Pistol Brace Info

[WebSnyper]

^^ This.

And then that Glock for example, is NFA forever after once registered, correct?

 

[Aszerigan]

And then that Glock for example, is NFA forever after once registered, correct?

 

[Jont22]

So, just for additional informtion - I've done four of the tax free forms in the past day for someone. They are not asking for photos of the firearms at the time of submission (although there is a caveat that they can ask for them in the future as needed). It's also requiring two fingerprint cards, not one as they stated in the informational interview.

It's a very quick process and exactly like a standard form 1 minus the pay.gov window.

I did 2 forms today...I included the eft with the submissions, but still received the cover letter via email requiring 2 fingerprint cards to be mailed within 10 days. Should I just ignore this?

 

[Aszerigan]

I did 2 forms today...I included the eft with the submissions, but still received the cover letter via email requiring 2 fingerprint cards to be mailed within 10 days. Should I just ignore this?

Yes. You can ignore the cover letter if you digitally uploaded your prints.

 

[12many]

Is there gun shop or company that can help me with the form1? I did the form 4 for a suppressor but the shop helped me with all the steps, I just don't want to screw up the forms. Fort Wayne area. Thanks

I just picked up a shotgun I won at a raffle in Ft Wayne.

Picked it up at a place called Bell Armor, 2400 Meyer Rd In the New Haven area of Ft Wayne. (260) 421-3305. They are a Class III dealer as far as I could tell, but they don't actually have a shop.

My 4473 experience was seamless and nice guys, if they can't help they might be able to point you in the right direction

just sayin'

 

[Amishman44]

MICRO CONVERSION KIT

www.micro-roni.com

So, an MCK 'brace' would be considered as part of the rule change as well???
(I figured they were, but am just clarifying!)

Also, I heard that if one took off the brace and changed the buffer tube to be 'not able' to reattach the brace to the pistol, that one would still be okay with the pistol...just minus the brace, as it's the 'brace' that is being addressed, not ownership of the pistol itself?

I also heard that if one swapped the pistol barrel to one that is rifle length (aka, OAL of 16" (or longer) and then installed a rifle stock, than would also be considered a correct 'adjustment' for a brace on a AR pistol?

Are both or either of these two options correct...asking for a friend!

 

[Amishman44]

A braced lower with a 16" upper would be considered non NFA and in compliance. Same as a rifle.

So...one could simply change the upper to a 16" OAL barrel and the use of a 'brace' (in place of a rifle 'stock') would be considered legal???

 

[ed1838]

So, an MCK 'brace' would be considered as part of the rule change as well???
(I figured they were, but am just clarifying!)

Also, I heard that if one took off the brace and changed the buffer tube to be 'not able' to reattach the brace to the pistol, that one would still be okay with the pistol...just minus the brace, as it's the 'brace' that is being addressed, not ownership of the pistol itself?

I also heard that if one swapped the pistol barrel to one that is rifle length (aka, OAL of 16" (or longer) and then installed a rifle stock, than would also be considered a correct 'adjustment' for a brace on a AR pistol?

Are both or either of these two options correct...asking for a friend!

That is how I understand it

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

So...one could simply change the upper to a 16" OAL barrel and the use of a 'brace' (in place of a rifle 'stock') would be considered legal???

Yes

 

[ed1838]

So...one could simply change the upper to a 16" OAL barrel and the use of a 'brace' (in place of a rifle 'stock') would be considered legal???

Yep seems that way as I understand it.

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

 

[Amishman44]

My understanding is for an AR, you have to install one of the foam-covered tubes to bring it up to compliance.

I picked-up a few of those on Friday...they looked pretty cool and for $16.99 each, I thought mebbe having a few of those around might come in handy someday...who knows???

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

And then that Glock for example, is NFA forever after once registered, correct?

They're easy to remove from the NFA registry. You write a letter saying your Glock has been separated from the mck, Flux, etc and is no longer in an NFA configuration and needs to be removed from the registry.

That's it. You no longer have a registered SBR.

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

My understanding is for an AR, you have to install one of the foam covered tubes to bring it up to compliance.

Really? First I've heard of this. Where in the new rule and/or FAQ did you see that?

 

[r3126]

I posted this in the Break Room last night but thought it might get wider notice if I posted here, Mods, forgive me if I have inadvertently violated a rule - my heart is in the right place.

No! Tyler didn't say that. I did. I can screw up a wet dream! Anyway.....

Here it is.

I have two guns that fell victim to the ATF ruling on armrests. I logged on to the site and started the application process....FRUSTRATION! As background, I am an older gentleman with little to no technical skills and get rather frustrated when I attempt anything requiring knowledge/skills on the internet. Long story short, I spent several hours getting my eForm started and finally (almost) gave up. Enter ASZERIGAN's posts offering help. I started a conversation at about 8PM and after several back and forth, just called him. After a short conversation, he offered to file for me via our telephone conversation. 17 minutes later (he promised 15 minutes) I had two forms successfully filed.

I cannot say enough regarding how easy he made the process and the professional manner with which he dealt with me (a rank amateur). I want to publicly thank him and to convey to those of you who read this what a fine gentleman he is.

I am sure that there are those of you who might disagree with my decision to file. To each his own.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Really? First I've heard of this. Where in the new rule and/or FAQ did you see that?

Discussed back at post 29

 

[Slow Hand]

And then that Glock for example, is NFA forever after once registered, correct?

You can remove an item from the NFA logs if you convert it to non nfa status. Basically you send them a letter telling them what you are doing, generally adding a 16“+ barrel to it. With the standard way, you are wasting 200 bucks but with the ‘free’ F1, you’re not out anything.

And, I’m a plumber, not a lawyer, so take this free advice for what it’s worth…

 

[Slow Hand]

Not trying to stir up the pot even more. But was any mention being made of the ‘brace mount’ for lack of better term being ‘necessary for operation of the firearm’? IE, you have to have a buffer tube/receiver extension for a standard AR style to work. It’s not needed on say an AK style. Would it still be legal to put a buffer tube on an AK pistol? It doesn’t really affect my current situation just curious.

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

Discussed back at post 29

Ok but where in the ATF's new rule or FAQ does it say "you have to install one of the foam covered tubes to bring it up to compliance."?

 

[tackdriver]

So the way I read this is that you wouldn't even have to be in possession of a brace. All you need to do is submit the lower as the NFA item and then you could attach any stock to it (brace or otherwise) and have an SBR.

Am I reading that correctly?

Unfortutunately, they were very aware that people would do this, and closed that loophole. If you search the Rule for the words "tax-exemption", you'll see where they even discuss how to go after anyone who does this.

Most important - I went to the eForm ATF website to learn about eFile Form 1, and encountered this language at the very beginning of the process:

"Pursuant to [Final Rule], the Attorney General has authorized certain persons tax-exempt registration of firearms they own or possess at the publication of the rule that are: 1) equipped with a stabilizing brace; 2) meet the definition of "rifle" under federal law; and 3) have a barrel or barrels less than sixteen (16) inches in length.

By proceeding with this application, you are certifying that you and the firearm you intend to register meet the tax-exempt parameters set forth in ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F."

I think "certifying" is a legal term that has the effect of swearing under oath, like in an affidavit. You must swear you already possess an unregistered SBR. Not pistol and a brace - an SBR.

In the rule itself, there's the language: "Individuals, ... will not be subject to the $200 making tax
for SBR’s in their possession as of January 31, 2023, so long as they timely submit an E-Form 1 by May 31, 2023"

So...either you swear you're committing a felony; or, you claim you never really had a brace, and committed pergury.

I don't think they can know whether or not you "got a brace from your neighbor" before the rule or not (assuming you don't purchase online or with a CC). One could probably easily slip it through. Just be aware of the language, and that - if you somehow wound up in the crosshairs - proceeding as you suggest doesn't fall in-bounds.

I'm not a lawyer, or know all the details, but hope this is helpful.