Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

CLEO signoff elimination going forward

Discussion in 'NFA Firearms and Accessories' started by AlexanderA, Jan 8, 2013.

  1. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,754
    Location:
    Virginia
    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.
     
  2. wacki

    wacki Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,693
    Location:
    Reminiscing the Rockies
    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.
     
  3. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,754
    Location:
    Virginia
    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.
     
  4. plunge

    plunge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    245
    well that sounds like a pain.
     
  5. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,754
    Location:
    Virginia
    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.
     
  6. kimbershot

    kimbershot Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    340
    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:
     
  7. Iramo94

    Iramo94 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2011
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    South Florida
    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.
     
  8. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    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.
     
  9. plunge

    plunge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    245
    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
     
  10. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    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.
     
  11. Auto426

    Auto426 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    455
    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.
     
  12. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,601
    Location:
    Texas
    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.
     
  13. Aaron Baker

    Aaron Baker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    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
     
  14. tepin

    tepin Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2006
    Messages:
    562
    Location:
    MN
    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:
     
  15. Aaron Baker

    Aaron Baker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    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
     
  16. mjw930

    mjw930 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    61
    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 ;)
     
  17. Jim K

    Jim K Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,541
    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
     
  18. Swing

    Swing Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,463
    +1 to post #13 by Aaron Baker.
     
  19. wally

    wally Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,890
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    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.
     
  20. kell490

    kell490 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    40
    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.
     
  21. JustinJ

    JustinJ Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,046
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    You can still go in and get cards printed out. At least that's the case here in Austin.
     
  22. plunge

    plunge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    Messages:
    245
    this is just another one of those debates on THR, "that it doesn't affect me, so i am ok with it"
     
  23. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,754
    Location:
    Virginia
    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.
     
  24. Aaron Baker

    Aaron Baker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    Why?
     
  25. ngnrd

    ngnrd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    South Central Alaska
    Yeah... Why?
     

Share This Page