I"m sorry, it is actually 9303308017

I don't see that one either.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-...ules/b/2015/c93.html

I think I may have the wrong number myself. From what I can see for a bolt-action rifle, value of over $50, I believe would be

9303.30.7017

Which is different than what you have, and different than what Ken Wilson shows on his instructions.

I'll try and get clarification on it. If anyone else has an ITN issued already please let us know what Schedule B number was used.

thanks

Is this procedure the same for shotguns?

Officially, travelers taking personal handguns or rifles abroad for personal or business purposes must register their intentions and claim any applicable exemptions through AES. Travelers then must take the resulting ITN and declared firearms to a CBP officer at the point of departure for inspection. The Census Bureau has a help line (1-800-549-0595) for travelers navigating AES, and real people are available to assist. We called the line and spoke to a representative promptly. He was courteous and was familiar with problems travelers are facing, although he could not resolve the problem with private travelers having to obtain an EIN through IRS to use the system. He also acknowledged that not all travelers will have ready access to a CBP office at their point of departure.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana1:
Is this procedure the same for shotguns ...

It appears that under 15 C.F.R. Section 740.14(e) there is a special exemption for shotguns, as long as the barrel is 18 inches or longer. See: http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/te...%3A2.1.3.4.25.0.1.14

Why exempt shotguns and not all long guns? Whats then rationale there?

Earlier in this thread someone posted that export to Canada was exempt from this procedure, has anyone found this stated in the regulation? I have not been able to fond it; I am going hunting in Alberta this fall and would like to know for sure.

Does anyone know the answer to the above question. I am headed for Canada this fall as well as Mexico. Africa next year but one pitfall at a time!!

quote:

Originally posted by Orvar:
Why exempt shotguns and not all long guns? Whats then rationale there?

ITAR....covers firearms with rifled barrels

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:
Earlier in this thread someone posted that export to Canada was exempt from this procedure, has anyone found this stated in the regulation? I have not been able to fond it; I am going hunting in Alberta this fall and would like to know for sure.

Canada is not exempt for rifles.

I just talked to a very nice customs agent (30 yrs. experience) in the Nashville office, and he told me they had just received a memo from Washington on Fri. 4/17.
They were told that there is to be no enforcement of AES/ITN requirement until further notice.
Michael Coppersmith also told me today that they are meeting with customs tomorrow.

quote:

They were told that there is to be no enforcement of AES/ITN requirement until further notice.

I pray to God you are right! What a hassle this has been.

quote:

Originally posted by Kebco:

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:
Earlier in this thread someone posted that export to Canada was exempt from this procedure, has anyone found this stated in the regulation? I have not been able to fond it; I am going hunting in Alberta this fall and would like to know for sure.

Canada is not exempt for rifles.

Thanks Ken.

Let's hope the SCI lobbying days are helpful. Unfortunately, I can't go this year due a conflict.

Here is the latest from SCI on this. Unfortunately, you cannot link through on this post, you will have to contact them or have the original email to do so:

"ANGERED BY THE NEW FIREARMS EXPORTATION REQUIREMENTS?
JOIN SCI IN DC TO LOBBY AGAINST THESE CHANGES

If you’ve read SCI’s alerts about the recent changes in the process for bringing your firearms with you to hunt out of the country, you know how burdensome these changes will be for the international hunter. Whether you are flying with your firearms to Africa, Canada, South America or Australia or elsewhere, these new requirements will pose problems for you. Now is the time to do something about it.

As an SCI member, you have the perfect opportunity to tell Congress why the new firearms exportation requirements don’t work for hunters. Join SCI members from around the country in our annual Lobby Day activities. Tell your elected representatives that the Departments of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection have burdened hunters with confusing, inconsistently implemented and illegal obligations for traveling with firearms out of the United States.

SCI needs your voice. Make the trip to Washington, DC on Thursday May 7, 2015 to attend SCI’s Lobby Day on Capitol Hill. SCI is in the process of scheduling hundreds of meetings with Congressional Offices in order to give you the opportunity to personally express your opposition to the excessive and unnecessary firearms exportation requirements.

To register for SCI’s Lobby Day, click HERE or use the link below. Once you’ve registered, a member of SCI’s staff will contact you with further details.

The administration has clearly decided that we are a group to be targeted with unnecessary regulatory burdens. You need to be with us on May 7th, 2015 to oppose this unfair treatment. If you cannot make it, we hope you can spread the message to others to attend on behalf of hunters everywhere. Let’s be sure to make SCI’s voice is heard in Washington, DC."

Latest from the NRA:

https://www.nraila.org/article...ernational-travelers

can anybody confirm this with some announcement from NRA SCI or CBP?

quote:

Originally posted by 450NE:
I just talked to a very nice customs agent (30 yrs. experience) in the Nashville office, and he told me they had just received a memo from Washington on Fri. 4/17.
They were told that there is to be no enforcement of AES/ITN requirement until further notice.
Michael Coppersmith also told me today that they are meeting with customs tomorrow.

quote:

Originally posted by 450NE:
I just talked to a very nice customs agent (30 yrs. experience) in the Nashville office, and he told me they had just received a memo from Washington on Fri. 4/17.
They were told that there is to be no enforcement of AES/ITN requirement until further notice.
Michael Coppersmith also told me today that they are meeting with customs tomorrow.

Hopefully...this is true...but after talking to some agents that said one thing and others that said something else and others that already quit issuing 4457's...I would not take the chance.

Coppersmith did my AES filing for me and recommended having it just in case.

I spoke to a CBP agent in Baton Rouge today and she said they are aware of the regs because they are getting a few calls, but they have not received anything that would allow them to implement it. I told her I had my ITN and so I need them to inspect my firearms before I leave. She asked if I had a 4457 for my firearms and she said that should suffice. So off I go Saturday.

Cheers,

Here is the phone # of the "big cheese" customs agency in Washington that issued the memo to the Nashville office. I was told it was issued to all customs offices.
202 - 325 - 1257
Mike

Well today was an interesting day, first time I've ever met a congressman. Got to work and the laptop I'm usually quite attached to through the day refused to let me login to my company network. So I was dead in the water till midday. So with nothing to do, I got on my iPad and was checking FB out. I had sometime ago "Liked" my Congressman Matt Salmon's FB page and so I get updates on my news feed. Turns out he is in town and was conducting meetings with his constituency by appt only. So I called to see if there were any open appt times and there in fact was still one for this afternoon.

So at about a 3:45 this afternoon there I was in my congressman's local office. Turns out he is a hunter and has a number of his own rifles. Not a lot of time to chat, but he caught onto the problem quite quickly. He said he would like to get things back to the way they were and is going to have one of his Washington staffers call me to discuss details further..........or at least that's what he told me, we'll see. Friendly enough gentleman and I do hope he was not just telling me what he thought I wanted to hear, time will tell.

So if you think your congressman would be sympathetic to the cause and makes time to occasionally meet with his constituency, I'd encourage you to make an effort to meet him/her. Let them know what's going on and let them know Rep. Matt Salmon is looking into this. If we get that snowball rolling, you never know what may happen.

Having written to both Arizona Senators and my congressman, I did get a response for some degree of follow up. Representative Schweikert asked that I contact his senior legislative aide, and here is what I sent tonight. Let's keep the ball in play, please.

Mr. White,

I sent an email to Representative Schweikert a couple of weeks ago, and he responded as you can see below. He has referred me to you, and I'm asking for your help or support in addressing this issue. I did try calling you today, but you were in a meeting and so I am resorting to email. Always prefer a person-to-person conversation on complex topics, but this will suffice I'm sure.

About a month ago the Administration announced it would start enforcing a section of export regulations that were published by executive order some 2 or 3 years ago. Why this is being implemented now is unclear. What is clear is that the government has created a series of requirements that the traveling hunters and shooters are unable to safely comply with on their own.

Rather than try and explain this at length, I have taken the liberty of attaching a link to an NRA communication. It does a pretty good job of explaining both the difficulty of complying with the law, the inability of the agents across the country to assure compliance, and the intransigence of the agencies in arriving at a workable solution. The bottom line is that hunters, shooters, and gun owners are being burdened for what appear to be political reasons. I am quite certain that international trafficking in small arms, which was the original focus of the regulation, has not been aided one whit by sporting men and women traveling with hunting rifles to offshore destinations. Why would anyone try and illegally transport and sell an expensive hunting firearm overseas when there is no shortage of available (and much cheaper!) fully automatic weapons in those places? There is no incentive, no market, and (I'm willing to bet) no history of such travelers aiding illegal arms sales in any way.

It's a solution in search of a problem, put in place by an executive order that was buried in the federal register, and is now about to be enforced inconsistently. And the risk to persons like my wife and myself - with 12 trips to Africa, 2 to New Zealand, 2 to Argentina, and 3 or 4 to Canada -is that we no longer have a way to safely navigate the requirements without risking being in non-compliance with some agency. And at present, it appears that agency will be the IRS if we do as has been suggested in meeting the requirements of Customs, the TSA and the Census Bureau. Yessir, it's a mess.

Thank you for your time, and I understand that Representative Salmon has been directly contacted by at least one other Arizonan on this same matter. I am at your service to answer any questions of help in any way I can.


https://www.nraila.org/article...ernational-travelers


signed, ME !

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Latest from the NRA:

https://www.nraila.org/article...ernational-travelers

Here is the "fact sheet" that was given to the participants at the meeting with the govt. Bureaucrats mentioned in the NRA ILA article:

https://huntforever.files.word...earms-fact-sheet.pdf

Nothing new.

FWIW, which is exactly nothing, regarding the issue of traveling with firearms, here's the response I received from Sen. John Cornyn's office. Complete idiots can't even match up the right form letter to a constituent's written concern.


Thank you for contacting me regarding recent actions by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE). I share your concerns and appreciate having the benefit of your comments on these important matters.

As you may know, Congress passed the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) in 1986 to protect law enforcement officers from “armor piercing” ammunition, but importantly exempted ammunition “primarily intended for sporting purposes,” to account for the fact that sporting rifle ammunition could potentially be fired from handguns. Unfortunately, on February 13, 2015, the BATFE proposed a framework that would attempt to ban the manufacture and importation of certain ammunition by changing the way it interprets the LEOPA “sporting purposes” exemption.

I believe the BATFE abused its authority by interpreting the meaning of “sporting purposes” under LEOPA in this way, and was proud to sign a letter to BATFE Director Todd Jones in opposition to this proposal. In response to our opposition, the BATFE has decided not to issue a final framework.

As a strong proponent of the Second Amendment, I believe it is essential to safeguard law-abiding citizens’ constitutional right to own and use firearms for lawful purposes. Restricting this right runs counter to the intent of our Founding Fathers, who expressly guaranteed that citizens would retain the right to keep and bear arms. Furthermore, as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has primary jurisdiction over the BATFE, I will continue working with my colleagues to provide oversight of this agency.

I appreciate the opportunity to represent Texans in the United States Senate, and you may be certain that I will continue working with my colleagues to protect our Second Amendment rights. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.


Sincerely,



JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator











517 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Tel: (202) 224-2934

Fax: (202) 228-2856

http://www.cornyn.senate.gov

At least to Sen. Cornyn's credit (?) there was some push-back on the AR15 ammo issue that actually accomplished some good. Probably because of the vast number of people who were affected by it. The universe of "international hunters" is much smaller. But, who knows? We might get lucky too.

Exactly David W!!!

I got the exact same letter this morning in regards to my e-mail about this matter.

It really pisses me off that they are that dismissing of the matter to just send out a form letter and one addressing the wrong subject at that!

I depart from Washington Dulles for Harare a week from today (29 April). I called the CBP office at Dulles airport this morning to confirm the process in effect for legally taking my firearms to Zimbabwe for my hunt. The agent told me they required only a stamped form 4457 for firearms. When I inquired about the new process, the CBP agent told me she knew about it, but it had not been implemented. She also said it appeared to be very complicated, few people understood it, and she did not know when in the future it would go into effect. I will submit a post hunt report to detail what actually happens when I check in at Dulles next week.

I returned from a New Zealand hunt on 04-13-15. Prior to leaving I created an account and shipment on AES Direct. Departure and return were through LAX. I was not asked to produce any documentation, not even the 4457 (which I also had). I had registered the firearms and ammo with Air NZ on their site before leaving, which they confirmed. Only mention of the new requirements was on my return. The CBP agent (at LAX) told me that I should be aware that "next time" there would be new requirement. I told him I had created a shipment but he did not ask to see any documents.

I went by the Raleigh, NC CBP office this afternoon and they are not issuing 4457's for firearms now. They were a week ago when I called. I told them I wanted a government form for the firearms so I could get my pre-approved gun permit in South Africa. They talked it over and signed a Form 4457 for me but wrote in on the top of the form "Not valid for re-export into the United States". I am using Coppersmith for my ITN.

Two days ago I got my Form 4457 from USCBP in Birmingham Alabama. I asked the officer what I need to do additionally prior to my departure in July. He said "You don't need to do anything more, we have entered the information in the system and you are good to go."

I dunno about you all but I get the feeling the government doesn't know what the f**k they are doing. I'm just glad Steve Turner at TWG is my travel agent.

Is there possibility that Feds only hire inept people that couldn't make it in real world?
They need Big Brother to take care of them?

Have I mentioned before that I am not scheduled to travel outside this Country with firearms this year? What a complete "cluster".

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member

I returned from an overseas hunt on April 21st through Atlanta. I was asked for my form 4457 just as in years past, produced it along with my passport, and was quickly and professionally cleared and allowed to proceed through customs. From my experience, nothing has changed from previous years. Not a guarantee of how you will be treated, just an actual real life experience.

I was aware of the new "interpretation" before I left, and purposefully choose NOT to obtain an ITN number, or do anything different than every other trip out of the country. And I saw no different treatment either leaving the country or returning. I don't intentionally try to give government officials a reason to hassle me, and they rarely do. The path of least resistance for most government workers will be chosen.

Good luck on your own adventures.

Bill

It looks like the US is fast catching up with Australia.

Where one would soon need a permit to go to the bloody toilet!

Appears this is dead. I am on a plane. will post the e mail I received as soon as I can.

Please see the attached press release regarding firearms and international hunts.

Apr 23 2015
Hoeven: U.S. Hunters No Longer Required to Register With IRS to Take Personal Firearms on International Hunts

Senator Secures CBP's Commitment to Return to Previous Travel Forms

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Hoeven, chairman of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, today announced that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will no longer require U.S hunters traveling internationally to obtain an IRS identification number in order to bring personal weapons on hunting trips outside the U.S. At a meeting early Wednesday with U.S. CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske, Hoeven secured a commitment from the agency to return to the paper process used by international hunters for years, while updates are made to the automated reporting system for exporting weapons. Kurlekowske said the agency’s web site would be updated later today.
“Hunters should not have to register as a business with the IRS in order to bring their weapons and ammunition on international hunting trips,” said Hoeven. “This is an unnecessary and burdensome requirement on law-abiding citizens. We appreciate that CBP has recognized this and will return to their original forms for international hunters, while they update their automated system to recognize the difference between a commercial exporter and a sportsman traveling on a hunting trip to Canada or another country.”
CBP recently began enforcing regulatory changes from 2012 requiring U.S. hunters to comply with commercial export requirements when transporting firearms outside the U.S. for personal use. Under these requirements, in order for a U.S. hunter to take personal weapons to another country temporarily, the individual would have to register the weapon in the Automated Export System (AES) and provide a transaction number to CBP.
The AES is designed for commercial exporters and requires all users to obtain an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the IRS in order to access the system. CBP has acknowledged that forcing hunters to obtain an EIN is not appropriate. Under the agreement reached this week, the agency will allow international hunters to use the original paper process while CBP works with the Department of State on an appropriate long-term solution.
http://www.hoeven.senate.gov/p...be-9c15-b5fb71a76999


Thanks,

Laura Evans
UNI_Hunters_Logo_3-Color.png

Ding, dong, the witch is dead.

Man, what a clusterf...

Woohooo!

Gentlemen all:

While I think this is great news, I don’t think this is any time to do any kind of victory dance. I seriously doubt this issue is going to be "dead”…perhaps in “hibernation” until “they” regroup and try again. Specifically, as the press release states, “while updates are made to the automated reporting system for exporting weapons”. This clearly tells me “they” are still intent on doing this and using this system in any format I believe they will still be in violation of 18 USC, 926, "Firearms Owners' Protection Act" that FTBT found and posted up on 16 Apr. THIS is where we need to start hammering them NEXT!

Para (a)(3) - “No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.”

While I don’t think ANY export permit should be required for personally owned non-automatic, sporting firearms, if “they” still believe there is some legitimate reason to make sure that sporting arms going out are actually coming back, what I have been recommending to the Congressmen and Senators I've been corresponding with and talking to on the phone is a simple paper process. The form would be the same size as the current 4457 so it would be easy to clip inside a passport just like a 4457. The form would have the travelers basic info, just name and passport number, firearm info (make, model, serial #), estimated departure/re-entry dates and estimated ports of exit and re-entry. I say "estimate" for dates and ports as it is not unusual for flights to change or get canceled, or for those driving across a boarder to change exit/entry points for any number of legitimate reasons. The form would have the date and time, name/initials and phone number of the US C&BP officer and stamped seal just like the 4457.

This form would be filled out at the same time as a 4457 is obtained or at anytime after the traveler has confirmed airline tickets for those flying or at the departure boarder control point for those driving to Canada or Mexico. The form could be carried by the traveler and a copy in the rifle case. Unlike a 4457 that is valid indefinitely, this form would only be valid for this single trip. Since no government agency would be saving/recording firearm info in violation of 18 USC above, this would be very simple solution.

Important - this "new form" SHOULD NOT REPLACE the current 4457 as it is used and has been used for DECADES by foreign countries for their issuance of a "Temporary Import Permit". Changing this form or process with them will create SERIOUS problems for them as well as the hunters entering their countries.

SCI Celebrates An Early Victory In the Fight Against Firearms Export Registration Requirements

The efforts of SCI, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the National Rifle Association and others met with success on April 23, 2015 when Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reversed their decision to implement changes to the procedural requirements for hunters and recreational shooters wishing to travel abroad with their firearms. At a budget hearing held before the House Committee on Appropriations, R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner of CBP, announced that the agency would temporarily return to the paper process used for years by international hunters and recreational shooters. In response to questions posed by members of the Committee, Mr. Kerlikowske explained that CBP would temporarily withdraw its requirement that hunters and shooters, who wish to take their firearms out of the country, register their firearms in the Automated Export System (AES). Mr. Kerlikowske informed the Appropriations Committee that CBP would be modifying its website later in the day to reflect this change in position. Please refer to this link for additional information about the hearing.

SCI will continue to pursue a long-term solution to this issue. Today’s decision provides only a temporary fix to a broader concern. The recently proposed (and just aborted) changes to the exportation of firearms comply with regulations, adopted in 2012, that require electronic registration. SCI is working with NSSF, NRA and others to propose revisions to these problematic rules.

Please continue to follow SCI communications for further developments on this issue.

RE: the link referenced.

Apr 23 2015
Hoeven: U.S. Hunters No Longer Required to Register With IRS to Take Personal Firearms on International Hunts
Senator Secures CBP's Commitment to Return to Previous Travel Forms

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Hoeven, chairman of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, today announced that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will no longer require U.S hunters traveling internationally to obtain an IRS identification number in order to bring personal weapons on hunting trips outside the U.S. At a meeting early Wednesday with U.S. CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske, Hoeven secured a commitment from the agency to return to the paper process used by international hunters for years, while updates are made to the automated reporting system for exporting weapons. Kurlekowske said the agency’s web site would be updated later today.

“Hunters should not have to register as a business with the IRS in order to bring their weapons and ammunition on international hunting trips,” said Hoeven. “This is an unnecessary and burdensome requirement on law-abiding citizens. We appreciate that CBP has recognized this and will return to their original forms for international hunters, while they update their automated system to recognize the difference between a commercial exporter and a sportsman traveling on a hunting trip to Canada or another country.”

CBP recently began enforcing regulatory changes from 2012 requiring U.S. hunters to comply with commercial export requirements when transporting firearms outside the U.S. for personal use. Under these requirements, in order for a U.S. hunter to take personal weapons to another country temporarily, the individual would have to register the weapon in the Automated Export System (AES) and provide a transaction number to CBP.

The AES is designed for commercial exporters and requires all users to obtain an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the IRS in order to access the system. CBP has acknowledged that forcing hunters to obtain an EIN is not appropriate. Under the agreement reached this week, the agency will allow international hunters to use the original paper process while CBP works with the Department of State on an appropriate long-term solution.

-###-