Used Suppressors


PDA






JustinJ
October 21, 2013, 01:04 PM
My LGS has a few used 5.56 cans for between $250 and $300. They have Gemtechs and another brand, I don't recall. All are direct thread and were trade ins from the SWAT teams of a midsize city (Temple, TX) so high round counts. They came mounted to 10.5 Colts but are being sold separately. The rifles are for sale as well and have seem some hard use. Some of the cans look to be in good shape while others display what appears to be degradation of the baffle holes. It looks like erosion but could be baffle strikes. Given the automatic $200 additional cost and long wait I can't see going cheap for such a purchase but was curious if any others had thoughts on the matter. I have read though that cans actually can get quieter with time because of all the carbon deposits but it seems the baffle hole erosion would offset sound dampening from carbon.

If you enjoyed reading about "Used Suppressors" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GarySTL
October 21, 2013, 01:06 PM
I'd say buy a new one. Tax is the same and you'll know it's a good unit. Not much of a market for used ones I've always been told.

Telekinesis
October 21, 2013, 02:12 PM
I'm usually a big proponent of buying used cans because the majority of people treat their cans well and you can usually get some really good deals because the market for used cans is practically nonexistent, meaning you have very few other buyers to contend with.

That said however, I would not buy a .223 can that had been used like that. Most manufacturers won't warranty their cans on barrels that short for good reason: baffle erosion. Enough use on a barrel that short and you will eventually need a new baffle stack/core. I would also be willing to bet a lot of the use was quick firing that would really heat up the can which is definitely not good for its longevity.

All in all, I'd pass on these cans.

JustinJ
October 21, 2013, 04:59 PM
Would it be economically feasible to have a can rebuilt by the manufacturer or would it end up being more expensive than just buying new?

Willie Sutton
October 22, 2013, 06:26 AM
The only really financially viable option for cans like this is transfer tax-free to other LE outfits that want training cans for cheap. Once you put the tax stamp on them, as a percentage of total cost, you are in the territory of "why bother?". That's of course unless they are the latest generation of the big makers, in which case... <shrugs>... it's your call.


Willie

.

Bubbles
October 22, 2013, 10:46 AM
Gemtech's customer service and quality are good enough that I wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their used suppressors.

hentown
October 23, 2013, 11:27 AM
You can, of course, buy a used can directly from a governmental agency, via form 5, without having to pay a transfer tax. I'm in the process of doing that right now for a transferable Mac 10 with suppressor.

Gemtech offerred to "modernize" that old Mac suppressor for $150. Sounds like a bargain, to me. ;)

Captains1911
October 24, 2013, 09:29 PM
Gemtech's customer service and quality are good enough that I wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their used suppressors.
Gemtech is by no means on the high end of the quality suppressor scale. I'd definitely pass.

crazy-mp
October 24, 2013, 11:13 PM
Gemtech is by no means on the high end of the quality suppressor scale. I'd definitely pass.

I would agree a shot out gemtech will be just as loud as a new in box one, your buying a really expensive muzzle break when you buy gemtech. SBR's are hard on suppressors, many companies will state on their web site if the can is rated for SBR use or not.

I would pay another 150-200 for a mid range new one before I would buy a used one, unless you have excess funds and need another suppressor for your SBR.

dprice3844444
October 25, 2013, 03:20 PM
if they were still good,why did the cops turn them in?

Ranb
October 25, 2013, 05:42 PM
You can, of course, buy a used can directly from a governmental agency, via form 5, without having to pay a transfer tax.
That is news to me. How can you avoid the $200 tax unless it is being transferred to a government entity or museum?

Ranb

hentown
October 28, 2013, 08:35 AM
That is news to me. How can you avoid the $200 tax unless it is being transferred to a government entity or museum?

Ranb

Take a look at the Form 5. l It's for transfers to or from a governmental agency. There is no preclusion from a transfer being made to a private citizen.

MErl
October 28, 2013, 09:35 AM
so theoretically a gov agency could be setup that only did this: (in some friendly state of course)
"Buy suppressors direct from manufacturers and resell them to citizens of that state while avoiding the $200 tax and making a profit to run the show."

JustinJ
October 28, 2013, 10:03 AM
Take a look at the Form 5. l It's for transfers to or from a governmental agency. There is no preclusion from a transfer being made to a private citizen.

How does one get lucky enough to convince a government agency to transfer their old SBR's and cans to him?

Ranb
October 28, 2013, 02:53 PM
Take a look at the Form 5. l It's for transfers to or from a governmental agency. There is no preclusion from a transfer being made to a private citizen.
How are you getting around the requirements in the NFA Title 26, Chapter 53?
http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf

5811 Transfer tax.
(a) Rate. There shall be levied, collected, and paid on firearms transferred a tax at the rate of $200 for each firearm transferred, except, the transfer tax on any firearm classified as any other weapon under section 5845(e) shall be at the rate of $5 for each such firearm transferred.
(b) By whom paid. The tax imposed by subsection (a) of this section shall be paid by the transferor.
The law goes on to exempt licensed dealers, importers and manufacturers also. I don't see anything about obtaining a tax-free firearm from the government at all.


5853 Transfer and making tax exemption available to certain governmental entities.
(a) Transfer. A firearm may be transferred without the payment of the transfer tax imposed by section 5811 to any State, possession of the United States, any political subdivision thereof, or any official police organization of such a government entity engaged in criminal investigations.

Unless you are a government official I don't see how you can do this.

Just because a form says you can get a title ii gun from the government without paying the tax this doesn't mean the law allows it. Has the application been approved yet?

Ranb

wally
October 28, 2013, 03:10 PM
your buying a really expensive muzzle break when you buy gemtech.
Non-sense. In actual testing all the makers are arguing "superiority" over 2-3 db differences which is about what it take for an untrained listener to reliably detect A is louder than B or vice-versa. If you look at detailed readings you'll often see this much variation within a string of 10 shots with the same can on the same gun.

SBR's are hard on suppressors, many companies will state on their web site if the can is rated for SBR use or not. This is true, in fact assume its true that they are not rated for SBR usage unless stated otherwise.

GemTech states on their website and in the owners manual that 11" is the SBR minimum barrel for their 5.56 suppressors.

https://www.gem-tech.com/store/pc/viewContent.asp?idpage=7#31

There are two main reasons: "uncorking pressure" which could be solved with a stronger, heavier design, but bullet stability issues that could cause baffle strikes is a larger problem that would require a larger bore reducing effectiveness or requiring even more length and thus mass.

mmissile
October 28, 2013, 04:15 PM
quote" if they were still good,why did the cops turn them in? "quote


Many departments have budgets that require they spend money to maintain their budgets, or add to them.

hentown
October 28, 2013, 05:21 PM
So, Ranb, who is the transferor, in my scenario? Governmental agencies are not charged a transfer tax, whether buying or selling (or gifting) NFA items.

You supplied your own answer in the quote that you furnished. There is no tax, to or from a governmental agency, and there's no prohibition from a governmental agency's transferring an NFA item to a private citizen.

JustinJ
October 28, 2013, 05:22 PM
if they were still good,why did the cops turn them in

They were attached to a pair of 10.5 colt AR's. Apparently the shop had to first ultrasound them while on the barrel in order to get them off. The AR's were pretty beat up.

The cops may also have wanted to simply upgrade or convert to a different system such as quick detach.

JustinJ
October 28, 2013, 05:24 PM
GemTech states on their website and in the owners manual that 11" is the SBR minimum barrel for their 5.56 suppressors.

Yeah, I saw that. Awfully convenient given the prevalence of 10.5 Colt AR's.

Aaron Baker
October 28, 2013, 07:14 PM
You supplied your own answer in the quote that you furnished. There is no tax, to or from a governmental agency, and there's no prohibition from a governmental agency's transferring an NFA item to a private citizen.

No he didn't. You're adding the word "from". His quote only said "to."

5853 Transfer and making tax exemption available to certain governmental entities.
(a) Transfer. A firearm may be transferred without the payment of the transfer tax imposed by section 5811 to any State, possession of the United States, any political subdivision thereof, or any official police organization of such a government entity engaged in criminal investigations.

It's confusing for sure. The form certainly seems to say "to and from" but the law just says "to."

So, I think his question to you is fair: have you or anyone you know ever had the ATF approve a tax-free transfer from a government to an individual?

Aaron

Ranb
October 28, 2013, 07:53 PM
So, Ranb, who is the transferor, in my scenario?
That would be the government agency you are obtaining the firearm from.

Governmental agencies are not charged a transfer tax, whether buying or selling (or gifting) NFA items.
Can you quote the law that says this?

You supplied your own answer in the quote that you furnished.
Can you quote the words I used that say there is no tax for a transfer from a government agency?

There is no tax, to or from a governmental agency,
Link to the law that says this please?

and there's no prohibition from a governmental agency's transferring an NFA item to a private citizen.
I agree with this part.

Ranb

hentown
October 28, 2013, 07:57 PM
AAMOF, he DID provide the answer to his own question, as I so adroitly pointed out in my previous response. "Who pays the tax?" The transferor. Who is the transferor, per his info? The governmental agency. There is no tax on a transfer from a governmental agency to anybody, whether another agency or a private citizen.

O.K., so I have a confession to make. I've been sandbagging a couple of you guys. Please forgive me. Copy n' pasting a copy of an email that I personally received from the NFA National Office, which clarifies this matter, in plain English.

The reason I asked for the guidance of the NFA National Office is that I have been offered a MAC 10 with suppressor by the local Sheriff. The MAC is pre'86, and is transferable.

Actual Class III dealers told me, on other forums, that such tax-free transfers are fine. I wanted confirmation.

" No, a transfer tax is never imposed when a weapon is being transferred to or from a government entity. It does not matter if the weapon is being transferred to an individual, dealer or another government agency. The correct form you should use when transferring a weapon from or to a government entity is an ATF Form 5, (Application for Tax Exempt Transfer and Registration of a Firearm). This form is used to apply for tax-exempt transfers of National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms to government agencies. If you have additional questions, please contact the NFA Branch at (202) 927-8330."

thank you
-----Original Message-----
From: EPS Directorate
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 4:18 PM
To: FES Division
Subject: -NFA: Transfer of Class II Devices



-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 12:51 PM
To: EPS Directorate
Subject: Transfer of Class II Devices


Would you please verify for me whether a transfer tax is imposed on a tax-exempt organization, eg., county Sheriff's Dept., when that tax-exempt organization transfers a Class II firearm or device to a private citizen? (The firearm & device in question were purchased by the Sheriff's Dept. during the 1970's and were properly registered at that time with the BATF.)

What would be the proper form for registering such a transfer with BATFE?

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

I took the liberty of removing my personal info. Hope this clarifies the question. Was just having a little fun with you guys. I knew the answer all along. If you're lucky enough to find a local l.e. agency with an NFA item that they want to sell, then you may do so, via Form 5, with no transfer tax.

Ranb
October 28, 2013, 08:26 PM
That e-mail is 9 years old. Could you forward the e-mail to me? Who was the individual who sent it to you? Every time I have received a reply from the NFA branch I got their name and address. The industry professionals I've talked to said this kind of tax free transfer can't happen.

Randy Bragge
ranb40@yahoo.com
Belfair, WA
(360) 440-5889

Aaron Baker
October 28, 2013, 10:03 PM
So, to clarify, you were basically being a jerk. Or at least attempting to.

But also to clarify, did this transfer actually happen? Because the ATF has been known to give bad information to people. I understand that the Form 5 itself seems to indicate that this can happen, but the law itself only references transfers TO governmental agencies.

I believe that you have an e-mail from the ATF saying that this can happen, and that other dealers have told you it can happen. What I don't believe, without some confirmation, is that it has ever actually happened.

Aaron

hentown
October 29, 2013, 07:51 AM
I did apologize for the sandbagging. In my defense, however, I didn't ask a rhetorical question. I simply made a statement that was challenged by a couple of NFA "experts." :cool:

It's not my problem that a guy posts a copy of a section of a code and doesn't understand what the code is telling him. I don't mean that as a jerk, but I've three times now brought attention to the section describing who pays the tax. The tax is NOT paid by the transferee. The tax, IF A TAX IS DUE, is paid by the transferor. If that's too complicated, then perhaps anybody not understanding would like to send his own e-mail to the NFA directorate?

Once again, I do apologize for the sandbagging. Seems like the sandbagging wasn't really sandbagging, though, as my posting a copy of the e-mail that I received from ATF didn't seem to settle anything with a couple of folks. I THOUGHT I was being helpful to the OP by supplying the CORRECT information about the transferring of an NFA device from a governmental agency to a private citizen. My authority was an actual e-mail from the governing agency, not the speculation of internet experts. ;)

Being the nice guy that I am, IF the local sheriff follows through with his promise to transfer the aforementioned items to me (acutally to my LLC), then I'll post the results in this forum.

Oh, yeah, the reason I originally contacted NFA headquarters in D.C. is because local agents, all the way up to the Atlanta field office didn't have a clue.

Ranb
October 29, 2013, 09:17 AM
I did apologize for the sandbagging. In my defense, however, I didn't ask a rhetorical question. I simply made a statement that was challenged by a couple of NFA "experts."
You made a statement unsupported by the US code. Please post a link to the section of the code that supports your claims.

I am not an expert on the law by any stretch of the imagination, so you don't need to throw around your "expert" accusations my way. You may have noticed that I gave direct answers to your questions, but you have failed to answer mine. Why is this?

It's not my problem that a guy posts a copy of a section of a code and doesn't understand what the code is telling him. I don't mean that as a jerk, but I've three times now brought attention to the section describing who pays the tax.
But you are claiming to be a jerk (sandbagger). You have not demonstrated any knowledge of the law other than the content of an ATF form and who pays the tax. The opinion of some anonymous employee in the NFA branch 9 years ago is not the law. I have posted a link to the law, can you show us in the US code where it allows you to receive an NFA firearm from a government agency on an ATF form 5?

I THOUGHT I was being helpful to the OP by supplying the CORRECT information about the transferring of an NFA device from a governmental agency to a private citizen. My authority was an actual e-mail from the governing agency, not the speculation of internet experts.
If you want to convince anyone that your e-mail is indeed real, you could forward it to those of us who want to see it so we can contact the branch that might be giving you bogus information. An e-mail from the NFA branch contains zero authority.

You need to put as much effort into reading the US code as you claim to do sandbagging on the forum.

Bubbles
October 29, 2013, 10:26 AM
http://www.atf.gov/files/forms/download/atf-f-5320-5.pdf
Read Block 1 and Instruction 2(b)(3). Yes, transfers both to and from a government agency also are tax-exempt on a F5.

Ranb
October 29, 2013, 10:41 AM
Bubbles,

Have you heard of these tax free transfers from the government to an unlicensed individual taking place at all? I am all for it but I just don't see where it says this in the code. Even though the form 5 and instructions say "to or from", the US code section 5853 only says transfers "to" the government are exempt. Thanks.

Ranb

Bubbles
October 29, 2013, 01:22 PM
Bubbles,

Have you heard of these tax free transfers from the government to an unlicensed individual taking place at all? I am all for it but I just don't see where it says this in the code. Even though the form 5 and instructions say "to or from", the US code section 5853 only says transfers "to" the government are exempt. Thanks.

Ranb
No I haven't heard of any, but that doesn't mean that they don't happen. Most government agencies wouldn't sell off their firearms, whether Title I or Title II, to individuals anyway unless it's a retiring cop taking his duty pistol. Usually the guns go to a distributor for credit against replacement firearms, handed off to other government agencies, auctioned off in lots to FFL's, etc.

Anyway, I'm guessing the reason that you couldn't find it is that you were only looking through the US Code and not the CFR's, which is actually where you find the "meat" of most firearm laws. I had to dig a bit but I did track it down at Title 27 CFR Chapter II, Part 479.90(a) (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div5&view=text&node=27:3.0.1.2.4&idno=27#27:3.0.1.2.4.6.25.10).

Ranb
October 29, 2013, 02:22 PM
Thanks Bubbles. This is exactly what I was hoping hentown could have provided to back up his claim. My copy of the ATF's Reference Guide has this section but I only read the parts I quoted earlier in the thread. They do seem to be a bit contradictory don't they? :)

Ranb

Aaron Baker
October 29, 2013, 06:46 PM
Well, I'm certainly man enough to admit that I stand partially corrected.

It seems that both the Code of Federal Regulations and the Form 5 say that the transfer to or from a governmental entity is tax-free. However, the US Code itself only specifies that the tax is not paid when there's a transfer to a governmental entity. For my part, I simply could not imagine that the ATF would have promulgated regulations that were more permissive than the statute which authorizes them. But apparently they did!

To hammer that point home a little: Congress, by statute, told the ATF that you can't charge a transfer tax when the transfer is TO a government agency. The ATF, in making their own regulations to enforce the law, decided that they weren't going to charge the tax TO or FROM. They would have been well within their rights as an agency to charge the tax when the transfer is from a governmental agency to a private individual.

Derision aside, I do consider myself something of an NFA expert, and I'd never realized this was possible. It's probably because, as Bubbles points out, there are very few circumstances in which a governmental agency would ever consider transferring their NFA firearms to a private individual. No one can point to a specific example of it ever happening. That doesn't mean it hasn't, and the law certainly seems to indicate that it can.

hentown, I hope you understand why you got the reaction you got. It isn't because we want to rain on anyone's parade. You made an unsupported statement that would seem unusual to even people who are familiar with NFA transfers. The US Code doesn't actually say that's allowed, and that's what Ranb quoted that you kept saying supported your point. It doesn't. The Form 5 supports your point, but the Form itself isn't law. Until I saw it in the CFR that Bubbles posted, there was no reason for me to believe it was possible other than your say-so. And we all encounter people all the time that think they know things about the NFA, but don't. Also, the ATF does have a long history of telling people incorrect information by letter and e-mail. (For examples, check out all of the tech branch letters out there that are contradictory and the shoe-string machine gun fiasco.) So your personal situation, which includes an e-mail from 2004 and a transfer from a sheriff that hasn't been approved yet, wasn't very convincing.

But, like I said, now that we've got all the regulations and statutes hashed out, I'm surprised to say it, but apparently Ranb and I were wrong.

Now, if we could all just find a kindly local sheriff willing to sell us all his old suppressors, SBRs and transferrable machine guns for cheap!

Aaron

If you enjoyed reading about "Used Suppressors" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!