Armory Sponsor
Posted: 5/2/2012 3:31:40 PM EDT
| What is the cost of a nfa trust |
| I paid $125 and it took about a week from start to finish. Just need to name trustee, secondary trustee, and beneficiary trustee. Any trustees must be present at the time of notarization but secondary and beneficiary trustees are not required to be present. A local dealer did mine and I can give you his info if you would like. |
|
Quoted:
I paid $125 and it took about a week from start to finish. Just need to name trustee, secondary trustee, and beneficiary trustee. Any trustees must be present at the time of notarization but secondary and beneficiary trustees are not required to be present. A local dealer did mine and I can give you his info if you would like. You paid an FFL to make a trust for you? .....and you trust that trust? Not only is that illegal (practicing law without a license), but pretty stupid on both sides. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I paid $125 and it took about a week from start to finish. Just need to name trustee, secondary trustee, and beneficiary trustee. Any trustees must be present at the time of notarization but secondary and beneficiary trustees are not required to be present. A local dealer did mine and I can give you his info if you would like. You paid an FFL to make a trust for you? .....and you trust that trust? Not only is that illegal (practicing law without a license), but pretty stupid on both sides. Maybe the FFL was a lawyer like many we have here in Texas? Giving someone the forms to fill out is not practicing law without a license, quicken, legalzoom do it every day. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I paid $125 and it took about a week from start to finish. Just need to name trustee, secondary trustee, and beneficiary trustee. Any trustees must be present at the time of notarization but secondary and beneficiary trustees are not required to be present. A local dealer did mine and I can give you his info if you would like. You paid an FFL to make a trust for you? .....and you trust that trust? Not only is that illegal (practicing law without a license), but pretty stupid on both sides. Maybe the FFL was a lawyer like many we have here in Texas? Giving someone the forms to fill out is not practicing law without a license, quicken, legalzoom do it every day. True... Though, how often than not do we see not attorney SOTs giving out trust documents? If they give any advice about how to fill out the document, then they're practicing law w/o a license. Again, how many SOTs that rip off others work don't offer advice on how to fill out the trust? I sure as hell wouldn't go down that road, and I doubt you would either. |
|
Quoted:
My dealer did my trust for me and so far no problems. He has been doing them for 20+ years so I figure that he knows what he is doing. Well he might "know what he is doing*" but unless he is a lawyer he is likely committing a felony by practicing law without a license. Personally I wouldn't let an unlicensed doctor take out my gall bladder....but I am biased. *and for the record I bet he doesn't know what he is doing. I bet is filling in some old form someone gave him. |
|
Quoted:
All I'm doing is supplying an option for the OP. I dont see why I am being attacked. I doubt that a trust from a dealer can be any worse than a do it yourself one. You're not being attacked. I'm simply pointing out that a non-attorney dealer who supplies a trust to a customer is likely breaking the law (copyright or practicing law w/o a license). I never said it was any worse than a DIY or fill in the blank trust. Do you want to buy an NFA item from a dealer that has no problems breaking the law - especially felony level offenses? Sure, most people don't think twice about it, but it's something that would make me think twice about the honesty of the dealer. Quoted:
My dealer did my trust for me and so far no problems. He has been doing them for 20+ years so I figure that he knows what he is doing. Interesting. Considering people have only been using trusts for NFA ownership for ~10 years now, I highly doubt he's been doing trusts for 20+ years unless he's also an attorney and was doing estate planning for people. |
|
I just yesterday filled out my first NFA paperwork, and did the fingerprint cards. A Form 1 for an SBR, I just have to get the pictures glued to the form and get CLEO signature. Planning to do it this week.
And then as soon as my dealer takes possession of the can, I am going to do the same for the suppressor. The only people I know with NFA stuff have done it this way. I wonder, should I back up and not go through with the forms and do a trust instead. I know I am going to at a minimum want more suppressors down the road. But probably not a ton. Just trying to decide if I should do a trust instead. Time to read up I suppose. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. Considering people have only been using trusts for NFA ownership for ~10 years now, I highly doubt he's been doing trusts for 20+ years unless he's also an attorney and was doing estate planning for people. Trusts have always been allowed and used. They originally allowed Corporations and Unions to own automatic weapons and short barreled shotguns for "enforcement". In the first two decades of the 20th century there was quite a bit of violence between Unions and mining corporations, for example. Check out the battle of Blair Mountain for an example of one of the largest Civil uprisings in the USA. There were a lot of machine guns used by these parties. Az |
|
Quoted:
I just yesterday filled out my first NFA paperwork, and did the fingerprint cards. A Form 1 for an SBR, I just have to get the pictures glued to the form and get CLEO signature. Planning to do it this week. And then as soon as my dealer takes possession of the can, I am going to do the same for the suppressor. The only people I know with NFA stuff have done it this way. I wonder, should I back up and not go through with the forms and do a trust instead. I know I am going to at a minimum want more suppressors down the road. But probably not a ton. Just trying to decide if I should do a trust instead. Time to read up I suppose. I recommend a trust. Easier and better IMO. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just yesterday filled out my first NFA paperwork, and did the fingerprint cards. A Form 1 for an SBR, I just have to get the pictures glued to the form and get CLEO signature. Planning to do it this week. And then as soon as my dealer takes possession of the can, I am going to do the same for the suppressor. The only people I know with NFA stuff have done it this way. I wonder, should I back up and not go through with the forms and do a trust instead. I know I am going to at a minimum want more suppressors down the road. But probably not a ton. Just trying to decide if I should do a trust instead. Time to read up I suppose. I recommend a trust. Easier and better IMO. I am going to spend a little time, prior to getting my CLEO sig, and see if I can make a trust happen, for a reasonable cost. As long as it doesnt add a silly amount of wait time before I get the go ahead to SBR my lower and get my can. The trust concept sounds great long term. Just need the details to get started. Dont really want to use lawyer. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting. Considering people have only been using trusts for NFA ownership for ~10 years now, I highly doubt he's been doing trusts for 20+ years unless he's also an attorney and was doing estate planning for people. Trusts have always been allowed and used. They originally allowed Corporations and Unions to own automatic weapons and short barreled shotguns for "enforcement". In the first two decades of the 20th century there was quite a bit of violence between Unions and mining corporations, for example. Check out the battle of Blair Mountain for an example of one of the largest Civil uprisings in the USA. There were a lot of machine guns used by these parties. Az Feel free to post an F1 or F4 from 20 years ago with a trust as the transferee. I've dabbled with NFA for nearly that long and never saw a trust transfer until around 10 years ago. Yes, trusts have been in the NFA since the inception in 1934, but in my experience, people didn't really start using them except in the last 10 years. Prior to that, anyone that had CLEO issues usually went the corporation route. |
Some are paying $300 for a lawyer. 
And I would say I fix about 5 trusts a month where people initially screwed them up trying to do it themselves or their dealer set it up for them and had no idea what they were doing. Some common issues I see are: failing to list yourself as a trustee (and therefore you are not legal to possess the items), listing people who you want to be able to possess the items only as successor trustees (and thus they cannot possess the items until the trustee dies), not appointing a beneficiary or appointing yourself as the beneficiary (and thus the trust is invalid), not funding the trust (and thus the trust is invalid), naming the trust something too long to engrave like the "Johnathon Michael Doe Family Firearms Revocable Living Trust." So yes, there are lots of errors out there. Now I personally don't know anyone who has ever gotten arrested for any of these, but again I see lots and lots of invalid trusts or trusts that don't do what the person thinks they do. |
|
Quoted:
Some are paying $300 for a lawyer.
And I would say I fix about 5 trusts a month where people initially screwed them up trying to do it themselves or their dealer set it up for them and had no idea what they were doing. Some common issues I see are: failing to list yourself as a trustee (and therefore you are not legal to possess the items), listing people who you want to be able to possess the items only as successor trustees (and thus they cannot possess the items until the trustee dies), not appointing a beneficiary or appointing yourself as the beneficiary (and thus the trust is invalid), not funding the trust (and thus the trust is invalid), naming the trust something too long to engrave like the "Johnathon Michael Doe Family Firearms Revocable Living Trust." So yes, there are lots of errors out there. Now I personally don't know anyone who has ever gotten arrested for any of these, but again I see lots and lots of invalid trusts or trusts that don't do what the person thinks they do. When you say engrave, are you saying you have to engrave the firearm? 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some are paying $300 for a lawyer.
And I would say I fix about 5 trusts a month where people initially screwed them up trying to do it themselves or their dealer set it up for them and had no idea what they were doing. Some common issues I see are: failing to list yourself as a trustee (and therefore you are not legal to possess the items), listing people who you want to be able to possess the items only as successor trustees (and thus they cannot possess the items until the trustee dies), not appointing a beneficiary or appointing yourself as the beneficiary (and thus the trust is invalid), not funding the trust (and thus the trust is invalid), naming the trust something too long to engrave like the "Johnathon Michael Doe Family Firearms Revocable Living Trust." So yes, there are lots of errors out there. Now I personally don't know anyone who has ever gotten arrested for any of these, but again I see lots and lots of invalid trusts or trusts that don't do what the person thinks they do. When you say engrave, are you saying you have to engrave the firearm?
yes, when you do a form 1 (assembling your own sbr, making your own suppressor, etc) if you do a form 4 and buy a factory built sbr or a manufactured suppressor there is no engraving needed |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some are paying $300 for a lawyer.
And I would say I fix about 5 trusts a month where people initially screwed them up trying to do it themselves or their dealer set it up for them and had no idea what they were doing. Some common issues I see are: failing to list yourself as a trustee (and therefore you are not legal to possess the items), listing people who you want to be able to possess the items only as successor trustees (and thus they cannot possess the items until the trustee dies), not appointing a beneficiary or appointing yourself as the beneficiary (and thus the trust is invalid), not funding the trust (and thus the trust is invalid), naming the trust something too long to engrave like the "Johnathon Michael Doe Family Firearms Revocable Living Trust." So yes, there are lots of errors out there. Now I personally don't know anyone who has ever gotten arrested for any of these, but again I see lots and lots of invalid trusts or trusts that don't do what the person thinks they do. When you say engrave, are you saying you have to engrave the firearm?
yes, when you do a form 1 (assembling your own sbr, making your own suppressor, etc) if you do a form 4 and buy a factory built sbr or a manufactured suppressor there is no engraving needed ah so makes sense |
|
Quoted:
Feel free to post an F1 or F4 from 20 years ago with a trust as the transferee. I've dabbled with NFA for nearly that long and never saw a trust transfer until around 10 years ago. Yes, trusts have been in the NFA since the inception in 1934, but in my experience, people didn't really start using them except in the last 10 years. Prior to that, anyone that had CLEO issues usually went the corporation route. Yeah, I'll get right on that. Wait right there until I come back. 
All I said was trusts were allowed from way back because the Unions and large corps wanted a way to own automatic weapons, etc, for their assorted investigative and enforcement crews. It's a bit of History, and a simple fact that can be checked anywhere. It's almost like you're looking for a fight or something while I agree with what you said. I'm not really sure how to take it. 
Az |
|
Quoted:
All I said was trusts were allowed from way back because the Unions and large corps wanted a way to own automatic weapons, etc, for their assorted investigative and enforcement crews. It's a bit of History, and a simple fact that can be checked anywhere. What does the fact that unions and corporations have owned NFA have to do with trusts? You do realize that a trust is not the same as a corporation or partnership, don't you? A corporation or a union would not need or (probably) want a trust to own their NFA items - they'd just buy them directly. I believe what bigcbass was trying to explain to you is that a trust, as a non-natural person legal entity which can own NFA, has not been commonly used for that purpose until about ten years ago. Corporations and partnerships and such have directly owned NFA since 1934, but it's very doubtful they did so by creating a trust, when the corp can already own it directly. |
|
Quoted:
What does the fact that unions and corporations have owned NFA have to do with trusts? You do realize that a trust is not the same as a corporation or partnership, don't you? Trusts were originally combinations of corporations. Quoted:A corporation or a union would not need or (probably) want a trust to own their NFA items - they'd just buy them directly.
You are right that the Union or corp could buy them directly, but many of the "enforcement" people were hired under different companies, like Pinkerton or Wells Fargo, or smaller companies that were started just for strong arm needs. A trust allowed cross pollination of the ability to use the firearms. Quoted:I believe what bigcbass was trying to explain to you is that a trust, as a non-natural person legal entity which can own NFA, has not been commonly used for that purpose until about ten years ago. Corporations and partnerships and such have directly owned NFA since 1934, but it's very doubtful they did so by creating a trust, when the corp can already own it directly.
I looked back through the thread and can't find where bigcbass responded to anything I said. Are we on the same page here? And let's try to read what I write. I never said trusts were always popular. I said they were available and had been used. I also agreed that they have become much more common in the last 10 years especially single person NFA owners. Do you understand? I agree with you, I simply pointed out that obtaining NFA through a trust was always an option. Can we please stop correcting what I never said? 
Az |
|
Quoted:
You are right that the Union or corp could buy them directly, but many of the "enforcement" people were hired under different companies, like Pinkerton or Wells Fargo, or smaller companies that were started just for strong arm needs. A trust allowed cross pollination of the ability to use the firearms A trust would be a poor choice for a business to use to acquire NFA. It seems like it would make things more complicated since only trustees could legally possess the NFA items. Pinkerton/Wells Fargo were incorporated. As such, any bona fide employee of the corporation could legally possess the NFA items. It's no different than now with for example post samples. How would using a trust for ownership benefit those companies? I can see many disadvantages. |
Armory Sponsor