Armory Sponsor
Posted: 11/14/2014 11:08:01 PM EDT
|
My dealer called today and said my approved paper Form 4 has been received. This is for a Trust.
He went on to say that new ATF rules require the NICS check. I was under the impression that any background checks were waived for NFA items. What's the scoop? Not that a NICS check is going to be any problem, of course. Is this somehow related to a ramp-up to 41P? My last paper Form 4 all I had to do was fill out a 4473. |
|
Nothing I've heard. Line 22 on the 4473 looks the same.
22. No NICS check was required because the transfer involved only National Firearms Act firearm(s). (See Instructions for Question 22.) EXCEPTIONS TO NICS CHECK: A NICS check is not required if the transfer qualifies for any of the exceptions in 27 CFR § 478.102(d). Generally these include: (a) transfers where the buyer has presented the licensee with a permit or license that allows the buyer to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm, and the permit has been recognized by ATF as a valid alternative to the NICS check requirement; (b) transfers of National Firearms Act weapons approved by ATF; or (c) transfers certified by ATF as exempt because compliance with the NICS check requirements is impracticable. See 27 CFR § 478.102(d) for a detailed explanation. If the transfer qualifies for one of these exceptions, the licensee must obtain the documentation required by 27 CFR § 478.131. A firearm must not be transferred to any buyer who fails to provide such documentation. |
|
Quoted:
Well technically according to NFA Handbook, NICS is required for the person picking up on behalf of the entity. Its not new news. Could be that, too. I've had all mine mailed to me so far, which is a slightly different set of rules. Just sent them a copy of my DL and CHP (which negates the need for NICS anyway). |
|
Quoted:
Well technically according to NFA Handbook, NICS is required for the person picking up on behalf of the entity. Its not new news. The last can I picked up in May or June required a 4473 and Background check as the Grantor of the Trust. Pisses me off because the NICS check should be all we need to begin with. |
|
Quoted:
The last can I picked up in May or June required a 4473 and Background check as the Grantor of the Trust. Pisses me off because the NICS check should be all we need to begin with. Quoted:
Quoted:
Well technically according to NFA Handbook, NICS is required for the person picking up on behalf of the entity. Its not new news. The last can I picked up in May or June required a 4473 and Background check as the Grantor of the Trust. Pisses me off because the NICS check should be all we need to begin with. We shouldn't have that. |
|
OP, I see that you are in VA. I just picked up my suppressor two days ago and had to go through a NICS check.
Basically, it's a new VA thing now to require background checks for suppressors. According to my dealer, they (all FFL/SOTs) were notified by the VA State Police that they were to start conducting the NICS and VA SP background checks for these. Apparently this has been going on for about 2 months. There's no precedence and I couldn't find any information on the VA SP Web sites. Nonetheless, it's a new requirement. I wish they would just do the background check and let me take it home instead of going through the whole ATF rigmarole. Sorry--wasn't thinking. How could I forget what "shall not be infringed" means? 
ETA: The last two suppressors I picked up earlier this year from the same dealer required NO additional checks once he got the stamps. |
| Yes, you have to fill out a 4473--that's always (for reasonable values of "always") been the case AFAIK. The question is whether the NICS check is required for a trust. Earlier in the year, ATF decided that since a trust isn't a "person" under the GCA, transfers of NFA items to a trust still required a NICS check. This was discussed a bit here at the time, and led to the (incorrect, IMO) idea that it's therefore possible for trusts to make and own new machine guns. As I recall, this "decision" wasn't in the way of a formal, citable ruling, but a letter to a particular manufacturer or dealer. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, you have to fill out a 4473--that's always (for reasonable values of "always") been the case AFAIK. The question is whether the NICS check is required for a trust. Earlier in the year, ATF decided that since a trust isn't a "person" under the GCA, transfers of NFA items to a trust still required a NICS check. This was discussed a bit here at the time, and led to the (incorrect, IMO) idea that it's therefore possible for trusts to make and own new machine guns. As I recall, this "decision" wasn't in the way of a formal, citable ruling, but a letter to a particular manufacturer or dealer. it might not be correct in your opinion, but that didn't stop the ATF from approving a handful of form 1s for new MGs check nolo's new thread in GD (red highlighted) for the status of the pending litigation |
|
Quoted:
Yes, you have to fill out a 4473--that's always (for reasonable values of "always") been the case AFAIK. The question is whether the NICS check is required for a trust. Earlier in the year, ATF decided that since a trust isn't a "person" under the GCA, transfers of NFA items to a trust still required a NICS check. This was discussed a bit here at the time, and led to the (incorrect, IMO) idea that it's therefore possible for trusts to make and own new machine guns. As I recall, this "decision" wasn't in the way of a formal, citable ruling, but a letter to a particular manufacturer or dealer. Honestly, I think the idea of "no nics required" for NFA is because on the 4473 form, it states if an NFA item is being transfered, no nics is required. That's where the people got the idea that no nics is required for all NFA transfer. Form 4473, question 22 states no nics is require if NFA only is involved and also states to refer to instructions for question 22. |
|
When I got approval for my 1st can (spectre 2) last January I went to pick it up and the dealer had me fill out the 4473 and then he called it in to the state police for the NICS check. I didn't have any reason to question it as he'd been in the class 3 business for a goodly number of years, I didn't know any better and several friends and acquaintances have been using him, so there wasn't even a question. It was just part of the process.
On my second can ( YHM Ti-phantom 5.56) I had a trustee pick up the item from the dealer because he was "gonna be up that way". He brought a copy of the trust showing him as a trustee and then the form 4473 and the NICS check same as before. Might it be a state level requirement? |
|
Quoted:
My dealer called today and said my approved paper Form 4 has been received. This is for a Trust. He went on to say that new ATF rules require the NICS check. I was under the impression that any background checks were waived for NFA items. What's the scoop? Not that a NICS check is going to be any problem, of course. Is this somehow related to a ramp-up to 41P? My last paper Form 4 all I had to do was fill out a 4473. No NICS check for NFA in Virginia unless it's an SBR, SBS, AOW or Machine Gun (which leaves only silencers). Virginia doesn't recognize suppressors as firearms so cannot require dealers to perform checks on them at the state level. |
|
Dealers have not been notified, directly or otherwise, of any changes. |
|
Quoted:
Dealers have not been notified, directly or otherwise, of any changes. Because there haven't been any. For the billionth time, No NICS check for NFA. This is why ATF-41P is requiring prints/CLEO for trusts. In fact, dealers have been notified, via the FFL Newsletter, NICS is not required: "Approved NFA transfers are exempt from the NICS background check" 
|
|
I'm reading that as a yes to both the 4473 and to the NICS check, being required. |
|
Quoted:
Because there haven't been any. For the billionth time, No NICS check for NFA. This is why ATF-41P is requiring prints/CLEO for trusts. In fact, dealers have been notified, via the FFL Newsletter, NICS is not required: "Approved NFA transfers are exempt from the NICS background check" <a href="http://s839.photobucket.com/user/Umbrarian/media/BATFE/NFANoNICS.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i839.photobucket.com/albums/zz314/Umbrarian/BATFE/NFANoNICS.jpg</a> I'm reading this as a yes to 4473 and a no to a NICS check. Clear as mud. |
|
Quoted:
I'm reading this as a yes to 4473 and a no to a NICS check. Clear as mud. Quoted:
Quoted:
Because there haven't been any. For the billionth time, No NICS check for NFA. This is why ATF-41P is requiring prints/CLEO for trusts. In fact, dealers have been notified, via the FFL Newsletter, NICS is not required: "Approved NFA transfers are exempt from the NICS background check" <a href="http://s839.photobucket.com/user/Umbrarian/media/BATFE/NFANoNICS.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i839.photobucket.com/albums/zz314/Umbrarian/BATFE/NFANoNICS.jpg</a> I'm reading this as a yes to 4473 and a no to a NICS check. Clear as mud. Clear as clean water. Same for CHLs in many states. Form, no call. |
|
Quoted:
OP, I see that you are in VA. I just picked up my suppressor two days ago and had to go through a NICS check. Basically, it's a new VA thing now to require background checks for suppressors. According to my dealer, they (all FFL/SOTs) were notified by the VA State Police that they were to start conducting the NICS and VA SP background checks for these. Apparently this has been going on for about 2 months. There's no precedence and I couldn't find any information on the VA SP Web sites. Nonetheless, it's a new requirement. I wish they would just do the background check and let me take it home instead of going through the whole ATF rigmarole. Sorry--wasn't thinking. How could I forget what "shall not be infringed" means?
ETA: The last two suppressors I picked up earlier this year from the same dealer required NO additional checks once he got the stamps. This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. |
|
Quoted:
This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. Quoted:
Quoted:
OP, I see that you are in VA. I just picked up my suppressor two days ago and had to go through a NICS check. Basically, it's a new VA thing now to require background checks for suppressors. According to my dealer, they (all FFL/SOTs) were notified by the VA State Police that they were to start conducting the NICS and VA SP background checks for these. Apparently this has been going on for about 2 months. There's no precedence and I couldn't find any information on the VA SP Web sites. Nonetheless, it's a new requirement. I wish they would just do the background check and let me take it home instead of going through the whole ATF rigmarole. Sorry--wasn't thinking. How could I forget what "shall not be infringed" means?
ETA: The last two suppressors I picked up earlier this year from the same dealer required NO additional checks once he got the stamps. This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. I thought Federal laws trumps state? |
|
Quoted:
I thought Federal laws trumps state? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
OP, I see that you are in VA. I just picked up my suppressor two days ago and had to go through a NICS check. Basically, it's a new VA thing now to require background checks for suppressors. According to my dealer, they (all FFL/SOTs) were notified by the VA State Police that they were to start conducting the NICS and VA SP background checks for these. Apparently this has been going on for about 2 months. There's no precedence and I couldn't find any information on the VA SP Web sites. Nonetheless, it's a new requirement. I wish they would just do the background check and let me take it home instead of going through the whole ATF rigmarole. Sorry--wasn't thinking. How could I forget what "shall not be infringed" means?
ETA: The last two suppressors I picked up earlier this year from the same dealer required NO additional checks once he got the stamps. This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. I thought Federal laws trumps state? If that were the case, Colorado wouldn't have marijuana tourism. |
|
Quoted:
This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. Quoted:
This must be it; had to do the 4473 (of course) and then the state police form and NICS check. Suppressors I got 2 years ago were 4473 only and no NICS check. Hmm... Maybe I'll ask Philip Van Cleave about it. There is no state requirement for background checks for suppressors in Virginia. Period. There has been no state law change in regards to suppressors and VSP doesn't get to make changes without specific legislative action. Edit to add: I contacted the Firearms Transaction Center about this. Basically, the Virginia form has been brought in line with the 4473. Receivers, AOWs and pistol grip shotguns can now be properly recorded on the state form SP65. Below is the email correspondence. Dear Mr. Hansohn, That is a decision of federal law; not state. If ATF's guidance is that a NICS check is required, instruction is provided in the third paragraph of the memorandum from Captain Turner. Donna K. Tate, Manager Firearms Transaction Center Department of State Police http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms.shtm Post Office Box 85608 / Richmond, Virginia 23285-5608 / Tel: 804-674-2210 / Fax: 804-674-2791 -----Original Message----- From: Chris Hansohn Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 11:17 AM To: Price, Estella F. Cc: Tate, Donna K.; Matthews, Michael S.; Lam, Evelyn Y. Subject: Re: Fwd: Background Checks for Transfer of NFA Weapons in Trust-Clarification Just to clarify: If an NFA firearm is federally registered with an approved ATF Form 4 (Application for Tax Paid and Registration of Firearm), then no NICS check nor SP65 is required. Is this correct? Thank you, Chris Hansohn -- www.HansohnBrothers.com |
|
And it appears it's an ATF thing; they are telling FFLs that a NICS check is required on individuals picking up items for a trust.
So it's not VSP after all. And (just guessing here) that I'm filling out the SP65 becasue that's how we do NICS checks here in VA? MAN I wish we'd do away with NICS checks for CCW holders. |
|
Quoted:
And it appears it's an ATF thing; they are telling FFLs that a NICS check is required on individuals picking up items for a trust. So it's not VSP after all. And (just guessing here) that I'm filling out the SP65 becasue that's how we do NICS checks here in VA? MAN I wish we'd do away with NICS checks for CCW holders. Not quite. ATF isn't telling dealers to perform background checks on NFA, quite the opposite. See ATF FFL Newsletter, November 2008. Yes on the SP65. Totally agreed on your last sentence. That would require changes to our CHP process, something VCDL should have been working on since 1994. |
|
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf scoll down to page 64 under section 9.12.1.
9.12.1 NFA Transfers to other than individuals. Subsequent to the approval of an application
requesting to transfer an NFA firearm to, or on behalf of, a partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation, the authorized person picking up the firearm on behalf of, a 176 Ibid. See also 27 CFR 479.105(d) 177 27 CFR 479.105(c) 65 partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation from the FFL must complete the Form 4473 with his/her personal information and undergo a NICS check. See also, question P60 in the ATF FAQs. Yes I've seen Newsletter that states no NICS is required. So really, thats up to your discretion. ATF can say whatever they want. |
| I had to fill out a 4473 and pass nics checks when picking up both my suppressors on a form 4, trust. I got a nics delayed, which sucked, since I the dealer was a 1 1/2 hour drive from me. I asked why they needed to wait for an approval when no nics is required. Dealer told me though it is not required for NFA items, it is their store policy. Sucked for me, had to drive back 3 days later when approval finally came in. |
|
Quoted:
Dealers have not been notified, directly or otherwise, of any changes. Quoted:
Dealers have not been notified, directly or otherwise, of any changes. This admittedly poorly-worded letter from the VSP was sent out in September: 
|
|
Quoted:
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf scoll down to page 64 under section 9.12.1. Yes I've seen Newsletter that states no NICS is required. So really, thats up to your discretion. ATF can say whatever they want. Quoted:
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf scoll down to page 64 under section 9.12.1. 9.12.1 NFA Transfers to other than individuals. Subsequent to the approval of an application
requesting to transfer an NFA firearm to, or on behalf of, a partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation, the authorized person picking up the firearm on behalf of, a 176 Ibid. See also 27 CFR 479.105(d) 177 27 CFR 479.105(c) 65 partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation from the FFL must complete the Form 4473 with his/her personal information and undergo a NICS check. See also, question P60 in the ATF FAQs. Yes I've seen Newsletter that states no NICS is required. So really, thats up to your discretion. ATF can say whatever they want. You know who wrote that don't you? NFACTA (says so right in the preface). That was their first attempt to throw Trusts under then bus. It was published n 2007. When FFLs called BS on it, ATF was forced to refute it in the 11/2008 Newsletter. It was never fixed in that guide, which has no legal authority. We all know how their second attempt to throw Trusts under the bus worked out. When ATF-41P is enacted, they will all of a sudden say, we made a mistake, you should have just checked box 22 on the 4473 and not done a NICS check like it says the directions. 
|
|
Quoted:
You know who wrote that don't you? NFACTA (says so right in the preface). That was their first attempt to throw Trusts under then bus. It was published n 2007. When FFLs called BS on it, ATF was forced to refute it in the 11/2008 Newsletter. It was never fixed in that guide, which has no legal authority. We all know how their second attempt to throw Trusts under the bus worked out. Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf scoll down to page 64 under section 9.12.1. 9.12.1 NFA Transfers to other than individuals. Subsequent to the approval of an application
requesting to transfer an NFA firearm to, or on behalf of, a partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation, the authorized person picking up the firearm on behalf of, a 176 Ibid. See also 27 CFR 479.105(d) 177 27 CFR 479.105(c) 65 partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation from the FFL must complete the Form 4473 with his/her personal information and undergo a NICS check. See also, question P60 in the ATF FAQs. Yes I've seen Newsletter that states no NICS is required. So really, thats up to your discretion. ATF can say whatever they want. You know who wrote that don't you? NFACTA (says so right in the preface). That was their first attempt to throw Trusts under then bus. It was published n 2007. When FFLs called BS on it, ATF was forced to refute it in the 11/2008 Newsletter. It was never fixed in that guide, which has no legal authority. We all know how their second attempt to throw Trusts under the bus worked out. Exactly correct. And until 41P is resolved, the Nov 2008 newsletter is the latest official stance of the ATF regarding trusts. /thread |
Armory Sponsor