This is really nothing new, I'm not going to say it's right, just not new. Here's the deal:

Companies like DPMS for example make parts kits for AR15 rifles. The parts kit without a lower receiver is not subject to the excise tax as it isn't a complete firearm.

The lower receiver is a firearm so it is subject to the 11% excise tax at the time of sale (as opposed to at the time of mfr.) so let's say the selling price is $100, $11 excise tax must be recorded & paid.

If DPMS sells you a parts kit for $400 and a receiver for $100 as a kit, then excise tax must be collected & paid on the $500 total, $55 excise tax, as it's considered a complete firearm assembled or otherwise.

Here's where it begins to get grey. If a firearms dealer decides to order a pile of parts kits from DPMS and a pile of receivers from Rock River and sell AR kits. He is avoiding paying the excise tax, at least on the $400 cost of the parts kits. Since he is a type 01 dealer, he cannot properly collect and remit the excise tax, plus packaging the receivers with the kits makes him a sort of defacto manufacturer whether he assembles them or not. Ever wonder why FFL dealers don't buy parts kits and receivers and assemble complete rifles? Technically the dealer would have to have a type 07 FFL (manufacturer) and remit %11 excise tax on the cost of each completed rifle sold.

This is where the gunsmith issue comes into place. Most gunsmiths are type 01 FFL dealers, an 01 is all that's needed for gunsmith work not an 07 manufacturers license. What is usually considered gunsmithing is repair work and customization of complete firearms.

Now, a good number of these custom smiths will buy bare receivers and build up a gun on them and resell them. They are essentially value added manufacturers no different than the AR example provided.  The way BATF sees it, they should hold an 07 FFL and remit the 11% excise tax on their finished product.  Legislation passed late last year that allowed small manufacturers a tax exemption for the first 50 guns. It still didn't absolve them from having a type 07 instead of 01 FFL.

FWIW, smart manufacturers find ways to trim their guns down to bare bones and make all the other parts accessories, this allows them to lower their excise tax burdon on each weapon.

Finally, the 11% excise tax (whish many of you rail against) is part of the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 which was to protect & improve wildlife resources for hunters. It's collected on guns, ammo and archery equipment. In 1970, they added maintenance & construction of public shooting ranges and hunter education to the beneficiary of the revenue. So manufacturers are really cheating the sportsman & not the Dept. of Revenue.

Again, not saying what's going on is right but this hopefully will give you a better understanding of what & why instead of just "Fuck the ATF".

I'm sure this is part of a larger shift toward BATFE focus on eliminating the ability of people to bypass their taxation system. I doubt they are going to stop with the gunsmiths. By making any modification of a gun the equivalent of manufacturing a firearm, it's not a huge leap (under BATFE logic) to say that any of the parts swapping, complete uppers, etc., that goes on with the ARs is also unlicensed manufacturing. And think about all of the people who have sent in prototype 80% receivers to verify that they aren't a firearm and can be sold without going through an FFL. BATFE has surely been freaking out trying to find a way to gain control over all of those.

The Congressional attention is probably the exact reason for this new enforcement of made-up BATFE law. All  they need is a dozen people like that shootnscoot dude who they can grab. "Hey Congress, we are a vital part of the war on terror, in the past year we have caught multiple violent felons engaged in the illegal manufacture of machine guns. <holds up scary but irrelevant AR and AK for effect> All we are trying to do is eliminate the blackmarket for these evil weapons."

Ever since I first made the mental connection between "Sten parts kit" and the "pipe with blueprint" right beside it, I've been wondering when this would happen

Quoted: This is really nothing new, I'm not going to say it's right, just not new. Here's the deal: Companies like DPMS for example make parts kits for AR15 rifles. The parts kit without a lower receiver is not subject to the excise tax as it isn't a complete firearm. The lower receiver is a firearm so it is subject to the 11% excise tax at the time of sale (as opposed to at the time of mfr.) so let's say the selling price is $100, $11 excise tax must be recorded & paid. If DPMS sells you a parts kit for $400 and a receiver for $100 as a kit, then excise tax must be collected & paid on the $500 total, $55 excise tax, as it's considered a complete firearm assembled or otherwise. Here's where it begins to get grey. If a firearms dealer decides to order a pile of parts kits from DPMS and a pile of receivers from Rock River and sell AR kits. He is avoiding paying the excise tax, at least on the $400 cost of the parts kits. Since he is a type 01 dealer, he cannot properly collect and remit the excise tax, plus packaging the receivers with the kits makes him a sort of defacto manufacturer whether he assembles them or not. Ever wonder why FFL dealers don't buy parts kits and receivers and assemble complete rifles? Technically the dealer would have to have a type 07 FFL (manufacturer) and remit %11 excise tax on the cost of each completed rifle sold. This is where the gunsmith issue comes into place. Most gunsmiths are type 01 FFL dealers, an 01 is all that's needed for gunsmith work not an 07 manufacturers license. What is usually considered gunsmithing is repair work and customization of complete firearms. Now, a good number of these custom smiths will buy bare receivers and build up a gun on them and resell them. They are essentially value added manufacturers no different than the AR example provided.  The way BATF sees it, they should hold an 07 FFL and remit the 11% excise tax on their finished product.  Legislation passed late last year that allowed small manufacturers a tax exemption for the first 50 guns. It still didn't absolve them from having a type 07 instead of 01 FFL. FWIW, smart manufacturers find ways to trim their guns down to bare bones and make all the other parts accessories, this allows them to lower their excise tax burdon on each weapon. Finally, the 11% excise tax (whish many of you rail against) is part of the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 which was to protect & improve wildlife resources for hunters. It's collected on guns, ammo and archery equipment. In 1970, they added maintenance & construction of public shooting ranges and hunter education to the beneficiary of the revenue. So manufacturers are really cheating the sportsman & not the Dept. of Revenue. Again, not saying what's going on is right but this hopefully will give you a better understanding of what & why instead of just "Fuck the ATF".

Very good post. Thanks.

The idea of congress clarifying the rules is almost as terrifying as the ATF making them up.  You know Teddy Kennedy and his butt-buddies would try to add all kinds of amendments to the bill just to kill it, or even worse allow it to pass.

The ATF is part of the DOJ, which is the executive branch.  So it's not like paying off a judge.  It's like paying off the District Attorney or the cops...

You know Teddy Kennedy and his butt-buddies would take a break from drowning young women to add all kinds of amendments to the bill just to kill it, or even worse allow it to pass....

Fixed it.

The ATF is acting like a bunch of brown shirts? When did THAT happen?

Quoted: The ATF is acting like a bunch of brown shirts? When did THAT happen?

many years ago my friend.

The new BATF definition of "manufacturing a firearm" is "making any substantive changes to a firearm." CORRECTION OF YESTERDAY'S POST: Using the new definition, the BATF hit Competitive Edge Gunworks — who has been featured on SHOOTING GALLERY and COWBOYS — and threatened chief gunsmith Larry Crow with SIX potential felony counts (including one for "changing the hammer and barrel of a Ruger and installing an octagonal barrel") unless applied for a manufacturing license and pay the appropriate tax and penalties for the guns he was charged with manufacturing. CORRECTION ON YESTERDAY'S POST: Crow says that he has reached an agreement with BATF, but that revenue agents stated they have the right to go back through a gunsmiths' paperwork and levy the 11% excise tax and penalties on every gun the gunsmith has ever produced. There is no statue of limitations on tax issues. For some of the top gunsmiths, we would be literally talking hundreds of thousands of dollars. Both NRA and NSSF lawyers are on it now, with Second Amendment Foundation close behind. Master gunsmith Hamilton Bowen says if this isn't a tempest in a teapot, it puts 3/4 of the Pistolsmith Guild, including him, out of business. ironically, manufacturing licenses are not particularly expensive, but the excise tax adds another layer of paperwork.

So does this mean that if you take a stripped receiver and build an AR on it (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm?

Does this mean that if you replace the A2 buttstock on your AR with a telestock (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm?

Does this mean that if you convert a Saiga to an 922r compliant AK (making substantive changes to a firearm) that you are illegally manufacturing a firearm?

Does this mean that if you build a 1911 on a striped frame (making substantive changes to a firearm), or disable the mag safety on your semi auto (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a pistol grip and mag tube extention on your Remington 870 express (making substantive changes to a firearm), or replace your standard handguards with a 4 rails handguard (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a match trigger in your AR (making substantive changes to a firearm), or add a folding stock and a muzzle break to your AK (making substantive changes to a firearm), or refinish your SAR/WASR (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm?

Does this mean that according to the federal government we are all guilty of illegally manufacturing a firearm, which is a federal felony with no statute of limitations?

Quoted: The new BATF definition of "manufacturing a firearm" is "making any substantive changes to a firearm." CORRECTION OF YESTERDAY'S POST: Using the new definition, the BATF hit Competitive Edge Gunworks — who has been featured on SHOOTING GALLERY and COWBOYS — and threatened chief gunsmith Larry Crow with SIX potential felony counts (including one for "changing the hammer and barrel of a Ruger and installing an octagonal barrel") unless applied for a manufacturing license and pay the appropriate tax and penalties for the guns he was charged with manufacturing. CORRECTION ON YESTERDAY'S POST: Crow says that he has reached an agreement with BATF, but that revenue agents stated they have the right to go back through a gunsmiths' paperwork and levy the 11% excise tax and penalties on every gun the gunsmith has ever produced. There is no statue of limitations on tax issues. For some of the top gunsmiths, we would be literally talking hundreds of thousands of dollars. Both NRA and NSSF lawyers are on it now, with Second Amendment Foundation close behind. Master gunsmith Hamilton Bowen says if this isn't a tempest in a teapot, it puts 3/4 of the Pistolsmith Guild, including him, out of business. ironically, manufacturing licenses are not particularly expensive, but the excise tax adds another layer of paperwork. So does this mean that if you take a stripped receiver and build an AR on it (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you replace the A2 buttstock on your AR with a telestock (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you convert a Saiga to an 922r compliant AK (making substantive changes to a firearm) that you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you build a 1911 on a striped frame (making substantive changes to a firearm), or disable the mag safety on your semi auto (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a pistol grip and mag tube extention on your Remington 870 express (making substantive changes to a firearm), or replace your standard handguards with a 4 rails handguard (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a match trigger in your AR (making substantive changes to a firearm), or add a folding stock and a muzzle break to your AK (making substantive changes to a firearm), or refinish your SAR/WASR (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that according to the federal government we are all guilty of illegally manufacturing a firearm, which is a federal felony with no statute of limitations?

From the ATF website:

(A7) Does the GCA prohibit anyone from making a handgun, shotgun or rifle?


With certain exceptions a firearm may be made by a nonlicensee provided it is not for sale and the maker is not prohibited from possessing firearms.
However, a person is prohibited from making a semiautomatic assault weapon or assembling a nonsporting semiautomatic rifle or nonsporting shotgun from
imported parts. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and approval by ATF. An application to make a machinegun will not be
approved unless documentation is submitted showing that the firearm is being made for a federal or state agency. [18 U. S. C. 922( o), (r), (v), and 923, 27 CFR 178.39, 178.40, 178.41 and 179.105]


It's all about the law. You can do what you like to your own gun.

Quoted: Quoted: The new BATF definition of "manufacturing a firearm" is "making any substantive changes to a firearm." CORRECTION OF YESTERDAY'S POST: Using the new definition, the BATF hit Competitive Edge Gunworks — who has been featured on SHOOTING GALLERY and COWBOYS — and threatened chief gunsmith Larry Crow with SIX potential felony counts (including one for "changing the hammer and barrel of a Ruger and installing an octagonal barrel") unless applied for a manufacturing license and pay the appropriate tax and penalties for the guns he was charged with manufacturing. CORRECTION ON YESTERDAY'S POST: Crow says that he has reached an agreement with BATF, but that revenue agents stated they have the right to go back through a gunsmiths' paperwork and levy the 11% excise tax and penalties on every gun the gunsmith has ever produced. There is no statue of limitations on tax issues. For some of the top gunsmiths, we would be literally talking hundreds of thousands of dollars. Both NRA and NSSF lawyers are on it now, with Second Amendment Foundation close behind. Master gunsmith Hamilton Bowen says if this isn't a tempest in a teapot, it puts 3/4 of the Pistolsmith Guild, including him, out of business. ironically, manufacturing licenses are not particularly expensive, but the excise tax adds another layer of paperwork. So does this mean that if you take a stripped receiver and build an AR on it (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you replace the A2 buttstock on your AR with a telestock (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you convert a Saiga to an 922r compliant AK (making substantive changes to a firearm) that you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you build a 1911 on a striped frame (making substantive changes to a firearm), or disable the mag safety on your semi auto (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a pistol grip and mag tube extention on your Remington 870 express (making substantive changes to a firearm), or replace your standard handguards with a 4 rails handguard (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a match trigger in your AR (making substantive changes to a firearm), or add a folding stock and a muzzle break to your AK (making substantive changes to a firearm), or refinish your SAR/WASR (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that according to the federal government we are all guilty of illegally manufacturing a firearm, which is a federal felony with no statute of limitations? From the ATF website: (A7) Does the GCA prohibit anyone from making a handgun, shotgun or rifle? With certain exceptions a firearm may be made by a nonlicensee provided it is not for sale and the maker is not prohibited from possessing firearms. However, a person is prohibited from making a semiautomatic assault weapon or assembling a nonsporting semiautomatic rifle or nonsporting shotgun from imported parts. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and approval by ATF. An application to make a machinegun will not be approved unless documentation is submitted showing that the firearm is being made for a federal or state agency. [18 U. S. C. 922( o), (r), (v), and 923, 27 CFR 178.39, 178.40, 178.41 and 179.105] It's all about the law. You can do what you like to your own gun.

CS223, your posts make a lot of sense and seem to logically explain ATF's position.  Does this mean the ATF will come down on me if I build an AR from a kit and a stripped lower and later sell it?  Do I have to disassemble it before sale and then make sure I sell the receiver and parts to different people?  

Quoted: Quoted: The new BATF definition of "manufacturing a firearm" is "making any substantive changes to a firearm." CORRECTION OF YESTERDAY'S POST: Using the new definition, the BATF hit Competitive Edge Gunworks — who has been featured on SHOOTING GALLERY and COWBOYS — and threatened chief gunsmith Larry Crow with SIX potential felony counts (including one for "changing the hammer and barrel of a Ruger and installing an octagonal barrel") unless applied for a manufacturing license and pay the appropriate tax and penalties for the guns he was charged with manufacturing. CORRECTION ON YESTERDAY'S POST: Crow says that he has reached an agreement with BATF, but that revenue agents stated they have the right to go back through a gunsmiths' paperwork and levy the 11% excise tax and penalties on every gun the gunsmith has ever produced. There is no statue of limitations on tax issues. For some of the top gunsmiths, we would be literally talking hundreds of thousands of dollars. Both NRA and NSSF lawyers are on it now, with Second Amendment Foundation close behind. Master gunsmith Hamilton Bowen says if this isn't a tempest in a teapot, it puts 3/4 of the Pistolsmith Guild, including him, out of business. ironically, manufacturing licenses are not particularly expensive, but the excise tax adds another layer of paperwork. So does this mean that if you take a stripped receiver and build an AR on it (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you replace the A2 buttstock on your AR with a telestock (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you convert a Saiga to an 922r compliant AK (making substantive changes to a firearm) that you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that if you build a 1911 on a striped frame (making substantive changes to a firearm), or disable the mag safety on your semi auto (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a pistol grip and mag tube extention on your Remington 870 express (making substantive changes to a firearm), or replace your standard handguards with a 4 rails handguard (making substantive changes to a firearm), or put a match trigger in your AR (making substantive changes to a firearm), or add a folding stock and a muzzle break to your AK (making substantive changes to a firearm), or refinish your SAR/WASR (making substantive changes to a firearm) then you are illegally manufacturing a firearm? Does this mean that according to the federal government we are all guilty of illegally manufacturing a firearm, which is a federal felony with no statute of limitations? From the ATF website: (A7) Does the GCA prohibit anyone from making a handgun, shotgun or rifle? With certain exceptions a firearm may be made by a nonlicensee provided it is not for sale and the maker is not prohibited from possessing firearms. However, a person is prohibited from making a semiautomatic assault weapon or assembling a nonsporting semiautomatic rifle or nonsporting shotgun from imported parts. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and approval by ATF. An application to make a machinegun will not be approved unless documentation is submitted showing that the firearm is being made for a federal or state agency. [18 U. S. C. 922( o), (r), (v), and 923, 27 CFR 178.39, 178.40, 178.41 and 179.105] It's all about the law. You can do what you like to your own gun.

OK, that makes me feel better.

Sucks that they are wiping out our gunsmiths though.

Quoted: This is really nothing new, I'm not going to say it's right, just not new. Here's the deal: Companies like DPMS for example make parts kits for AR15 rifles. The parts kit without a lower receiver is not subject to the excise tax as it isn't a complete firearm. The lower receiver is a firearm so it is subject to the 11% excise tax at the time of sale (as opposed to at the time of mfr.) so let's say the selling price is $100, $11 excise tax must be recorded & paid. If DPMS sells you a parts kit for $400 and a receiver for $100 as a kit, then excise tax must be collected & paid on the $500 total, $55 excise tax, as it's considered a complete firearm assembled or otherwise. Here's where it begins to get grey. If a firearms dealer decides to order a pile of parts kits from DPMS and a pile of receivers from Rock River and sell AR kits. He is avoiding paying the excise tax, at least on the $400 cost of the parts kits. Since he is a type 01 dealer, he cannot properly collect and remit the excise tax, plus packaging the receivers with the kits makes him a sort of defacto manufacturer whether he assembles them or not. Ever wonder why FFL dealers don't buy parts kits and receivers and assemble complete rifles? Technically the dealer would have to have a type 07 FFL (manufacturer) and remit %11 excise tax on the cost of each completed rifle sold. This is where the gunsmith issue comes into place. Most gunsmiths are type 01 FFL dealers, an 01 is all that's needed for gunsmith work not an 07 manufacturers license. What is usually considered gunsmithing is repair work and customization of complete firearms. Now, a good number of these custom smiths will buy bare receivers and build up a gun on them and resell them. They are essentially value added manufacturers no different than the AR example provided.  The way BATF sees it, they should hold an 07 FFL and remit the 11% excise tax on their finished product.  Legislation passed late last year that allowed small manufacturers a tax exemption for the first 50 guns. It still didn't absolve them from having a type 07 instead of 01 FFL. FWIW, smart manufacturers find ways to trim their guns down to bare bones and make all the other parts accessories, this allows them to lower their excise tax burdon on each weapon. Finally, the 11% excise tax (whish many of you rail against) is part of the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 which was to protect & improve wildlife resources for hunters. It's collected on guns, ammo and archery equipment. In 1970, they added maintenance & construction of public shooting ranges and hunter education to the beneficiary of the revenue. So manufacturers are really cheating the sportsman & not the Dept. of Revenue. Again, not saying what's going on is right but this hopefully will give you a better understanding of what & why instead of just "Fuck the ATF".

Good post.

I understand this completely. What I also understand is the ATF decided to define a firearm as a serialized reciever. I won't criticize this decision, they had to define it somehow.

But here they are now, after THEY defined what a firearm is for tax purposes, trying to go back and redefine their own definition. They want their cake and eat it too.

That doesn't sound like "justice" to me.

PS: Where are all those ranges we are funding with our excise tax? I can't name a federally-owned and operated range open to the public anywhere in the entire nation.

It's time to kick our Gov't back to 1789.

OK... I just called the NRA-ILA, and the girl I spoke with had not heard anything about this case or about any BATF rule changes.

I don't know what that is worth however, because she didn't seem to truly grasp what I was explaining to her, and she transfered me to the voice mail of "the person who handles these things"

Maybe a few of us can contact the NRA & hopefully get to the bottom of what's going on here?

Quoted: CS223, your posts make a lot of sense and seem to logically explain ATF's position.  Does this mean the ATF will come down on me if I build an AR from a kit and a stripped lower and later sell it?  Do I have to disassemble it before sale and then make sure I sell the receiver and parts to different people?

No, unless you make a habit of it or start doing it as a sideline business. There's nothing for them to gain in a single firearm bust (unless you are a felon obviously), they'd get laughed out of court. But they have taken stupid cases to court in the past. If you were to buy 6 receivers for example and build up a bunch of guns for your buddies, then there is a possibility that you could be accused of manufacturing without a license, dealing without a license, tax evasion etc. If you build 6 guns from 6 receivers and 5 are still in your possession, then you'd be fine or if you sold them off over a 10 year period etc. It's all common sense.

Quoted: Quoted: CS223, your posts make a lot of sense and seem to logically explain ATF's position.  Does this mean the ATF will come down on me if I build an AR from a kit and a stripped lower and later sell it?  Do I have to disassemble it before sale and then make sure I sell the receiver and parts to different people?   No, unless you make a habit of it or start doing it as a sideline business. There's nothing for them to gain in a single firearm bust (unless you are a felon obviously), they'd get laughed out of court. But they have taken stupid cases to court in the past. If you were to buy 6 receivers for example and build up a bunch of guns for your buddies, then there is a possibility that you could be accused of manufacturing without a license, dealing without a license, tax evasion etc. If you build 6 guns from 6 receivers and 5 are still in your possession, then you'd be fine or if you sold them off over a 10 year period etc. It's all common sense.

I'm not going to make a habit of it.  Heck, I've only sold one firearm in my life - a Mossberg .22 that I sold over 20 years ago.  I instantly regretted it and, since then, I don't sell guns.  I still miss that Mossberg, though.

Quoted: Good post. I understand this completely. What I also understand is the ATF decided to define a firearm as a serialized reciever. I won't criticize this decision, they had to define it somehow. But here they are now, after THEY defined what a firearm is for tax purposes, trying to go back and redefine their own definition. They want their cake and eat it too. That doesn't sound like "justice" to me. PS: Where are all those ranges we are funding with our excise tax? I can't name a federally-owned and operated range open to the public anywhere in the entire nation.

Well, a serialized receiver isn't exactly the definition of a firearm. For excise tax purposes, it's the receiver and the combination of parts required to make the gun fire. For example, if you build a bolt action gun with a removeable tactical rail and a removeable bipod and mount. You would only pay excise tax on the barreled receiver and the fire control parts, not the rail or bi-pod. If the bipod and rail were permanent welded on parts to the gun, then you would be taxed on those as well. Likewise, you couldn't strip the gun of it's bolt and trigger pack for tax purposes because those are required for it to fire. These gunsmiths are building custom guns, that's what they do. They are not only customizing what they already have. Therefore they should have an 07 and remit excise tax accordingly. No different than Wilson Combat or Kimber. It has to do with "value added" and being a business. Someone who refinishes guns for people is different than someone who takes a stripped receiver and builds up a $5000 custom gun for someone other than themselves.

There are many public ranges that are Pittman-Robertson ranges. I know of two in my area alone. They are going to be public ranges in National forests, and on other public lands. Also, the hunter education classes that they teach here in FL are all %100 free paid for by Pittman-Robertson. State hunting property that is leased, wildlife management & research.  I don't recall the stats on the amount of dollars that Pittman-Robertson bring in every year, it's out there but it's an incrediable amount of money. If it were not for P-R, we as sportsman would have been screwed looong ago. Think about it, if we were dependant on a Federal appropriation for funding to support sporting causes, that would have been cut to zero many years ago and would be a part of an anti-gun agenda. Nobody can do jack shit about P-R. We sportsmen pay for it every time we buy ammo, guns, archery gear. We are paying our own way and not dependant on .gov and the tax payer. We owe alot to the foresight of P-R.

ETA. I haven't found a link to the annual report on FET collected but it's in the Billons. A quick google search will bring up states who's budgets get millions from P-R for sportsmen related causes.

Posted over at TheHighRoad.org...

Dear Forum Members: Please regard this as an unofficial notice, but I thought I could help clear up what’s going on. The Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET) is a tax imposed by Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 4181) on the sale of firearms and ammunition by manufacturers, producers, and importers. The present situation has arisen due to a possible misinterpretation of the term “manufactured” by the ATF. It has been difficult in the past for gunsmiths to determine exactly which services performed by gunsmiths were “manufacturing” and thus subject to FAET. Generally, gunsmiths are not subject to the FAET, unless the gunsmith has title to the firearm and his work materially changes the firearm so that a different taxable article results. See Rev. Rulings 58-586, 64-202 and 69-325. Which specific acts (mounting a scope, re-stocking, checkering, engraving, etc.) count as “manufacturing” has been difficult to determine and inconsistently applied by ATF in the past. To address this problem, on October 1, 2005, 26 U.S.C. Section 4182 was amended to also exempt any pistol, revolver, or firearm from FAET if it was manufactured, produced or imported by a person who manufactures, produces or imports less than an aggregate of 50 such articles during the calendar year. This allows gunsmiths to operate (for fewer than 50 guns per year) without worry that a particular act would be considered “manufacture” or not. The 50 guns per year change, however, is not retroactive (despite our efforts to make it so). Recently gunsmiths have been aggressively investigated by ATF, and their back records examined for FAET compliance. This investigation is legal and proper, however, there is concern that ATF is again misinterpreting “manufacture” and including transactions under FAET that should properly be excluded. Larry Crow, owner of Competitive Edge Gunworks and member of the American Pistolsmith Guild, is currently being charged as liable for taxes and penalties for the “manufacture” of firearms; Mr. Crow questions the validity of ATF’s determination that he manufactured the firearms. In meetings and discussions with the ATF and IRS beginning 24 January 2006, Mr. Crow has been unable to get a direct and consistent answer regarding both ATF and IRS policy. The National Rifle Association is in contact with Mr. Crow and others in the gunsmithing community, and is actively exploring both regulatory and legal remedies for this situation. This situation is, however, one which may not lend itself to a quick or easy fix, as it involves statutes, regulatory rulings, and policy decisions at the intersection of two separate federal agencies. I assure you that the National Rifle Association will make the most efficient use of its resources, with the goal of protecting the civil rights of Americans, as the Framers sought to protect those rights under the Constitution. We will provide updated information on our website as further significant details or activities become known. Thank you for your continued support. -Eric Swartz Office of Legislative Counsel National Rifle Association – Institute for Legislative Action

Quoted: Posted over at TheHighRoad.org... Dear Forum Members: Please regard this as an unofficial notice, but I thought I could help clear up what’s going on. The Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET) is a tax imposed by Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 4181) on the sale of firearms and ammunition by manufacturers, producers, and importers. The present situation has arisen due to a possible misinterpretation of the term “manufactured” by the ATF. It has been difficult in the past for gunsmiths to determine exactly which services performed by gunsmiths were “manufacturing” and thus subject to FAET. Generally, gunsmiths are not subject to the FAET, unless the gunsmith has title to the firearm and his work materially changes the firearm so that a different taxable article results. See Rev. Rulings 58-586, 64-202 and 69-325.

I suspect that is the crux of the argument by BATF. If you are working on a customer supplied gun, then it's gunsmithing. If you as a dealer are buying guns (thus having title to it) and adding value to the gun, then it constitutes manufacturing and is taxable as such.

It's a fishing expedition for addtl. legislation. The end result is certain gunsmiths will have to have an 07 license  & remit FET. This guy will probably have to pay out back taxes and interest to keep his ass out of the pokey and frankly it will be his best option if he wants to remain a gunsmith in lieu of a felon. But I will say that BATF screwed up when they picked a high profile gunsmith to pick on.

You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar and BATF seems to like vinegar thus the recent Congressional scrutiny. This won't make it any better for them. I think Sen. Orin Hatch? is in charge of the oversight committee when it comes to BATF. (Sorry if my .gov terminology is wrong) Someone should bring it to his attention.

Quoted: Well, a serialized receiver isn't exactly the definition of a firearm. For excise tax purposes, it's the receiver and the combination of parts required to make the gun fire. For example, if you build a bolt action gun with a removeable tactical rail and a removeable bipod and mount. You would only pay excise tax on the barreled receiver and the fire control parts, not the rail or bi-pod. If the bipod and rail were permanent welded on parts to the gun, then you would be taxed on those as well. Likewise, you couldn't strip the gun of it's bolt and trigger pack for tax purposes because those are required for it to fire. These gunsmiths are building custom guns, that's what they do. They are not only customizing what they already have. Therefore they should have an 07 and remit excise tax accordingly. No different than Wilson Combat or Kimber. It has to do with "value added" and being a business. Someone who refinishes guns for people is different than someone who takes a stripped receiver and builds up a $5000 custom gun for someone other than themselves.

Then I should be able to buy a receiver without going through an FFL. Since it isn't really a gun.

You see, the ATF has painted itself into a corner. If they want to get out of it, they should have to redefine what a firearm is instead of just making shit up.

There are many public ranges that are Pittman-Robertson ranges. I know of two in my area alone. They are going to be public ranges in National forests, and on other public lands. Also, the hunter education classes that they teach here in FL are all %100 free paid for by Pittman-Robertson. State hunting property that is leased, wildlife management & research.  .

I looked for the nearest Federal 1,000 yard range (or even a 600) and, outside of military owned, I haven't found any open to the public. Let me know if you see a Federally owned Highpower range advertise a match.

So how does this affect the guys building AKs and FALs from kits and receivers that people send to them?

Quoted: So how does this affect the guys building AKs and FALs from kits and receivers that people send to them?

Grey area. If you go by the post above, it makes them gunsmiths since they don't hold title to the "firearm" or receiver. But if they are taking your parts kit and sticking it on a receiver that they have in inventory, then they are a manufacturer. Again, BATF could say what they like and until someone calls them on it and spanks them in court, they are free to go willy nilly wreaking havoc as they like. They are constantly trying to find loopholes in the law to justify their existance just as gunowners are trying to find ways around the laws to get their fix of firearm fun.

Quoted: WOW just WOW!!

+1

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The NRA's going to be on this like stink on garbage. There is NO WAY the BATFE wins this one...just watch. HH The reason I dont give money to the NRA is 1: they send me all kinds of garbage in the mail 2: how much good will they really do in this guys case? Really?  I get my American Rifleman and a few bits of mail about votes, and legal issues and that's it for the most part.  Of course I expended the VAST amount of time and energy it required to go to the website and request I be removed from fund-raising mailings.  I'm sure a few peices of junk mail are a fantastic reason to not join the only gun lobby that congress gives a shit about.

Very well said.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The NRA's going to be on this like stink on garbage. There is NO WAY the BATFE wins this one...just watch. HH The reason I dont give money to the NRA is 1: they send me all kinds of garbage in the mail 2: how much good will they really do in this guys case? Really?  I get my American Rifleman and a few bits of mail about votes, and legal issues and that's it for the most part.  Of course I expended the VAST amount of time and energy it required to go to the website and request I be removed from fund-raising mailings.  I'm sure a few peices of junk mail are a fantastic reason to not join the only gun lobby that congress FEARS.

Fixed it for ya.