CLEO signoff elimination going forward


PDA






AlexanderA
January 8, 2013, 11:04 PM
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201210&RIN=1140-AA43

The proposal for CLEO signoff elimination has now reached the stage of "proposed rulemaking." That means the clock is running for official adoption.

The upside is that CLEO signoffs will no longer be required for Forms 1 or 4. The signoff will be replaced by a CLEO "notification."

The downside is that all "responsible persons" of trusts and corporations will have to submit photographs and fingerprints, and have a background check done.

These two things, together, eliminate most of the incentive for forming NFA trusts. This also means a slightly lighter workload for ATF.

If you enjoyed reading about "CLEO signoff elimination going forward" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
wacki
January 9, 2013, 12:20 AM
This is just for new tax stamps right? Do we have to do this every time?

If so then purchasing cans under my trust got a lot harder. I've got 4 people on my trust.

AlexanderA
January 9, 2013, 01:25 AM
Presumably, the change will be effective after the comment period has passed and the regulation has been finalized. The new photograph/fingerprint requirements for trustees would apply to Forms 1 and 4 submitted after that time.

plunge
January 9, 2013, 05:28 AM
well that sounds like a pain.

AlexanderA
January 9, 2013, 09:05 AM
Is getting fingerprint cards more of a pain than setting up a trust?

I see this as a big plus for people in jurisdictions with antigun CLEO's. In my case, although my local CLEO will sign, his independent investigation adds another month to the process. Eliminating that step would save me time and money.

kimbershot
January 9, 2013, 10:21 AM
wrote earlier on the process. i have several form 4's from my previous state. new state--leo sign off would never happen so i did a trust. so the issue would be--if they go to a non leo sign-off and you already have all your ducks in order )apps, prints, pics) and all new transactions are legal--why 6+ months?

what happens if the gov. decides that all "assault weapons" need to go through the nfa process.:scrutiny:

Iramo94
January 9, 2013, 10:27 AM
The .gov cannot just "decide" that EBRs are NFA items. It takes the passing of a law for that to happen, and in the current political climate, hat is not likely.

MasterSergeantA
January 9, 2013, 11:25 AM
Is getting fingerprint cards more of a pain than setting up a trust?

I see this as a big plus for people in jurisdictions with antigun CLEO's. In my case, although my local CLEO will sign, his independent investigation adds another month to the process. Eliminating that step would save me time and money.
I will admit to a certain level of paranoia based on my past employment. But do you really think that the copy going to the local CLEO will take longer than processing the Form 1 or 4? And if the local CLEO is anti-NFA, do you really think that won't have an effect on your form processing? Doing the photos and prints for each trustee on each form isn't that big a deal to me. It is a nuisance, to be sure, but worth it to have the trust.

In my case, my CLEO is a good guy and I have never had a problem. It adds about a week to my process to get his signature...mostly because of the problems we have down here on the border. He is a busy guy.

Of course, that is just my opinion; I could be wrong.

plunge
January 9, 2013, 01:14 PM
I mean it would be a pain to get prints and photo's of everyone on the trust for every form. Unless it was a 1 time thing

MasterSergeantA
January 9, 2013, 05:57 PM
I mean it would be a pain to get prints and photo's of everyone on the trust for every form. Unless it was a 1 time thing
I understood what you meant and for me the requirement to submit them EVERY time would not be a big deal. But it might be a major pain for others. A one-time thing would be my hope, but I have to submit the photos, prints and CLEO sign-off EVERY time I submit a Form 1 or 4 right now, so I doubt that will change. I've carried a top secret/code word clearance for the past 30 years and have more fingerprints in the system than I do hairs on my head (okay...lousy comparison) and I still have to submit everything every time.

Auto426
January 9, 2013, 06:09 PM
If this actually does go through I could see a Mk18 style AR in my future. I have been longing for a short barreled AR for a while now, but the huge hassle of going through all the paperwork and either setting up a trust or getting a CLEO sign off has stopped me. If they do eliminate that step in the process, I may just go through with it.

Bartholomew Roberts
January 9, 2013, 06:13 PM
What happens when you add/change trustees or officers after the Form was approved? Are you now going to have to notify ATF every time your corporate officers change? I don't think that is going to streamline their paperwork.

Aaron Baker
January 9, 2013, 06:48 PM
I dislike the thought of having to do all the additional photographs and fingerprints, frankly. And it adds costs if you have to pay someone to do fingerprints, which some folks do. It was a nice side benefit of having a trust.

Trusts still make sense for anyone who wants to have their spouse be able to possess their NFA firearms without them being present.

But it does add hassle if you have to get all that paperwork together for every trustee every time.

And frankly, it doesn't make any sense from a legal perspective. A revocable living trust can be amended literally at any time to add or remove trustees. If one wanted to, you could remove trustees, get a new Form approved with just your fingerprints, and then add them back. Maybe a bit of pain, but possible. Moreover, since you can add trustees at any time, the ATF can't guarantee that it has done a background check on every trustee, if you add them after the stamp is approved.

I'm all for eliminating CLEO signoff for everyone, but ADDING the additional requirements for trusts is an unnecessary trade-off. You can do one without the other.

Aaron

tepin
January 9, 2013, 07:15 PM
And none of these new laws and or regulations will stop future school shootings. It's all a complete waste of time and money. Ugh. :fire:

Aaron Baker
January 9, 2013, 08:58 PM
This new regulation is completely unrelated to school shootings. It was not a reaction to anything, and was already in the works before the recent interest in increased gun control.

In fact, the goal was to EASE the burden on individual tax stamp applicants. Apparently, part of the bargain was that if they eliminated CLEO signoff, trusts were going to have to start submitting the rest of the requirements that they were avoiding.

Aaron

mjw930
January 9, 2013, 09:18 PM
I'm new to the NFA section, having only shown an interest in setting up a trust to make it easier on my family if something happens to me and to get everything moved into a trust IF something stupid happens in Congress. At a minimum, since there wouldn't be any transfer, I could avoid the tax stamp if "Black Guns" become NFA listed.

Anyway, one thing that jumped out at me was the disparity between the background checks required of individual Form 4 applications and Trust/Corporate Form 4 applications. It seemed to me that if they pulled the covers off the NFA trusts as they attempt to make more weapons NFA restricted they would stumble across this disparity and make it next to impossible to use trusts at all. I see this as a good thing, regardless the additional effort in entails on our part since it closes another "loophole" that politico''s love to throw up as they make their gun grabs.

Of course that's JMHO, YMMV ;)

Jim K
January 9, 2013, 09:21 PM
I can't see the Obama administration allowing that to go forward. They will take heat from the anti's for "relaxing the rules and allowing criminals and the insane* to buy machineguns."

*Insane in the current administration is a term applied to anyone who did not vote for Obama.

Jim

Swing
January 9, 2013, 09:23 PM
+1 to post #13 by Aaron Baker.

wally
January 9, 2013, 10:24 PM
Is getting fingerprint cards more of a pain than setting up a trust?

Add passport photos, after the first time, yes!

Not sure where to even get them done these days, as Texas DPS has gone to electronic fingerprint scans for the CHL.

kell490
January 11, 2013, 11:51 PM
It seems to me the reason they want to do this is to get trusts, corps, and LLC's to submit finger prints, and photos because it allows them to run those in each state for crimes.

JustinJ
January 12, 2013, 12:13 AM
Not sure where to even get them done these days, as Texas DPS has gone to electronic fingerprint scans for the CHL.

You can still go in and get cards printed out. At least that's the case here in Austin.

plunge
January 12, 2013, 07:36 AM
this is just another one of those debates on THR, "that it doesn't affect me, so i am ok with it"

AlexanderA
January 12, 2013, 11:13 AM
this is just another one of those debates on THR, "that it doesn't affect me, so i am ok with it"

I'm OK with it precisely because it does affect me. The NFA community has been trying for years to get the CLEO signoff requirement removed. And trustees should have to submit photographs and fingerprints.

Aaron Baker
January 12, 2013, 12:52 PM
And trustees should have to submit photographs and fingerprints.

Why?

ngnrd
January 12, 2013, 01:27 PM
Yeah... Why?

Trent
January 12, 2013, 02:43 PM
This will be HUGELY helpful for many folks in Illinois, now that we have SBR's.

crazy-mp
January 13, 2013, 02:15 AM
I'm new to the NFA section, having only shown an interest in setting up a trust to make it easier on my family if something happens to me and to get everything moved into a trust IF something stupid happens in Congress. At a minimum, since there wouldn't be any transfer, I could avoid the tax stamp if "Black Guns" become NFA listed.

ATF form 5 would allow you to transfer your item(s) upon your death tax free to another individual. No need for a trust on that argument. If "Black Guns" as you call them were moved to the NFA list they would most likely be be grandfathered in like the USAS-12 and street sweepers were.

Yeah... Why?

Because it will eliminate the nameless faceless trust, and it will make the NFA cliques a thing of the past.

And none of these new laws and or regulations will stop future school shootings.

This change has been in the works for over a year now, NOTHING in government moves that fast. The NFATCA announced this during last years meeting. The announcement was projected to be released during the 4th quarter of 2012 and it was released first quarter of 2013, not too bad.


Not sure where to even get them done these days, as Texas DPS has gone to electronic fingerprint scans for the CHL.

Anybody can do fingerprints it does not have to be LEO.

wacki
January 14, 2013, 11:00 PM
Anyone know when this becomes effective? when the comment period ends?

Also, my whole family is on my trust. Will I need to print & photograph them every time I buy a can or SBR?

Bubbles
January 15, 2013, 12:07 PM
The public comment period hasn't started yet. This is just the first of many steps that still need to be completed.

Also, this rule change will require changing the format of the Form 1 and Form 4, which doesn't happen overnight either. I'd say the earliest the change could potentially go into effect is this summer.

doom
January 15, 2013, 03:26 PM
Finally, I can start the process for a pen gun and other AOW stuff :)

IdahoSkies
January 15, 2013, 06:53 PM
Is the actual text of the proposed rule available yet?

mvorbrodt
January 18, 2013, 01:05 PM
LEO sign off and the Trusts were always a turn off for me. If this goes through, I will be a very happy, and quiet, camper :D

-v-
January 21, 2013, 01:27 AM
I feel for the guys who have a trust right now for whom this new proposed regulation will cause headaches. That said, no CLEO signoff is a big plus. When this goes through I am definitely putting down the $200 to SBR a few of my rifles.

AlexanderA
January 21, 2013, 08:01 AM
This could be fast-tracked by being added to any pending post-Newtown legislation. While we're at it, include a provision to repeal the Hughes Amendment (on the ground of "registering" more guns). Let the antis choke on "poison pills."

MasterSergeantA
January 21, 2013, 10:46 AM
This could be fast-tracked by being added to any pending post-Newtown legislation. While we're at it, include a provision to repeal the Hughes Amendment (on the ground of "registering" more guns). Let the antis choke on "poison pills."
Now THERE is an idea worth pursuing.

smithwr3
January 31, 2013, 07:27 AM
So those of us that have family corps have to waste all kinds of time getting our family members photographed and fingerprinted every time we want to buy a NFA item? That's BS that I have to waste my time doing this. I'm active duty overseas and what if me and my brother are deployed at the same time and aren't somewhere that can fingerprint and photograph us? We have to slow down the process for everyone else in our corp? Oh and the ATFE is so efficient by mailing off the fingerprint cards to the FBI to do a background check. You think ATFE will get any quicker at approving NFA forms? Last time I looked the federal government was under a hiring freeze and they won't be getting more manpower to support this. Also, do you or anyone in the ATFE honestly believe that most corps would allow prohibited members access to NFA weapons? To say it is a no-win situation for the corp and it's members is an understatement.

Let's get real and voice our opposition to this proposed rule.

Bubbles
January 31, 2013, 08:41 AM
Last time I looked the federal government was under a hiring freeze and they won't be getting more manpower to support this.
Incorrect. This posting is for 11 new examiner positions, including NFA:
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/336785100

BTW it will only be up for a week if you want to apply. I would go for it since it's only 10 miles from me, but I would have to give up my FFL and I can't afford the pay cut...

kimbershot
January 31, 2013, 09:03 AM
i got 2 cans on a form 4 from another state and a pending form 1 sbr build on a trust with my new state. i can't speculate on what the gov will or won't do--it is what it is until it ain't. i would not have done a trust if i didn't have to. :what:

If you enjoyed reading about "CLEO signoff elimination going forward" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!