Does modifying to an SBR require engraving name?

[Bang]

Someone asked me if shortening a carbine to an SBR requires that he engrave his name on the receiver (as the manufacturer). I presume this refers to the new ATF rule that is last I knew still unsettled. I told him it still has the serial number and the law is not yet clear and hold off on that engraving until I can learn more. So, please help? Thanx. (He hasn't done it yet, he is still waiting on the paper work).

According to an article (January, 2016 Truth About Guns):

This is exactly what the ATF told me. As always, I am not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice, so if you are concerned feel free to contact one before taking any actions.

It seems like short barreled rifles are all the rage these days. Ever since the advent of the gun trust and ATF’s eForms it has never been easier to register your firearm as an NFA device and chop down the barrel as low as it can go. There’s just one problem: the marking requirement. Ask three people whether you need to engrave your information on your newly registered NFA device and you’ll get three different answers. In an effort to sort out the confusion I asked the ATF directly, and their response actually made perfect sense . . .



Let’s start at the beginning.

Any time a firearm is manufactured with the intent of sale in interstate commerce, the ATF requires that it be marked with the name and location of the manufacturer as well as a serial number. Those individuals who manufacture 80% lower receivers into finished firearms may be familiar with this specific wrinkle, since their guns don’t require any markings until the moment they decide to try to sell them.

When it comes to making a short barreled rifle from an existing firearm (like an AR-15 lower you bought complete), things get a little murkier. The manufacturer’s information is already stamped on the side of the gun. That original stamping satisfies the ATF’s requirements for the Title I firearm, but what about when the firearm transitions to a Title II weapon and becomes an NFA device?

According to the ATF, the process of creating an NFA device (even if it only means adding a stock to the gun) constitutes “remanufacturing” the firearm. As such you (the person who filed the Form 1) become the manufacturer of the NFA device. In theory this means that the firearm needs your information (name and location) marked on it as well, but according to the ATF that might not be the case.

HuntingRifle2-900x601

If you manufacture a NFA device from an existing firearm, according to the ATF you DO NOT need to immediately engrave your information into the firearm. Much like how firearms manufactured from a 80% lower receiver don’t require engraving upon completion, the ATF believes that the mere act of manufacture of an exiting NFA device doesn’t require additional engraving. The existing serial number is sufficient for identification.

So, when do you need to engrave your Form 1’ed SBR? The answer: when you intend to sell it. Engraving requirements apply to firearms that are intended for sale in interstate commerce, so when you go to sell your gun you’re going to need to have it engraved.

An interesting wrinkle is that this applies even if you have removed the NFA device from the registry. According to the ATF the moment the firearm is returned to a Title I state (a rifle with a 16-inch barrel, for example) the gun is no longer a registered NFA device, but the registration record remains in their database. To have it removed you need to send them a letter notifying them of the disposition of the firearm and they will send a response in about…4 to 6 months. Even if your SBR has been removed from the registry AND you already have the letter in hand, the fact that it was remanufactured as an SBR at some point means your information needs to be on it.

In short, if you don’t intend to sell your firearm after turning it into an NFA device you don’t need to engrave it. But if you ever sell it later (even after removing it from the registry) you will need to have it engraved.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _______________________

^^^Does this still stand? Does anyone know just what "location" requires? Would a city and state suffice? Must it include an actual address? Zip Code?

[esh21167]

I'm no lawyer either, but pretty sure if you use a trust or LLC as the NFA item manufacturer, you need to engrave, but not for an individual.

[USMC3531]

Why wouldnt you engrave it? if you die on the way to the range and its not engraved couldnt that cause trouble with transfer to beneficiaries?

[esh21167]

Why wouldnt you engrave it? if you die on the way to the range and its not engraved couldnt that cause trouble with transfer to beneficiaries?

Have your Form 1 with the item at all times. Not that engraving is a bad idea, I don't think ATF requires it for an individual that manufactures and NFA item.

[JoshIronshaft]

Luckily there are some trophy shops in the Pittsburgh area that do good work for $20-$30 so I don't even question if it is a true requirement or not. I have heard the debate though.

[NathanB]

I'll let someone else be the test case. I'll spend the 30 bucks to get it engraved while I wait for my stamps.

[USMC3531]

oh i carry copys with mine, I just dont see the reason not to engrave. not engraving an 80% ok so there would be some anonymity buy a registered "restricted" item I just dont see why you would risk harassment.

[GunLawyer001]

Is this thread some kind of spoof?

[ExFlyinguy]

I'm not a lawyer nor am I a SOT dealer so take this for what it's worth.

Yes he must engrave - Name, City & State on the SBR. Typically the serial number is already there from the existing firearm.

I would believe this thread before anything I read on TTAG: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=19708

Seems to me they published a few recent articles that were just plain hogwash.

[Bang]

Just talked with him again. I asked if he had anything against getting it engraved and he said not really, so I guess I had misread him and this spoof was not needed. Thanks folks. I especially liked the one about not being the test case.