Results 11 to 20 of 20
Thread: SBR Question
-
November 17th, 2019, 07:42 PM #11Grand Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
- Location
-
Berks County,
Pennsylvania
(Berks County) - Posts
- 3,334
- Rep Power
- 21474851
Re: SBR Question
-
November 17th, 2019, 07:50 PM #12Grand Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
- Location
-
Moscow,
Pennsylvania
(Lackawanna County) - Posts
- 4,029
- Rep Power
- 21474853
-
November 17th, 2019, 08:18 PM #13
Re: SBR Question
Beware of people who sell trusts, telling you that the smart move is to have trusts.
People who sell aluminum siding will tell you that in their expert opinion, EVERYBODY should have aluminum siding.
The truth is, I've never heard of any non-prohibited spouse or family member ever being prosecuted for using an NFA firearm that was in the family home of the registrant, in an emergency. Sure, even after 85 years of the 1934 NFA, it's possible for the first person to be prosecuted, but there's a doctrine of necessity, that says that if you have to save your life, you will be excused the breaking of lesser laws.
What gets folks in trouble is when PROHIBITED persons use guns (NFA or other) to defend themselves. In that case, it's not about an unlawful transfer, it's about that person having access all the time, which the popo only find out about when he smokes a bad guy with it.
Trusts are a layer of extra complication after you die. They don't even save you any money (not much, anyway), because you can leave your NFA toys to someone in a will and they transfer tax-free; the only difference is whatever inheritance tax may apply to your $200 silencer or $10K machinegun, and for spouses in PA, the tax rate is 0%.
It's simply not true that everyone benefits from having an NFA trust. It wasn't even true before ATF eliminated the CLEO signature requirement, so for damned sure it's not true now that we don't have to go begging for permission from the local satrap.
Can a trust be useful? Sure, for a minority of NFA owners. But for most, your family will never want to take your toys to the range without you, and when you die, your heirs will want to sell your gear and divvy up the proceeds. I've handled a bunch of estates, that's just the truth. If you die and your expensive toys are in a trust naming your brother and cousin and your buddy from work, you've left them with an ugly situation, for which they won't thank you.Attorney Phil Kline, AKA gunlawyer001@gmail.com
Ce sac n'est pas un jouet.
-
November 17th, 2019, 08:20 PM #14
-
November 17th, 2019, 08:24 PM #15
-
November 17th, 2019, 09:51 PM #16
-
November 17th, 2019, 10:07 PM #17
-
November 18th, 2019, 12:21 AM #18
Re: SBR Question
Attorney Phil Kline, AKA gunlawyer001@gmail.com
Ce sac n'est pas un jouet.
-
November 18th, 2019, 07:00 AM #19
-
November 18th, 2019, 09:55 AM #20
Re: SBR Question
Not enough info to discern the question or the facts, but whatever percentage of the S corp that you own, will become property of your estate, and whatever that S corp owns goes along with it (sort of). If you own 100%, then your estate owns the entity, and your executor has to deal with the S corp as an entity/asset owned by the estate; it's subject to the claims of creditors first.
If you registered your NFA in the S corp, then you can't bequeath the NFA stuff to your son, because the S corp didn't die, the owner of the S corp did. You could leave him the S corp and the right to possess the toys, but that's mostly invisible to ATF until he tries to buy more toys or transfer out the existing ones. And the majority of heirs (yours may be different) would need to hire a lawyer to figure out the rules.
If anyone else owns a piece of the S corp, then it's different.
It's not obvious, how NFA rules work, and most heirs (and most non-gun lawyers) haven't a clue. Plenty of MG's and silencers are found in estates and the horrified next of kin, administrators, or estate lawyers quietly dumpster them or drop them off a bridge, because they have no clue what a stamped Form 4 is. Even lawyers just assume that it's all contraband.
I read once that something like 90% of the guns originally registered after the 1934 act are still registered with the original registrants. Do the math; if you were 21 in 1934, you're 106 now, and probably not getting out to the range that often. The truth is that most of those are either destroyed, deep-sixed, or possessed by family members who think vaguely that "It's OK, great-grandpa paid a tax for these, so I can keep them."Attorney Phil Kline, AKA gunlawyer001@gmail.com
Ce sac n'est pas un jouet.
Similar Threads
-
Question on 4473 and question 11c, am I prohibited?
By SynthExe in forum GeneralReplies: 7Last Post: March 26th, 2018, 07:39 PM -
Question about PICS form question 11.C
By Corsair19955 in forum GeneralReplies: 20Last Post: March 21st, 2018, 06:36 PM -
Question
By shawn021614 in forum PistolsReplies: 28Last Post: October 2nd, 2017, 02:09 PM -
Question about ACT 235??
By dab86 in forum GeneralReplies: 19Last Post: May 21st, 2012, 10:21 PM -
AK 74 mag question
By glockmaster in forum GeneralReplies: 4Last Post: December 24th, 2011, 02:04 AM
Bookmarks