sixfivesavage
Active Member
I don't like how it says the forms must be sent to the CLEO in the jurisdiction of the entity. I see no reason to let local police know what I have if I can help it. That's part of what people use trusts for.
They can argue that you can still (in free States) buy firearms without all of the hubub of photos/prints. A SBR or AOW is not necessary for the exercise of that right. Of course, if you look at Miller, they looked at military firearms in use at the time. In this era, that would be the M4, which is both FA and a SBR.......
I think this is it - http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201210&RIN=1140-AA43 (ETA - was in Post #2, as well).Is the actual proposed rule available? I hope I don't need my wife's (co-trustee) prints every time I buy an NFA item... she doesn't even know about the NFA stuff I buy until it comes home.
Guess who's probably about to be axed as a trustee?
I think this is it - http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201210&RIN=1140-AA43 (ETA - was in Post #2, as well).
That sums up the arguments pretty well.
I can't wait for the day that NFA is challenged and judged to be the unconstitutional pile of excrement that it is, but I know we're taking baby steps down that path to build the precedent case by case and there are bigger fish to fry first.
Is the actual proposed rule available? I hope I don't need my wife's (co-trustee) prints every time I buy an NFA item... she doesn't even know about the NFA stuff I buy until it comes home.
Guess who's probably about to be axed as a trustee?
The proposed regulations would (1) add a definition for the term "responsible person";(2) require each responsible person of a corporation, trust or legal entity to complete a specified form, and to submit photographs and fingerprints
This isn't fully directed at you, but...
I disagree that having to submit photos and fingerprints for inclusion in some massive government database to exercise a fundamental human right can ever be considered a good thing.
If you're going to argue that, you may as well also argue for abolition of BATFE under a strict interpretation of the 2A and relegating firearms laws and regulations, if any, to the states.
Yes, the National Firearms Act is unConstitutional. But that ship has sailed.
I hope I don't need my wife's (co-trustee) prints every time I buy an NFA item.
If it's just one-time to submit the prints and photos of the trustees, that's not a big deal.
This is a good thing.
The biggest hassle with NFA paperwork wasn't the photos and prints, it was the fact that you had to send it to two agencies (CLEO and BATFE) for sign-off. The main reason for most NFA trusts was to bypass CLEO sign-off.
Now you go straight to BATFE...one-stop.
Everyone thought they were clever with the NFA trust system. No one thinks of the potential downsides...particularly the possibility that the SC or some other court could rule that trusts don't enjoy the same rights (i.e. 2A) as individual citizens, if someone wanted to press the issue.
I am surprised that so many people just wanted to pretend that this wasn't coming.
So is it worth doing a trust now?
This is a good thing.
The biggest hassle with NFA paperwork wasn't the photos and prints, it was the fact that you had to send it to two agencies (CLEO and BATFE) for sign-off. The main reason for most NFA trusts was to bypass CLEO sign-off.
Now you go straight to BATFE...one-stop.
Everyone thought they were clever with the NFA trust system. No one thinks of the potential downsides...particularly the possibility that the SC or some other court could rule that trusts don't enjoy the same rights (i.e. 2A) as individual citizens, if someone wanted to press the issue.
I am surprised that so many people just wanted to pretend that this wasn't coming.
So is it worth doing a trust now?
In my opinion, no.
This isn't fully directed at you, but...
I disagree that having to submit photos and fingerprints for inclusion in some massive government database to exercise a fundamental human right can ever be considered a good thing.
Looks like I missed the boat on getting into NFA items.
*Cue the "if you don't have something to hide..." responses*
They can argue that you can still (in free States) buy firearms without all of the hubub of photos/prints. A SBR or AOW is not necessary for the exercise of that right. Of course, if you look at Miller, they looked at military firearms in use at the time. In this era, that would be the M4, which is both FA and a SBR.......
The fact they are trying to define a new type of person(s) as "responsible person", lends me to believe this would be a one time thing for trusts and corporations. After you submit all the photos and fingerprints, they would presumably be accepted on future NFA transfers. I can't imagine corporations doing photos and fingerprints for each new NFA item for each new person, that would be a paperwork disaster!
Actually, there are still benefits to owning NFA items under a trust as opposed to individual ownership. Yes, the fingerprint, photopgraph, and CLEO sign-off exception was a big factor for many NFA enthusiasts for getting a trust but that isn't the only benefit of an NFA trust.
Here are some benefits of NFA trusts besides avoidance of fingerprints, photographs, and CLEO sign-off:
1. A trust lets you share your NFA items with other people not under your direct supervision. As an individual owner, you cannot let another person use your NFA items unless that person is under your direct supervision. A trust grants other trusted persons unfettered and unsupervised access to your NFA items such as your spouse, friends, family members, etc. Whomever you choose to name as a co-trustee.
2. A trust serves your estate planning and unforeseen circumstances needs. If you die as an individual owner, your spouse or personal representative of your estate must file the appropriate paperwork with the ATF to transfer the ownership of your items from you to your estate/heirs. In the throws of grief, I do not believe that your family members will remember to file that paperwork in a timely matter. A trust with a substitute trustee obviates this problem by providing for a fail and a mechanism to pass your items on. Also, if at some point in the future, you are declared a "prohibited person" under the law, a trust provides a mechanism for passing on your NFA firearms in a controlled fashion instead of a fire sale in order to get those firearms out of your possession (remember, as an individual owner, you cannot just hand them over to a third party to hold until you find a new owner for your toys).
3. A trust is as much an investment vehicle/ownership mechanism as it is a means to circumvent the f/p/CLEO requirement. A trust places the NFA items out of your name directly and into the trusts name meaning that said items are protected from different types of liability. The trust can also have financial benefits if you happen to make a profit on your NFA items.
I knew that when the ATF published this rule that many folks would say that there wasn't a benefit to an NFA trust anymore but those folks are dead wrong. They fail to understand the utility of trusts and the benefits trusts provide. A short-sighted person only looks at the f/p/CLEO benefits and fails to realize the other benefits that their NFA trust bestows.
I hope this helps some folks understand.