Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
One of Us |
I hold a manufacturing FFL with the BATF and during a compliance inspection I was told that I had to register with the State Dept. and pay a $2250 fee to get a license from them. I called the State Dept. and explained to them that I was a custom gunsmith that only made 2 or 3 rifles a year and did no import/export and did I still need this license. I was told by the State Dept. that I did need to purchase this license. So, guess I will be changing my FFL to a dealer FFL and no longer a manufacturer. Seems like they just continue to drive business underground. Anybody else having this issue? "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". | ||
|
One of Us |
To just build a rifle, under certain conditions, you do not need a manufacturers licens. It gets complicated but if you ask ATF what is considered mfg, they have a letter out explaining it. Pm also sent Jim Kobe 10841 Oxborough Ave So Bloomington MN 55437 952.884.6031 Professional member American Custom Gunmakers Guild | |||
|
one of us |
Most of us converted long ago. There was a time when ATF was requiring gunsmiths to get manufacturer licenses if they were new applicants. I didn't argue with the ATF as I wanted my license but just as quickly applied for an 01 afterward. I didn't want to deal with the state dept hassles either especially since I didn't MANUFACTURE anything. Aut vincere aut mori | |||
|
One of Us |
Jim, I was told that ANY mfg. required a State Dept. license. I was also under the impression that the few rifles I did required no further action than just listing them in the report at the end of the year. Don't think that is correct anymore. "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". | |||
|
One of Us |
http://www.firearmslawgroup.co...why-do-i-need-to-pay The ITAR requirements are written so vaguely that they can be interpreted just about anyway the Prosecution(Gov't) wants. I would seek legal advice from a Lawyer Familiar with both firearms laws and ITAR requirements. | |||
|
One of Us |
"For an understanding of what constitutes defense services, an examination of the USML is required. Providing a service to an item listed in the USML will constitute defense services. Recall that USML section 1 governs automatic and semiautomatic firearms, while USML section 3 governs ammunition. Any business that engages in providing gunsmithing services or the commercial sale of ammunition is also required to register under ITAR." OK, does this also mean the manufacturing of bolt action hunting rifles? If it does then this could change the whole custom rifle industry. "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". | |||
|
One of Us |
Complain to your congress critters. The FAA threatened an airplane mechanic and inspector that I knew because of a plane he signed off on. That plane had engines with an alternate starter mounting position and had been in service with that configuration for more than 20 years. The FAA found the anomaly and then threatened criminal prosecution when the deviation had been in use for 2 decades. Complaints to his congressmen eventually ended the stupidity by the FAA. | |||
|
One of Us |
It has been a while since I researched this issue, but as I recall as a practical matter if a customer brings a custom rifle builder an action which he already owns and asks him to build a rifle around it, then the work the builder performs is not deemed to be manufacture. However, if the customer orders a rifle and the builder furnishes the action as well as all the other parts involved as part of the deal, then his work is considered to be manufacturing. That may not still be the case, but it certainly is logically defensible. There should be other participants in this forum who are active lawyers. Maybe they could offer an opinion. | |||
|
One of Us |
Logic has nothing to do with the BATFE and Tech branch Rulings. And Logically Defensible isn't going to help you when you get a new 10 year roommate named Bubba who thinks you have a pretty smile. For those who have never had dealings with the BATFE and their rulings, my favorite example is the determination that a shoestring and a semi-automatic rifle is constructive possession of a Machine Gun. http://www.everydaynodaysoff.c...machine-gun-2004.jpg Colin | |||
|
One of Us |
I used to have an FFL but I got tired of trying to be in compliance and never being sure which agent might be reading the regs on any given day, or might have a corncob up their back side the day they decided to check my bound book, so I gave up my FFL 10+ years ago and decided to just build and work on pre-1898 firearms. No FFL, No ITAR, No alphabet soup... and I had my Congress Critter's staff track down and forward me all the information concerning pre-1898 firearms and overseas transactions a few years ago so I'm all good to go with State Dept. and my overseas customers. I don't miss being able to work on other people post 1898 stuff one bit, it was well worth the trade off not to have to deal with all the headaches, paper trails and inspections that go with the BATFE and now ITAR. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia