AR-15 stripped lower MUST be registered as a handgun - Legal issues?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

....

here is a PDF from the FAQ's page of the ATF site. take note of the "imported" parts list. I wonder how many people are building AR's using UTG (made in china) parts.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/building_a_firearm.pdf

I'll do some more digging after dinner, We went thru this years ago with Browning 1919's and the number that were showing up at gunshows without manufacturer marks or even serial numbers.


Rich W.

---

Is there a difference between assembling based on a previously serialized complete AR lower (a "firearm" by itself) vs. building from a non-serialized flat (AK for example and not a "firearm" in its own right)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by notenoughguns

I 'm more interested in your 1 per year statement , I'm aware of the compliant parts regs .

---

Ditto!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveWag

I am not in my shop right now so I don't have a PA record of sale, but last night my brother pointed out the the record of sale must be executed "if the firearm is less than 24 inches long". Now the 4473, in note 18, clearly defines "recievers and frames as "firearms". Using this logic ANY receiver, including a Mauser action (remember the XP-100) would require the PA record of sale to be executed.

Steve

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gun Bowanna

That's exactly what I said a few days ago (post #55).

According to this logic, ALL receivers regardless of their originally designed intent are/require a Handgun form.

---

It's not any more relevant than what some PICS employee says.

18Pa.C.S.6111 defines what firearms need to have a Form SP4-113 executed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -JD-

Is there a difference between assembling based on a previously serialized complete AR lower (a "firearm" by itself) vs. building from a non-serialized flat (AK for example and not a "firearm" in its own right)?


Ditto!

---

Yes there is a difference between using a 100% receiver and oooo say a 90% receiver or an AK receiver flat. The biggest difference in the 2 is the fact the serialized receiver can be tracked and the flat can't be if you get my point.

In other words, if you build 10 AK's using receiver flats, it is almost impossable to "prove" how many you built. But a serialized 100% receiver can be tracked back to the person that completed the firearm. That is the BIGGEST reason why ATF changed the 4473. WAY too many people (dealers included)building AR's for resale and not paying the FET.

If you build ONE AR and 2 years later decide to sell it. It is VERY unlikely that anyone anywhere will ever even notice. Now build 5 in one year and sell everyone for ANY reason and at a minimum the Treasury dept. WANTS thier 11%.

On a side note: if ever questioned, you can't say they were all POS and you sold them for $50. each because TTB is set up to and they have NO PROBLEM telling you what the retail value should have been and how mucg FET you WILL pay.


Keep in mind I am only throwing this out because times are changing and fast. I would expect just about any law (no matter how obscure) to be used against gun owners in the near future.



Rich W.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

You could in reality open several cans of worms on this one.

1. YES to stay within the current line of PSPFD thinking, you should/would have to do an FFL transfer if you ever wish to get the firearm out of your name.

---

No, because a rifle does not require a SP4-113 per 18Pa.C.S.6111
Does not matter if an FFL was incorrectly directed to do so when sold to them, there would be no duty to go to an FFL because the firearm is a rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

2. And this is the BIG one. When you sell a firearm that you built from a completed receiver. That firearm has never had the FET paid on it that would have been paid if it was built by an 07 FFL holder

---

Only Manufacturers are required to pay FAET. Individuals, manufacturing firearms for personal use are not among those taxed. A non manufacturer FFL (01FFL) is required to pay FAET (and obtain a 07) in order to manufacture more than 50 guns per year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

...because as an individual you can build one firearm a year for personal use...

---

Internet legend. No such restriction exists on the number of firearms a person (non-licensee) can manufacture for personal use per year in Fed or Pa. law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

It is no different than the 01 FFL holders that think it's ok to buy a complete lower receiver from RRA and then buy a complete upper receiver from joe blows custom uppers and then put both together and sell it as a complete firearm. More than 1 FFL has got his peepee in a bind for doing that.

---

Again, this is NOT correct. Not since 2005.
FFL's are allowed 50 per year before they are required to get an 07 and pay Federal FAET. Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax.
Ref: http://www.ttb.gov/pdf/50gun_exemption.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -JD-

Is there a difference between assembling based on a previously serialized complete AR lower (a "firearm" by itself) vs. building from a non-serialized flat (AK for example and not a "firearm" in its own right)?

---

Difference how? In terms of the law and tax issues?

For the individual: No

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

Yes there is a difference between using a 100% receiver and oooo say a 90% receiver or an AK receiver flat. The biggest difference in the 2 is the fact the serialized receiver can be tracked and the flat can't be if you get my point.

---

Greater than 80% (as determined by the ATF) are considered "firearms" and subject to all applicable controls.

If an individual builds a title-1 firearm, there is no difference in using a title-1 receiver or a flat in terms of legality for te individual. No FAET is due and no limit on how many they can make as long as they are not building them with the intention of selling them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

...In other words, if you build 10 AK's using receiver flats, it is almost impossable to "prove" how many you built. But a serialized 100% receiver can be tracked back to the person that completed the firearm. That is the BIGGEST reason why ATF changed the 4473. WAY too many people (dealers included)building AR's for resale and not paying the FET.

---

What change to the 4473?

And as above, non manufacturer FFL's are allowed to manufacture 50 guns per year without paying FAET.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

If you build ONE AR and 2 years later decide to sell it. It is VERY unlikely that anyone anywhere will ever even notice. Now build 5 in one year and sell everyone for ANY reason and at a minimum the Treasury dept. WANTS thier 11%.

---

This is simply not true. Individuals are not required to pay FAET regardless if they later sell the firearm or not.
Only time they would run afoul of the tax code is if they were determined to be "in the business" (see ref below) and slapped with manufacturing without a license.

REF:

Quote:

---

H6) May a person engage in gunsmithing under a dealer’s license (type 01), or do gunsmiths need to be licensed as “manufacturers” of firearms? [Back]

Generally, a person engaged in gunsmithing requires only a dealer’s license (type 01). There are circumstances in which a gunsmith might require a manufacturing license. Generally, a person should obtain a license as a manufacturer of firearms if the person is: 1. performing operations which create firearms or alter firearms (in the case of alterations, the work is not being performed at the request of customers, rather the person who is altering the firearms is purchasing them, making the changes, and then reselling them), 2. is performing the operations as a regular course of business or trade, and 3. is performing the operations for the purpose of sale or distribution of the firearms. (see attached).

---

&

Quote:

---

Section 921(a)21)(C)
The term "engaged in the business" means - C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(ll)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;

---

&

Quote:

---

http://www.ttb.gov/pdf/50gun_exemption.pdf
This information sheet announces the recently enacted amendment to section 4182 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (IRC), 26 U.S.C. 4182, to provide an exemption
from the firearms and ammunition excise tax (FAET) for any pistol, revolver, or firearm
(article) if it was manufactured, produced, or imported by a person who manufacturers,
produces, or imports less than an aggregate of 50 of such articles during a calendar
year.

--snip--

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

Greater than 80% (as determined by the ATF) are considered "firearms" and subject to all applicable controls.

If an individual builds a title-1 firearm, there is no difference in using a title-1 receiver or a flat in terms of legality for te individual. No FAET is due and no limit on how many they can make as long as they are not building them with the intention of selling them.

TYPO on the 90%. Manufacturing with the "intent" resale was my point



What change to the 4473?

the addition of the receiver only box, it wasn't put there for shits and giggles

And as above, non manufacturer FFL's are allowed to manufacture 50 guns per year without paying FAET.

I agree but it was not put in place for individuals, it was put in place to protect the local gunsmith that got his nuts in a jam because he didn't have a manufacturing license

This is simply not true. Individuals are not required to pay FAET regardless if they later sell the firearm or not.
Only time they would run afoul of the tax code is if they were determined to be "in the business" (see ref below) and slapped with manufacturing without a license.

like I said earlier, " if you build ONE AR and then decide 2 years later to sell it, No one will even notice BUT build 5 AR's in one year and sell them all, again "built with INTENET to RESELL"

if what I said was misleading to anyone then I apologize. the entire deal and the reason for my post is "building with the INTENT to RESELL that is why I mentioned that there are individuals as well as dealers doing it

REF: &

---

Pa.Patriot, it seems more times then not, we are on the same page but different lines of thinking seem to get in the way even when the result is the same.


Rich W.

Ok, folks. back to the original topic:

Discussing the issue with Lieutenant L. is a waste of time. The folks at PICS have decided that a AR-15 receiver is a handgun :rolleyes: even though they have not that authority. Not surprisingly, they don't understand that and/or are unwilling to concede.

Now, they HAVE told me they are waiting on the "legal dept" to make a decision.

I have spoken to an attorney today and am awaiting more info and his research into the issue, I may contact another attorney tonight as well.
I figure we can wait to see what the PICS legal dept says. THen (or before) we may want to have a court ordered decision on this and/or order to force PICS t stop telling dealers to violate 6111. Meanwhile, I will be executing transfers per 18.Pa.C.S.6111.
I will post more info on the possibility of a court action when I get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

Pa.Patriot, it seems more times then not, we are on the same page but different lines of thinking seem to get in the way even when the result is the same.


Rich W.

---

lol - I know, I believe that is the case.

I don't want people misunderstanding that the FAET issues are not applicable to an individual unless the prove the individuals intent to sell. Your posts made no such reference and made it sound as any individual manufacture was looking for trouble, the way I was reading it.. Also, the FFL's selling manufactured AR's at guns shows. Legal as long as it is 50 or less ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warners Surplus

I ALWAYS wondered about that one because as an individual you can build one firearm a year for personal use BUT you aren't suppose to sell that firearm until/unless the firearm has had the FET paid on it by a licensed 07. It is no different than the 01 FFL holders that think it's ok to buy a complete lower receiver from RRA and then buy a complete upper receiver from joe blows custom uppers and then put both together and sell it as a complete firearm. More than 1 FFL has got his peepee in a bind for doing that. The FET is paid on the retail resale value of the COMPLETED firearm and not the individual parts.

---

This just isn't accurate. I could make twenty guns tomorrow as long as I don't engage in the business of selling firearms. I can them sell those twenty guns in fire years as long as I'm not engaged in the business of making or selling firearms. I also don't need to pay the FET as you stated on any of those guns.

Now then if I was making 10 guns a year and selling all those guns every year the BATFE might want to question if I'm in the business of manufacturing firearms and could most likely right charge me.

[edit] Oops looks like Pa. Patriot already addressed this. Teaches me not to refresh before posting.[/edit]