[ARCHIVED THREAD] - ATF Releases ATF 41F FAQ (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/8/2016 2:36:26 PM EDT
|
New blog up.
https://blog.princelaw.com/2016/07/08/atf-releases-atf-41f-faq/ |
|
Thanks OP. For those that want a direct link to the ATF's FAQ page, here it is:
FINAL Rule 41F – Background Checks for Responsible Persons – Effective July 13 2016 |
|
Quoted:
I think you mean nobody will be able to submit new form 1's in a couple days. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can individuals use e forms yet? Nobody will be able to e forms in a couple days. I think you mean nobody will be able to submit new form 1's in a couple days. Why wouldn't they? |
|
Quoted:
Ever again? Gay. Regressing process approach. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can individuals use e forms yet? Nobody will be able to e forms in a couple days. Ever again? Gay. Regressing process approach. Well, not until they get their new system up and running, whenever that will be. |
|
Quoted:
Why wouldn't they? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can individuals use e forms yet? Nobody will be able to e forms in a couple days. I think you mean nobody will be able to submit new form 1's in a couple days. Why wouldn't they? Eforms has no mechanism to upload photo's and fingerprints which are required for individuals right now and will be required for trusts and entities after 41F takes affect. |
|
Quoted:
That seems like an interesting workaround. Quoted:
Quoted:
Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. That seems like an interesting workaround. I am not a lawyer. But it seems like the best solution for people who have family on their trust that live out of state or whatever. |
|
Quoted:
There is no way to describe in English language how horrible 41f is. It ruins everything for forever. It fills me with crazed anger and fear. hhhhhuuuuuhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm hhuuuuuuhhhhhmmmuuuuuuuhhhhhh http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vQYwZe0jl64/UZI17av6stI/AAAAAAAAAWE/C7TFfEADusM/s1600/panic-attack.jpg 
|
|
Quoted:
There is no way to describe in English language how horrible 41f is. It ruins everything for forever. It fills me with crazed anger and fear. hhhhhuuuuuhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm hhuuuuuuhhhhhmmmuuuuuuuhhhhhh http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vQYwZe0jl64/UZI17av6stI/AAAAAAAAAWE/C7TFfEADusM/s1600/panic-attack.jpg Remember to thank NFACTA for "helping" |
|
Quoted:
or is it? we don't actually know Quoted:
Quoted:
Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. or is it? we don't actually know Someone should write multiple letters to the atf..... 
|
|
Myself and others have asked the question, "what about adding/removing trustees from your trust as detailed in your trust wording?" Sounds like this makes it clear:
requiring responsible persons of such trusts or legal entities to complete ATF form 5320.23, National Firearms Act Responsible Person Questionnaire and to submit photographs and fingerprints when the trust or legal entity files an application to make an NFA firearm or is listed as the transferee on an application to transfer an NFA firearm; If they're not on your trust when you apply, they don't need to go through the process. I'd say add/delete away, but make sure you remove everyone from all portions because of this: Examples of who may be considered a responsible person of a trust or legal entity include:
Settlors/Grantors Trustees Partners Members Officers Board members Owners Beneficiaries – if said beneficiary has the capability to exercise any of the powers or authorities enumerated above. Because even if you have them listed as a beneficiary to your death and nothing else, they get the fingerprint and background check. |
|
Quoted: Someone should write multiple letters to the atf..... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. or is it? we don't actually know Someone should write multiple letters to the atf..... They should. And Congress should take the contradicting answers the ATF sends out and strip them of the authority to make up whatever rules they want whenever they want. Of course getting Congress to actually do their is less likely than getting a positive answer from the ATF. |
|
Quoted: So the fact that I am just getting my trust set up does me no good unless I submit my form 1 by the 12th? Not at all. It just means you won't be able to eFile, you'll have to submit self-taken fingerprints & selfies for all your trustees @ the time of filing, and you'll have to notify your CLEO. Insert witty anti-CLEO suppressor S/N here. |
|
Quoted:
or is it? we don't actually know Quoted:
Quoted:
Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. or is it? we don't actually know Couple of points... how would someone "Get caught" doing this? And what exactly would they get caught doing? That is to say... what would the atf charge them with? What are the criteria for charging someone with unlawful possession of a suppressor in this situation? Again, I'm no lawyer, but I see two primary criteria for our purposes (ignore prohibited person stuff). 1. Is the item registered? 2. Is the person who has it listed as a responsible person on the corporation or trust? If you're a "responsible person" listed on the trust and the object in question has a paid tax stamp and is held in the trust, what would they charge you with if you weren't a listed responsible person at the time the form 1/4 was submitted but later became one? Possession of an unregistered NFA item? It is registered. Are they going to say you aren't a valid responsible person? Is the ATF going to try to claim it has the authority to determine what is and isn't a valid trust in all 50 States? Sure seems to be WAY outside the scope of the National Firearms Act to me. Similarly, how would that can of worms affect corporations? Are they going to try to say that no corporate officer can possess an item owned by the corporation unless they were a member of the corporation at the time the stamp was issued? Great. So now the ATF is going to say who counts as a real member of a corporation and who doesn't. The argument against this would seem to be that the ATF has some kind of authority to make a distinction between a person who was a responsible person on a trust at a given point in time and somehow apply the law differently against them than someone who is/was a responsible person on a trust at a different time. Does the law itself make that distinction? Again, I'm no lawyer but I doubt it. Of course, this begs the question how you're going to get caught in the first place. You show up to the range with your machine gun, trust, and a copy of the form 4. Now what? How is the random Effa Bee Eye agent hanging out at the range going to deduce that you weren't on the trust at the time the stamp was applied for? TL/DR, the law is fucking retarded, the law enforcers are retarded, the lawmakers are retarded, and so am I for thinking about retarded shit this much. Go enjoy yourself and stop worrying about it. |
|
Quoted:
Because even if you have them listed as a beneficiary to your death and nothing else, they get the fingerprint and background check. I was getting ready to add my 9 month old son as a beneficiary. I think it would be highly amusing in a really wrong way to submit a new application with his fingerprints and photo. Talk about government run wrong...... |
|
Quoted: Someone should write multiple letters to the atf..... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. or is it? we don't actually know Someone should write multiple letters to the atf..... |
|
Quoted: That seems like an interesting workaround. Quoted: Quoted: Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. That seems like an interesting workaround. |
|
Quoted:
Can't believe nobody has written asking for clarification on that yet Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Amend trust to make yourself the sole responsible person, submit application, amend trust back the way it was. Easy mode. That seems like an interesting workaround. ATF doesn't have the authority to regulate how you use an estate planning device... Why on earth would you believe they would? Quoted:
Quoted:
Because even if you have them listed as a beneficiary to your death and nothing else, they get the fingerprint and background check. I was getting ready to add my 9 month old son as a beneficiary. I think it would be highly amusing in a really wrong way to submit a new application with his fingerprints and photo. Talk about government run wrong...... I'm not sure how either of you believe that ATF will require the beneficiary of a trust to submit fingerprints and photos. Maybe you should contact your lawyers who drafted your trusts to discuss what the beneficiaries can and cannot do under your trust. |
|
Quoted:
The ATF FAQ above defines a beneficiary as a "responsible party." My comment was based on that definition, not the direction of an attorney. Sort of, Beneficiaries – if said beneficiary has the capability to exercise any of the powers or authorities enumerated above.. ..those persons with the power or authority to direct the management and policies of the trust include any person who has the capability to exercise such power and possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority under any trust instrument, or under State law, to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of, the trust. If your beneficiary is under age, they sure as hell don't have any power or authority under the Trust or the Trust would be void. My beneficiaries have no power at this time until I die. I can, when they are of legal age, add them as trustees too. Until that time they have no power or authority under the trust. |
|
Examples of who may be considered a responsible person of a trust or legal entity include:
Settlors/Grantors Trustees Partners Members Officers Board members Owners Beneficiaries – if said beneficiary has the capability to exercise any of the powers or authorities enumerated above. Does this make sense to anyone else? The way I read it is if your beneficiary is also one of the above they are considered a responsible person, it seems redundant. Did they just throw that in there so your not thinking to yourself "well my son is a trustee but he's also the beneficiary which isn't listed so we don't need his pics and prints"? Dummy proofing it I guess. I couldn't see someone who is solely a beneficiary being a responsible person but a successor not. |
|
Quoted: I was getting ready to add my 9 month old son as a beneficiary. I think it would be highly amusing in a really wrong way to submit a new application with his fingerprints and photo. Talk about government run wrong...... Quoted: Quoted: Because even if you have them listed as a beneficiary to your death and nothing else, they get the fingerprint and background check. I was getting ready to add my 9 month old son as a beneficiary. I think it would be highly amusing in a really wrong way to submit a new application with his fingerprints and photo. Talk about government run wrong...... In theory a dog could be a beneficiary on a trust but it seems like the paw prints and picture would end up on a wanted:dead or dead poster |
|
Quoted: Couple of points... how would someone "Get caught" doing this? And what exactly would they get caught doing? That is to say... what would the atf charge them with?
What are the criteria for charging someone with unlawful possession of a suppressor in this situation? Again, I'm no lawyer, but I see two primary criteria for our purposes (ignore prohibited person stuff). 1. Is the item registered? 2. Is the person who has it listed as a responsible person on the corporation or trust? If you're a "responsible person" listed on the trust and the object in question has a paid tax stamp and is held in the trust, what would they charge you with if you weren't a listed responsible person at the time the form 1/4 was submitted but later became one? Possession of an unregistered NFA item? It is registered. Are they going to say you aren't a valid responsible person? Is the ATF going to try to claim it has the authority to determine what is and isn't a valid trust in all 50 States? Sure seems to be WAY outside the scope of the National Firearms Act to me. Similarly, how would that can of worms affect corporations? Are they going to try to say that no corporate officer can possess an item owned by the corporation unless they were a member of the corporation at the time the stamp was issued? Great. So now the ATF is going to say who counts as a real member of a corporation and who doesn't. The argument against this would seem to be that the ATF has some kind of authority to make a distinction between a person who was a responsible person on a trust at a given point in time and somehow apply the law differently against them than someone who is/was a responsible person on a trust at a different time. Does the law itself make that distinction? Again, I'm no lawyer but I doubt it. Of course, this begs the question how you're going to get caught in the first place. You show up to the range with your machine gun, trust, and a copy of the form 4. Now what? How is the random Effa Bee Eye agent hanging out at the range going to deduce that you weren't on the trust at the time the stamp was applied for? TL/DR, the law is fucking retarded, the law enforcers are retarded, the lawmakers are retarded, and so am I for thinking about retarded shit this much. Go enjoy yourself and stop worrying about it. Given that BATFE has already stated in the rulemaking process of 41f that they don't have the authority to regulate who goes onto a trust after you get your stamp back, they pretty clearly don't have the authority to regulate who goes onto a trust after you get your stamp back. Their hope is a) you'll file as an individual; b) that you file w/ a single trust & submit fingerprints for all your trustees each time you file w/ that one trust. Pretty clearly, the route is multiple trusts w/ limited # of trustees @ the time of submission, and add anyone else anytime you feel like it. |
|
Quoted:
My trust has wording that beneficiaries have the ability to possess and use items in the trust without any other authority - I'm having trouble determining if they'd be a responsible person as they cannot direct the trust, etc. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile If they can possess the firearms, they are responsible persons. |
|
Quoted:
If they can possess the firearms, they are responsible persons. Quoted:
Quoted:
My trust has wording that beneficiaries have the ability to possess and use items in the trust without any other authority - I'm having trouble determining if they'd be a responsible person as they cannot direct the trust, etc. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile If they can possess the firearms, they are responsible persons. Damnit! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
Beneficiaries – if said beneficiary has the capability to exercise any of the powers or authorities enumerated above. Because even if you have them listed as a beneficiary to your death and nothing else, they get the fingerprint and background check. No. It's quite clear in the sentence above what you typed. My listed beneficiary is just that, a beneficiary. He has no power of the trust and has nothing to do with the trust other than being listed as a beneficiary. |
|
Quoted:
My trust has wording that beneficiaries have the ability to possess and use items in the trust without any other authority - I'm having trouble determining if they'd be a responsible person as they cannot direct the trust, etc. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile I would say that in that case, they are clearly a responsible party, especially considering the use and possession without any other authority/member of the trust. |
|
Quoted:
I got a form 4 submitted a few weeks ago and I hope to get a form 1 sent in on Monday. This is ridiculous. It sucks, it is yet another hassle, we should NOT have to go through these hoops, but it really isn't the end of the world or end of trusts, nor is it the end of NFA. Don't confuse the above with me thinking that this isn't complete bullshit, because it is. |