ATF Just Released Their Brace Ruling

[John_Wick]

My question still is; can you register imported pistols? To my understanding the ATF declared that imported pistols are not covered under 922. However, if made into a rifle they would be non 922 compliant. So, can someone SBR/apply for a tax stamp imported pistols legally in other words without violating 922?

If the imported parts exceed the number of allowable parts in order for it to be a legal rifle under 922(r) you can't, legally, register it as an SBR. It can still live life as a pistol though. The ATF says otherwise as they claim the gun was always a rifle because it had a brace blah blah. Nonetheless, the criminal act is in the making of the gun, not possession of the gun and who is to say that brace ever existed? Also, I think there have only been 1 or 2 cases of 922(r) even being enforced so there's that.

Is it ethical or unethical for dealers to be selling braced pistols without a notice in the advertisement that as of now the ATF requires you register it as a SBR if you buy one?

Example. https://gunprime.com/products/novesk...eske9-02000829

Unethical and ATF will probably come knocking on their door if they're selling them as pistols w/ the brace.

From my understanding, as of the date of publish to the federal register, those firearms must be sold under a form 4. It's to late. The amnesty period is for anyone that has them to form 1 them, but it became illegal to commercially sell them when it was published.

Correct.

That's a good question. I was under the impression that it's not technically effective until 120 days has passed, but IANAL

They're not enforcing SBR possession on these until the 120 days is up, but the restrictions on transfers went into effect on 1/31 (date of publication in Federal Register).

To transfer an affected firearm after the date this rule is published, it must be
registered in the NFRTR and the government entity must submit and receive approval on
an Application for Tax Exempt Transfer and Registration of Firearms, ATF Form 5;
otherwise, the transfer is a violation of the NFA. See 26 U.S.C. 5861(e).

[knight0334]

The ATF are domestic terrorists and I don't negotiate with terrorists. I'm sure some admins of this forum are in a circle jerk with each other while screeching "i ToLd ThEm ThEiR rIgHtS aRe,Nt AbSoLuTe".

Your trial membership is about to expire.

Mind what you say about other people here at PAFOA.

[ray h]

If they call it an amnesty then they are already saying those with said firearms are already breaking the law. A forbearance is giving someone more time to comply.

Ahhhh no, not really.
A forebearance is a temporary postponement of a tax payment.
My point is, they are referring to this as a temporary postponement, which, as far as I understand English means they are just postponing your $200 tax payment. Are they going to want their $200 after the 120 days? Forebearances are usually expected to be repaid.
Forebearance is not my word, it's theirs.

[Ilikebuckets]

Ahhhh no, not really.
A forebearance is a temporary postponement of a tax payment.
My point is, they are referring to this as a temporary postponement, which, as far as I understand English means they are just postponing your $200 tax payment. Are they going to want their $200 after the 120 days?
Forebearance is not my word, it's theirs.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forbearance
It also means: refraining from the enforcement of something (such as a debt, right, or obligation) that is due

And also means the quality of being forbearing : LENIENCY
known * for her forbearance with her incorrigible husband

Not trying to stick up for the ATF but it does have a couple of less sinister definitions than your example including the definition of refraining from enforcement.

[ray h]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forbearance
It also means: refraining from the enforcement of something (such as a debt, right, or obligation) that is due

And also means the quality of being forbearing : LENIENCY
known * for her forbearance with her incorrigible husband

Not trying to stick up for the ATF but it does have a couple of less sinister definitions than your example including the definition of refraining from enforcement.

In the context of "tax forebearance".
Anyway, we all know the reason they aren't enforcing the tax now is because they know the courts will slap them around and they don't want to have to pay millions of people $200 back. So just suppose the court doesn't slap it down? Attorneys wrote this rule, they had a dozen words to choose from that best describes what is happening, they chose "forebearance" to best fit the situation.
Don't say the ATF wouldn't dare do that to people, these are the same people who have knowingly side stepped the constitution and the law.
Also, keep in mind they are maintaining a separate data base for all of those who took advantage of the forebearance, if an SBR is an SBR is an SBR, why are they keeping it separate.

[eagleclaw]

If the imported parts exceed the number of allowable parts in order for it to be a legal rifle under 922(r) you can't, legally, register it as an SBR. It can still live life as a pistol though. The ATF says otherwise as they claim the gun was always a rifle because it had a brace blah blah. Nonetheless, the criminal act is in the making of the gun, not possession of the gun and who is to say that brace ever existed? Also, I think there have only been 1 or 2 cases of 922(r) even being enforced so there's that.

Apparently you missed post # 825. acording to the ATF FAQ:

9. I POSSESS A PISTOL, WHICH WAS IMPORTED AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY EQUIPPED WITH A STABILIZING BRACE. DOES 18 U.S.C. § 922(R) APPLY TO MY FIREARM?

* No. Section 922(r), in relevant part, makes it unlawful to assemble from imported parts a semiautomatic rifle that is otherwise not importable. The implementing regulations of the GCA at 27 CFR 478.39 provides that a person may not assemble a semiautomatic rifle using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in the relevant paragraphs of the regulation. As discussed in section IV.B.8.e of the final rule, the criminal violation under section 922(r) is for the *assembly* of the semiautomatic rifle; therefore, no modification of such firearm would cure the 922(r) violation because the *assembly* has already occurred. Accordingly, a person with an imported pistol that was subsequently equipped with a *stabilizing brace* will have the same options as anyone else under the final rule. Should that person choose to register the firearm, no further modification of the firearm with domestic parts is required.

Unless I'm reading this wrong they are allowing imported pistols that came with a SB brace to be registered. Mine never came with a SB brace.

[John_Wick]

Ahhhh no, not really.
A forebearance is a temporary postponement of a tax payment.
My point is, they are referring to this as a temporary postponement, which, as far as I understand English means they are just postponing your $200 tax payment. Are they going to want their $200 after the 120 days? Forebearances are usually expected to be repaid.
Forebearance is not my word, it's theirs.

Maybe, but it doesn't read that way.

Because the E-Form 2, as noted above, does not require an accompanying NFA tax payment, ATF will not collect any taxes for registration of these weapons.

[John_Wick]

Apparently you missed post # 825. acording to the ATF FAQ:


Unless I'm reading this wrong they are allowing imported pistols that came with a SB brace to be registered. Mine never came with a SB brace.

I did miss that, but it actually reads the opposite: "a person with an imported pistol that was subsequently equipped with a *stabilizing brace*". If it came as a pistol and the brace was added later, they are considering it a pistol. Regardless, the takeaway is that it seems owners can SBR them if they so choose, which is a turnaround from the ATF's previous statement in which they instructed people to destroy or surrender them. Haha!

[GOYABEAN]

[WoollyPullover]

I did miss that, but it actually reads the opposite: "a person with an imported pistol that was subsequently equipped with a *stabilizing brace*". If it came as a pistol and the brace was added later, they are considering it a pistol. Regardless, the takeaway is that it seems owners can SBR them if they so choose, which is a turnaround from the ATF's previous statement in which they instructed people to destroy or surrender them. Haha!

https://thereload.com/atf-says-impor...hed-next-week/

I'm not sure what went into the published rule but they claimed that imports would be kosher. I trust the ATF won't turn around and change their mind at a later date, retroactively making millions into criminals.