41P Update - November 2015

[midtennchip]

The holidays seem to be the preferred time for this Administration to issue new Federal Regulations.  So, this Friday will be the date that they issue many new Final Regs and Proposed Regs.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/23/obama-quietly-releases-plans-for-2224-regs-ahead-of-turkey-day/

 

So, what does that mean for 41P?  We really don't know (yet).  Nothing has changed on the ATF and DOJ website regarding its intent to publish something:

 

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201510&RIN=1140-AA43

 

The Agenda published by the Administration for this coming Friday also still has 41P on it, but there are no details (just a list of items to be published).  So I would anticipate some news about it then.  However, we will not know what (if anything) is "final" until it is actually published in the Federal Register.  There was a proposal voted on by the House (HR 2578) to effectively end 41P, but it appears that proposal never got to the Senate floor for a vote.  So, as of now, it is still in the hands of the Administration.

 

So, the most up-to-date information is to watch the Federal Register this coming Friday.

 

 

 

 

[TGO David]

Some info on what 41P is for those who might be curious:

 

http://www.nfafa.org/atf41p.cfm

 

"Most of the 41P options currently under consideration would RE-insert local CLEOs into the NFA approval process. Currently, there are CLEOs throughout the country who will not even consider certifying such forms; however, gun owners living in these jurisdictions have the option of creating trusts, LLCs, or other legal entities, in order to avoid having their forms disapproved by a CLEO who is either personally or politically opposed to the ownership of NFA items. If 41P is implemented, that option for bypassing the CLEO sign-off requirement will disappear.

 

Under 41P, many U.S. citizens who are currently able to purchase NFA items will have that right denied by biased, often politically motivated CLEOs. Even in jurisdictions where CLEOs do not automatically deny all NFA applications, the requirement that all NFA applications go through a CLEO will result in long delays � much longer than the months of delays that are already the norm � in the process of acquiring an NFA tax stamp."

[midtennchip]

Nothing was published today regarding 41P. Rumor has it that the action date is going to be backed up until at least January. However, in trying to confirm that this morning, it appears the ATF's page for 41P status is down. When the page is reposted, hopefully there will be more information available.

[bud]

. Edited January 6, 2016 by bud

[MemHeli]

Ive been meaning to file a new form 1 on Eform ever since you posted this on Monday, in hope of beating whatever new limits are about to be imposed. Just sat down to sign into Eforms and the "service is temporarily unavailable". Hope my procrastination doesn't bite me.
I appreciate any new info you may post.

 

Looks like you're still under the window.  I'm going to make use of these last few weeks of the year myself and put a couple more in the hopper.  

[bud]

.

Edited January 6, 2016 by bud

[midtennchip]

It has been a BUSY few weeks, so I am a bit behind on these updates. Many of you already know that the ATF has pushed to action date on 41P to January. However, most industry experts expect 41P to become effective in early 2016.

The Prince Law Firm in Pennsylvania is preparing to litigate the issue if 41P is implemented. They are looking for donations. Here's a link to their page:

http://firearmsindustryconsultinggroup.com/atf-41p/

To help, our firm will be donating $25 for every NFA Trust we draft through January 31st. If you already have a trust, I would suggest taking a look at the information on the link above and consider making a donation. While 41P will not take away many of the benefits of a trust, it will make filing a tax stamp application more difficult. Edited December 19, 2015 by midtennchip

[midtennchip]

As of 5:30 this afternoon, there is an updated report regarding Obama's upcoming executive actions that indicates 41P will be implemented. The report has no details on exactly what the Final Rule will look like, but it appears it will be substantially similar to the Proposed Rule. With this report, I would expect a Final Rule to be published by the end of January.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/2016/1/4/obama-confident-gun-executive-actions-are-entirely-consistent-with-second-amendment/2

I would think this is both good news and bad news:

1. Obviously, we would prefer 41P not be implemented at all; but
2. Since some Republican presidential candidates are already saying they will overturn the executive actions on guns, there is a better chance to have 41P withdrawn if a Republican is elected. Having 41P tied into other, more high-profile restrictions, can only help get it overturned. Edited January 5, 2016 by midtennchip

[Dustbuster]

If i can figure out a way to get that 500 million to simply tell inquiring minds they cant have info due to a flaw in the hipaa system, ill have it made!

this executive thang will work like a lead balloon at 5 feet... and to think people advise that office for money 

[FreedomGunCo]

https://www.atf.gov/file/100896/download

[Dolomite_supafly]

Just got word from an industry partner that it appears the CLEO signoff requirement of 41p is going away.

[Lumber_Jack]

Yes in the big screwing their appears to be a courtesy reach-around.


Everything is seen says the same. All "responsible parties" have to have NICS, fingerprints, and photos. The CLEO will be a notification process.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I wonder how many people are going to be hassled when their CLEO is told about a pending NFA transfer. I know my current CLEO is against NFA, and guns in general, in the hands of citizens. Last time he was in office it took the attorney general to get him to realize he MUST sign. I know for a FACT my current sheriff has ZERO problems sending officers to people's houses to "fish".

 

Also, who is notifying CLEO of a pending transfer/build? Would it require documentation that the CLEO has been notified? I can see it being used to screw us if it requires the CLEO to sign something acknowledging they have been notified. Also, what happens if you notify then later the sheriff claims you did not?

 

We shall see how things work as I plan on waiting until 41p goes into effect to see what the process is.

[JohnC]

It's going to be interesting to see how this notification plays out. Like Dolo, I can see this as potentially another way to harass and keep folks from getting their NFA weapons via a hostile to NFA/2A CLEO. Perhaps they did this to get around all the "shall sign" legislation? Can he refuse to show proof he has been notified?

[Hozzie]

I don't really need another suppressor or sbr, but what the hell, I guess I will order one of each before this takes effect just as a middle finger to these updates.  I have and would still get a trust for the overall benefit, but screw getting permission or notifying a CLEO.  

[Lumber_Jack]

So I read " responsible parties" are those who have power to transfer to, or change the trust, so not all beneficiaries. For me that would only be me and my wife. Still a hassle.

Probably have until June/July depending on when it gets published. 180 days after that

[BBdown]

So out of 9,500 comments 13 were in support.  F*&%ing BS!!  For the people by the people.

 

IV. Analysis of Comments and Department Responses for Proposed Rule ATF 41P

In response to the proposed rule, ATF received over 9,500 comments. 

Several commenters supported the entire proposed rule, while the majority opposed the entireproposedrule. 

A. Comments Supporting the Rule

1. General Support for the Entire Rule

Comments Received

More than a dozen commenters stated that they supported the proposed rule in its entirety. 

[Lumber_Jack]

Here is a good summary as we know it today.  Things are obvioulsy open to change and interpretation.

 

 

Everything You Need To Know About ATF Rule 41F

[BBdown]

Sounds like the several hundred thousands of us NFA owners are a real mischievous bunch:  "A review of trace data and criminal records from 2006 to 2014 disclosed twelve incidents in which owners of NFA firearms were convicted of crimes; however, there is no evidence that these crimes were committed with NFA firearms." 

Pretty sure Fast and Furious guns are responsible for more crime. Just sayin'

[midtennchip]

Here is a good summary as we know it today.  Things are obvioulsy open to change and interpretation.

 

 

Everything You Need To Know About ATF Rule 41F

 

Generally, this is a decent review of 41F.  However, I have read several summaries from some pretty good lawyers and, after my full morning of reviewing 41F, I think there's more to the Beneficiary issue than most are explaining.

 

First, to figure out who is a Responsible Person, you HAVE to look at the provisions of the Trust.  Trustees and Settlors/Grantors are automatically Responsible Persons under the Rule.  However, Beneficiaries may be Responsible Persons, as well.   The key is whether the Beneficiaries have any powers in the Trust.  Most of the basic NFA Trusts I have seen do not give Beneficiaries powers that would make them Responsible Persons.  However, many of the "dynasty trusts" or "perpetual trusts" do give the Beneficiaries enough power to make them Responsible Persons.  To know for sure, you would need to look at the powers granted in the Trust itself.

 

Second, even with the Responsible Persons form that will be required, it appears that the requirement only applies to Responsible Persons who are involved with the Trust at the time the Form 1 or Form 4 is filed.  Pages 208 - 209 of the Final Rule indicate that the ATF will not review Responsible Persons who are added after the tax stamp is approved.

 

Third, I think the "effective date" issue is a bit more gray than this particular attorney suggests.  The Final Rule does say the Rule will not be retroactively applied.  But, it does not say that applications filed before the effective date are grandfathered.   What it says is that applications that are in "pending status" before the effective date will be grandfathered.  So, I would suggest not waiting until July to file a Form 1 or Form 4.  I would want to get it in a least a couple of weeks (or more) early to make sure it gets to "pending status" (not just postmarked) before the effective date.

[LawEnforcementSalesTN]

Looks like they're doing away with some of the CLEO nomenclature but there will still be some kind of CLEO involvement.  I don't think it's a mere sending a copy for their records like we do on a multi handgun sale.  Wording suggest a CLEO would have to confirm the prints and photos are of the individual they're associated with and possibly the CLEO doing a background check.  The doc (below) state CLEO will be responsible for some certification which I'm assuming equates still to a face to face visit of some portion.

 

Read thru pages 13-19, somewhere around there

 

 

https://www.atf.gov/file/100896/download

[Lumber_Jack]

Generally, this is a decent review of 41F.  However, I have read several summaries from some pretty good lawyers and, after my full morning of reviewing 41F, I think there's more to the Beneficiary issue than most are explaining.

 

First, to figure out who is a Responsible Person, you HAVE to look at the provisions of the Trust.  Trustees and Settlors/Grantors are automatically Responsible Persons under the Rule.  However, Beneficiaries may be Responsible Persons, as well.   The key is whether the Beneficiaries have any powers in the Trust.  Most of the basic NFA Trusts I have seen do not give Beneficiaries powers that would make them Responsible Persons.  However, many of the "dynasty trusts" or "perpetual trusts" do give the Beneficiaries enough power to make them Responsible Persons.  To know for sure, you would need to look at the powers granted in the Trust itself.

 

Second, even with the Responsible Persons form that will be required, it appears that the requirement only applies to Responsible Persons who are involved with the Trust at the time the Form 1 or Form 4 is filed.  Pages 208 - 209 of the Final Rule indicate that the ATF will not review Responsible Persons who are added after the tax stamp is approved.

 

Third, I think the "effective date" issue is a bit more gray than this particular attorney suggests.  The Final Rule does say the Rule will not be retroactively applied.  But, it does not say that applications filed before the effective date are grandfathered.   What it says is that applications that are in "pending status" before the effective date will be grandfathered.  So, I would suggest not waiting until July to file a Form 1 or Form 4.  I would want to get it in a least a couple of weeks (or more) early to make sure it gets to "pending status" (not just postmarked) before the effective date.

 

 

Thanks for reviewing that.  Someone was referencing the bottom of page 19 of the Final Rule and wondering if that was mentioning CLEO signing or was that part of the new "notification" process

[midtennchip]

Looks like they're doing away with some of the CLEO nomenclature but there will still be some kind of CLEO involvement.  I don't think it's a mere sending a copy for their records like we do on a multi handgun sale.  Wording suggest a CLEO would have to confirm the prints and photos are of the individual they're associated with and possibly the CLEO doing a background check.  The doc (below) state CLEO will be responsible for some certification which I'm assuming equates still to a face to face visit of some portion.

 

Read thru pages 13-19, somewhere around there

 

 

https://www.atf.gov/file/100896/download

That section (and the specific wording is at the bottom of Page 19) is talking about the Proposed Rule.  The Final Rule changed what was originally proposed for CLEO signatures.  If you start looking at Page 25, you can see the ATF's analysis of the Proposed Rule and the responses they received to the Proposed Rule.  Page 32, under the Department's Response, it is clear that the ATF is changing from the proposed CLEO certification to a CLEO notice.

 

Yes, if you don't read federal rule making documents often, they can be hard to follow, particularly when they are 248 pages long.

[LawEnforcementSalesTN]

Ha and I don't read from start to end either - always gets me ;o) ... appreciate your professional analysis of it Chip! Stuff is complicated even when you do understand it!

[JohnC]

Another read: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/01/foghorn/breaking-atf-issues-final-ruling-on-nfa-trusts-requires-fingerprints-but-eliminates-cleo-sign-off/