only you could use the items during that time. I think the amount of hoops we jump through just because we're law abiding citizens is crazy compared to how easy it is to do things the dishonest way. I never understood why once an item was approved on a trust, they couldn't add new items to the same trust faster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:11:30 PM EDT
[#26]
That's not a valid trust (as described on the website) in Florida...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:12:41 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh I wasn't making the point that it was practical, just that it was the same amount of foot-work. I think the amount of hoops we jump through just because we're law abiding citizens is crazy compared to how easy it is to do things the dishonest way. I never understood why once an item was approved on a trust, they couldn't add new items to the same trust faster. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well if you take everyone off and send a copy of your trust in for a new suppressor you have to wait what 300 days before the new can comes in ? So only you could use the items during that time. I think the amount of hoops we jump through just because we're law abiding citizens is crazy compared to how easy it is to do things the dishonest way. I never understood why once an item was approved on a trust, they couldn't add new items to the same trust faster. I think their trust is much simpler and having one for each item was the answer to the 41f paperwork nightmare. I went with a friend to buy last week it looked like a whole ream of paper for one suppressor. Maybe the ATF will cry uncle at some point or need a bigger building. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:14:19 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well if you take everyone off and send a copy of your trust in for a new suppressor you have to wait what 300 days before the new can comes in ? So only you could use the items during that time. Others can use them, but they need to remain in your control. So a bud at the ranch or range is ok, but he can't take it home. JPK |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:39:28 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, if you read 41F it says you can add people after the item is approved. But you cannot add them while waiting for approval without contacting the ATF. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So has the ATF blessed this method? I am probably making a purchase online this week. I may try this. I want to be able to hand my suppressor down to my kids someday when they are old enough. Yes, if you read 41F it says you can add people after the item is approved. But you cannot add them while waiting for approval without contacting the ATF. But you can add them after the fact without them being printed and photographed? I thought the biggest point of the changes from 41F was that everyone has to be printed, even on trusts, but no CLEO signature needed. If that's the case, that seems to run counter to everything else I've read about them (and I'm genuinely curious as I have a trust drawn up already, but not filed because of the need to get my wife printed). |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:53:24 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This tax evasion discussion is a hoot. If you subsequently sell the trust... No tax evasion there either, since the sale of a trust does not require a transfer tax. Quote HistoryQuoted:
This tax evasion discussion is a hoot. If you subsequently sell the trust... No tax evasion there either, since the sale of a trust does not require a transfer tax. Only the sale portion is even in question. For everyone so absolutely certain there are no legal issues I will quote from a 'lawyer' (or one who plays one on the internet as it were) from one of the links I provided earlier: It would likely be illegal for two main general reasons:
1. There is no actual "transfer" of the trust. HT4's idea involves the transfer of the trustee position for value which, in turn, would serve as a transfer of the NFA item since, under a trust, the trustee is the person who has actual possession and control of the NFA item. The intent is to transfer the NFA item through a transfer of the trustee position without the attendant paperwork with the ATF and tax payment. In the world of criminal law, this will likely be viewed by the ATF as "conspiracy to commit X" and also "violation of X"; two separate but very serious charges since the conspiracy charge will carry the same penalty as the actual violation. 2. Through the transfer of the trustee position (and thus transfer of the NFA item in the trust), the settlor of the trust is taking a great risk and taking on a great deal of liability. The Settlor still remains responsible for the trust estate to a certain degree. If the items are moved out of state, or if a crime is committed with the items in the trust, that can come back to haunt the Settlor as he or she was a willing participant in the transfer. From: https://www.mdshooters.com/archive/index.php/t-81437.html Now, take it for what it's worth, but it's a more reasoned position than just saying 'Nope, Legal. This talk about tax evasion is funny to me.'... okay... maybe, but perhaps provide something to back that up. I sincerly hope it does end up being proven to be legal and I am genuinely interested in the subject, but this, for me, has red flags all over it and I won't be the test case. I think if SS is purporting this to be legal and had lawyers working on it for 6 months, I'd like them to speak up and explain why it's legal - customers that purchase the product should be confident in the legality of it as it's their freedom that is on the line. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 10:53:59 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Something quick and simple based on info provided. Like ABC## Trust, using the customer's initials. The first could have 01, and automatically increase as it goes. Not sure what the odds are for somebody to need three digits, but you could also start with ABC001 Trust. I personally would be opposed to formatting it with "gun" or "NFA" or "firearms" in the name. ETA: and make it usable for items the dealer sells out of their local stock Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Trust name for silencers will be fixed. For Form 1's it will be limited to around 20 characters. If you have an idea we are open to suggestions. However the purpose of this is to be quick and simple. Allowing people to name the trust is one more step that is required on the end user. Something quick and simple based on info provided. Like ABC## Trust, using the customer's initials. The first could have 01, and automatically increase as it goes. Not sure what the odds are for somebody to need three digits, but you could also start with ABC001 Trust. I personally would be opposed to formatting it with "gun" or "NFA" or "firearms" in the name. ETA: and make it usable for items the dealer sells out of their local stock Agree 100%. The naming should avoid (or be able to avoid as an option) anything gun-related. How many pages will the Single Shot Trust be? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2017 11:03:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But you can add them after the fact without them being printed and photographed? I thought the biggest point of the changes from 41F was that everyone has to be printed, even on trusts, but no CLEO signature needed. If that's the case, that seems to run counter to everything else I've read about them (and I'm genuinely curious as I have a trust drawn up already, but not filed because of the need to get my wife printed). The only people that provide prints and photos are those that are considered Responsible Persons at the time of submission. There was a proposal with 41P that would require the photos and prints to be sent to the ATF within 30 days of any change. But, that didn't make it to 41F. What's being offered by SS is basically the "work around" that the ATF admitted existed in their FAQ when 41F was put into effect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:24:39 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll just keep my single, $100 trust that can accomplish exactly the same thing as this. From a lawyer I trust and can have face time with, not some yokel over the internet to boot. I fail to see any value in this, unless I know for absolute certainty that I will only ever possess one NFA item. Which would be a ludicrous restriction to place on myself. You're missing the point, bud. Pre-41f, there was no reason to have more than one trust, and you put all your NFA items in that single trust. Post-41f, it is advantageous to have every new NFA item in its own trust. 7 suppressors? 7 trusts. 3 SBRs? 3 more trusts. It doesn't restrict you to owning a single NFA item - it's just that the way BATFE wrote 41f, it's easier to deal w/ NFA using multiple trusts rather than the prior single trust method. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:38:27 AM EDT
[#34]
If it is really legal and legitimate to sell a Trust (containing an NFA asset/s) via the effective sale of a Trustee or Beneficiary position being written into an existing trust and no transfer tax is due why doesn't Silencer Shop just sell Single Shot Trusts with a pre-built in asset?
They are already creating "Silencerco-SN#12345" trust for the end consumer and transferring the asset to that trust for the end consumer. Why not just create the single shot trust when the silencer asset arrives on their books from the manufacturer. Create the Trust, pay the Form 4 tax and transfer the silencer to the pre-configured single shot trust. Then list a "trustee" position for sale, effectively sell the trust to the end consumer, immediately transfer the silencer (since there is no F4 required) and no responsible party information needs to be submitted, and finally remove the original Silencer Shop trustee from the trust. Granted the 8 month wait is still built into the total time frame while sitting on SilencerShops books. However it effectively removes a couple of big barriers folks complain about by allowing consumers to buy Single Shot Trusts with a built in asset and walk out the store the same day with their silencer and the end user would never have to provide pics, prints, or CLEO notification as long as they never transfer another NFA asset to the trust. If its 100% legal for end users to effectively transfer their silencer to another purchaser via the sale of a trustee position (or the like) with no tax due or responsible party docs required, I don't see why an FFL like Silencer Shop couldn't do the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:41:31 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're missing the point, bud. Pre-41f, there was no reason to have more than one trust, and you put all your NFA items in that single trust. Post-41f, it is advantageous to have every new NFA item in its own trust. 7 suppressors? 7 trusts. 3 SBRs? 3 more trusts. It doesn't restrict you to owning a single NFA item - it's just that the way BATFE wrote 41f, it's easier to deal w/ NFA using multiple trusts rather than the prior single trust method. How the hell does 7 trusts make more sense than 1? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:49:04 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've heard of people setting up individual LLCs for MG purchases. Ever want to sell? Sell the LLC and the buyer takes immediate possession Yea the difference is people didn't write blog posts and shit about it and push it via their website. This is why we can't have nice things. People can't just stfu. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:52:04 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll just keep my single, $100 trust that can accomplish exactly the same thing as this. From a lawyer I trust and can have face time with, not some yokel over the internet to boot. I fail to see any value in this, unless I know for absolute certainty that I will only ever possess one NFA item. Which would be a ludicrous restriction to place on myself. You're missing the point. Its to resell the NFA items by transferring the single item trust to the new owner and side stepping all the paperwork/transfer/tax/etc.. This isn't going to end well being made this high profile and public. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 12:53:23 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How the hell does 7 trusts make more sense than 1? It makes sense for folks who want to be able to share their NFA asset with friend/family or potentially sell their NFA firearm with no tax due without all of these new trust parties ever having to submit pics/prints/or CLEO notification. Under the old rules nobody on a legal entity had to submit pics/prints and there was no CLEO requirement. Post 41F all responsible parties "at the time of an active NFA application" have to submit pic and prints. Silencer Shops single shot trust system takes advantage of the way 41F was written that any responsible parties added to a trust when there are no active application in process do not have to submit any paperwork. Responsible party documentation (beyond the initial purchaser) is only trigger by a future NFA application. Since a single shot trust by definition will never have another active NFA application, that means that you can add remove trustees/beneficiaries, etc. at will without anybody ever having to submit responsible party documentation other than purchaser during the original transfer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 1:04:05 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it is really legal and legitimate to sell a Trust (containing an NFA asset/s) via the effective sale of a Trustee or Beneficiary position being written into an existing trust and no transfer tax is due why doesn't Silencer Shop just sell Single Shot Trusts with a pre-built in asset? If its 100% legal for end users to effectively transfer their silencer to another purchaser via the sale of a trustee position (or the like) with no tax due or responsible party docs required, I don't see why an FFL like Silencer Shop couldn't do the same. This is a good point. If perfectly legal for their end users - then they should do it too, and put their money where their mouth is. Or put their legal advice ahead of their own freedom / desire to be free from indictment / major legal entanglement. Plus if it works, then they can effectively completely eliminate the wait period and become incredibly successful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 1:17:01 AM EDT
[#40]
Although some of the statements regarding single trusts/selling/avoiding transfer tax, adding/subtracting names, etc. may fit within the letter of the law -for now,
I also remember when a wrist brace could be pushed against the shoulder without issue. Best hope is for HPA to pass before the Demos gain control again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 1:21:33 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How the hell does 7 trusts make more sense than 1? Because the process for getting the required paperwork for multiple RPs is a huge pain in the butt. I just did this for me and my wife on an SBS and it was very annoying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 1:37:52 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're missing the point. Its to resell the NFA items by transferring the single item trust to the new owner and side stepping all the paperwork/transfer/tax/etc.. This isn't going to end well being made this high profile and public. The point of the trust is not to exploit a loophole for suppressor transfer without paying taxes. The point of the trust is to have a single transferee on the trust at the time of the transfer to simply paperwork and speed up the process. Once approved, you can add other people. Transferring the trust is something that is a "side effect", but yet it seems to the only thing some people (more like one person) seem to be totally obsessed with it to the exclusion of everything else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 2:02:34 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The point of the trust is not to exploit a loophole for suppressor transfer without paying taxes. The point of the trust is to have a single transferee on the trust at the time of the transfer to simply paperwork and speed up the process. Once approved, you can add other people. Transferring the trust is something that is a "side effect", but yet it seems to the only thing some people (more like one person) seem to be totally obsessed with it to the exclusion of everything else. Well 'Easily Transfer Ownership' is listed as a 'feature' in the comparison matrix on the SS product page and I'm not the only 'one person' in this thread mentioning it. Anyway not waiting a year is clearly a bigger benefit than not having to get a picture and fingerprint card completed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 2:20:57 AM EDT
[#44]
This whole concept is why I decided to buy a trust post-41F, with nobody but me on it. My oldest kid is only 12, so I have at least 9 years to put shit on my trust before 41F effects anyone but me. I wish I had put my first 2 cans on the trust but I didn't understand this part before that. Sounds like what SS is offering is a cheap option for folks that don't have 9 years to wait. Hopefully HPA passes and it won't matter, but then there is still the SBR's...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 3:42:13 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right now, SilencerShop (on the singleshot page) says that you legally can use a trust as a vehicle to transfer a suppressor. They undoubtedly consulted a lawyer to get that information, or have one on staff. After the sales pitch for the Single Shot Trust, at the bottom of the page, SS states "This form is not legal advice and is to be used at your own direction. Consultation with an attorney is highly recommended and this form is not a substitute for appropriate legal advice in your state." i.e. caveat emptor. On the SS NFA Gun Trust page they have a lawyer referral link as well. For my state there are no attorneys in their network apparently, but SS provides a link to a firm in the DC area. On the page linked from SS, you hit "next" and then in the middle of the page you get this statement: "Beware of anyone offering you a one-size-fits all trust. Not all trusts are the same. Not all gun trusts are the same. Not all state laws are the same. In fact, many states do not allow a trust to continue forever, and many states do not allow you to put non-NFA firearms in a trust. Most generic trusts expose you to serious privacy and security risks. We recommend you use a law firm like ours with an attorney licensed in your state who can provide you guidance and future support. ..." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 10:08:31 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes that would require two single shots or the unlimited. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So what if you buy two (or more) cans at once. Able to group them onto one trust? Or forced to go with multiples or the lifetime option? Yes that would require two single shots or the unlimited. I don't understand this part. A trust is basically a trust so what's different about your "single shot" trusts vs. your "unlimited" trusts"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 10:14:55 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't understand this part. A trust is basically a trust so what's different about your "single shot" trusts vs. your "unlimited" trusts"? The single shot is for one item. The unlimited single shot is unlimited trusts for each of several items. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 10:19:54 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It makes sense for folks who want to be able to share their NFA asset with friend/family or potentially sell their NFA firearm with no tax due without all of these new trust parties ever having to submit pics/prints/or CLEO notification. Under the old rules nobody on a legal entity had to submit pics/prints and there was no CLEO requirement. Post 41F all responsible parties "at the time of an active NFA application" have to submit pic and prints. Silencer Shops single shot trust system takes advantage of the way 41F was written that any responsible parties added to a trust when there are no active application in process do not have to submit any paperwork. Responsible party documentation (beyond the initial purchaser) is only trigger by a future NFA application. Since a single shot trust by definition will never have another active NFA application, that means that you can add remove trustees/beneficiaries, etc. at will without anybody ever having to submit responsible party documentation other than purchaser during the original transfer. I'm sorry but that reasoning just sounds absurd to me. I don't want to have 10 trusts in the future that I have to deal with. Just get fingerprint cards made and print photos at Walgreens and stop being lazy asses. Your trustees will understand, OR they can just not play with your cool shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 10:31:51 AM EDT
[#49]
This might be a foolish question, but... f there is a suppressor at another dealer that I would like to buy, would I be able to go this route with it? Or does this apply only to silencer ship purchases?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2017 10:46:37 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This might be a foolish question, but... f there is a suppressor at another dealer that I would like to buy, would I be able to go this route with it? Or does this apply only to silencer ship purchases? You can do this with with any NFA trust. Do you have another valid NFA trust? Create a new trust based on that template, name it something new... BOOM... put a single item in it and you have the same thing. You really want to twist things... you can make 500 trusts with the exact same name on the exact same day. Each trust only gets one item. All items are in a an individual trust, but each trust is indistinguishable from the other. I don't recommend this, just pointing it out. If someone wanted to use this fact to separate items out from a single trust after the fact, not sure how you'd prove that they didn't do this from the start.... ponder that... but it would also constitute a transfer without paying the taxes if one did it after the fact so definitely don't do that. |
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
