Firearms transfer...

[SwissArmyDad]

Father-in-law is managing the assets of a very close friend who is in ill health, but doing better in a care facility. His friend has asked my father-in-law to take ownership of a small but sentimental gun collection, as one of the steps towards selling the owners house, rather than have it scattered to various owners.

Collection is mostly handguns and a few rifles.

Owner lives in Kentucky, father-in-law lives in California (orig. from kentucky, too)

What process should they expect to transfer ownership?

Thanks!

 

[SwissArmyDad]

So far, on the CA DoJ website I'm seeing the Power of attorney form, as well as the declaration of ownership form. $19.00 PER firearm, though...wow!

I thought that at one point there was a form that allowed a notorized transfer of a certain number of guns from one person to another with either a death certificate or a power of attorney to certify a "mitigating circumstance".

 

[Alland]

That would be an interstate transfer and they must be shipped to an FFL in CA. As I understand CA law the handguns could be a problem. If the handguns are not on the CA roster of "not unsafe guns" they could not be transfered. I believe single action revolvers are exempt and there may be an exemption for antiques. Posing your question on Calguns may get you a better answer.

 

[newfalguy101]

That is assuming the guns are even allowed in California

 

[SwissArmyDad]

Anything that isn't transferrable will have be kept in Kentucky and sold locally via consignment @ a local shop. Thanks for mentioning that. No worries there.

So a good first step would definitely be identifying all the guns with associated finishes, barrel lengths, calibers, etc and seeing if they're transferrable. That'll probably whittle down the herd a bit. At the same time, that same dealer could probably help out with the transfer of the guns to be brought to California, likely.

Would the owner need to be present for any of this, or could my FIL simply bring everything down to the LGS once a plan is made? Could the owner release them to him, via a power of attorney to be transferred?

 

[Librarian]

That would be an interstate transfer and they must be shipped to an FFL in CA. As I understand CA law the handguns could be a problem. If the handguns are not on the CA roster of "not unsafe guns" they could not be transfered. I believe single action revolvers are exempt and there may be an exemption for antiques. Posing your question on Calguns may get you a better answer.

Basically correct - since the transfer is from a living person, instead of a bequest from a deceased person, the transfer must run through a CA FFL; the FFL may charge whatever he/she likes for the interstate transfer.

Handguns need not be on the Roster, but must not be 'assault weapons' (Think 'Tec-9'). The handgun Roster applies to sales in California from an FFL to CA residents who are not exempt from the Roster (principally LEO).

Similarly, long guns must not be what CA calls 'assault weapons'.

See the Calguns Foundation Wiki article -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Moving_to_California_with_firearms ; same restrictions as moving here apply to other non-sale transfers into the state.

 

[newfalguy101]

Handguns need not be on the Roster, but must not be 'assault weapons' (Think 'Tec-9'). The handgun Roster applies to sales in California from an FFL to CA residents who are not exempt from the Roster (principally LEO).

In that case, please be so kind as to explain why a S&W 29-3 is NOT legal in California but a 29-4 is

 

[Frank Ettin]

I hate to say it, but working the dispersal of the guns through the OP's father-in-law is probably most cumbersome and expensive way to do things.

If the father-in-law is to take possession of the guns, they would need to be shipped to a California FFL, and the father-in-law would need to go through the background check process. He would also have to pay the DOJ and FFL fees for handling the transfer. That could run $50 to $100 for each gun, or more, depending on shipping expense.

On the other hand, the friend could transfer them to a Kentucky resident without formalities. He could do so in trust with written instructions regarding the disposition. He'd probably want to have a lawyer prepare the trust document.

In that case, please be so kind as to explain why a S&W 29-3 is NOT legal in California but a 29-4 is

Most likely because Smith & Wesson submitted the 29-4 for testing and paid the fee to have it included on the roster, but they didn't do that with the 29-3.

 

[Frank Ettin]

BTW, my post assumes that the guns would go to the OP's father-in-law for the purpose of selling them for the benefit of the estate. If they are going to the father-in-law to keep, and the father-in-law wants them, it would make sense to incur the shipping and transfer fees for those guns that can be transferred in California.

 

[SwissArmyDad]

BTW, my post assumes that the guns would go to the OP's father-in-law for the purpose of selling them for the benefit of the estate. If they are going to the father-in-law to keep, and the father-in-law wants them, it would make sense to incur the shipping and transfer fees for those guns that can be transferred in California.

In reality, the situation may include a bit of both, so I appreciate the info either way.

 

[Centurian22]

I do not know the legal pathways involving these states but I do think that some form of a trust setup, probably based in KY with the individuales involved with the transfers listed as 'executors' (or some such legal term) of the trust would be a viable way of achieving the goals. Best of luck to you.

 

[Librarian]

In that case, please be so kind as to explain why a S&W 29-3 is NOT legal in California but a 29-4 is

Why do you think it's illegal? Off-Roster is not at all the same thing as 'illegal'.

IF that gun is not on the handgun Roster, it would be illegal for an FFL to sell it to a non-exempt person.

But it IS legal for a private owner in CA to transfer such an off-Roster handgun to any other non-prohibited CA citizen, through an FFL as CA requires. It IS legal to move into the state with off-Roster handguns. It IS legal to inherit an off-Roster handgun, whether from a CA resident or a non-CA resident. It IS legal to own, possess and use off-Roster handguns, as much as it is legal to own, possess and use on-Roster handguns.

See also the Calguns Foundation Wiki article -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

 

[SwissArmyDad]

Any differentiation in policy between handguns and longguns? Or same procedure no matter what, other than say, black powder handguns/rifles, maybe?

 

[Sam1911]

Any differentiation in policy between handguns and longguns? Or same procedure no matter what, other than say, black powder handguns/rifles, maybe?

Setting aside California's rules (which I do not know well), the main difference under federal law would be that the transferee (your F-I-L) would be able to transfer and take possession of the long guns while in KY as long as all the laws of both CA and KY were followed. Unfortunately, that would involve observing CA's 10-day waiting period so it might be difficult to find an FFL in KY willing to deal with that.

The handguns would only be lawful to transfer at an FFL in CA.

Muzzle-loaders and firearms that fall under the definition of "antique" firearms are not covered by the federal GCA'68 rules, so he could take those with him. (Again, not counting any CA specific prohibitions.)

 

[mgkdrgn]

BTW, my post assumes that the guns would go to the OP's father-in-law for the purpose of selling them for the benefit of the estate. If they are going to the father-in-law to keep, and the father-in-law wants them, it would make sense to incur the shipping and transfer fees for those guns that can be transferred in California.

There is =nothing= to be gained by shipping all this stuff to California just so a non-ffl can try to sell all that stuff from there. All you are going to do is waste a lot of peoples time and pour your money into the coffers of the state of California, and spend a bunch of $ on shipping.

Find some local FFL that will handle the items as a consignment sale for a reasonable fee (I charge 15%, and market nationwide via the internet). This will save a ton of money, time, trouble and sweat on everyones part.

And if you can't find an FFL willing to handle the stuff .... let me know. ;-)

 

[Bubbles]

Another point is that CA forces FFL's to collect sales tax on the value of incoming transferred guns, even used guns from private sellers. So, as Frank pointed out, if the FIL intends to keep the guns then it will be would be worth paying shipping, DROS, the FFL's transfer fee, and sales tax. If the intent is to sell them for the benefit of the prior owner then it would be better to consign or sell to a local FFL.

And yes, if the FIL is not an exempt person then he couldn't take possession of the handguns if they're not on the approved roster. He can look them up at http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/

ETA: California law prohibits more than five separate transactions involving handguns in a year unless one is an FFL.
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12070.php

 

[Librarian]

Setting aside California's rules (which I do not know well), the main difference under federal law would be that the transferee (your F-I-L) would be able to transfer and take possession of the long guns while in KY as long as all the laws of both CA and KY were followed. Unfortunately, that would involve observing CA's 10-day waiting period so it might be difficult to find an FFL in KY willing to deal with that.

Worse, that 'follow CA law' also requires using a CA-licensed FFL - PC 28050

(a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to
26915, inclusive, [[ CA FFL licensing ]] in accordance with this chapter in order to comply
with Section 27545.

PC 27545

Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's
license issued pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, the
parties to the transaction shall complete the sale, loan, or transfer
of that firearm through a licensed firearms dealer pursuant to
Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050).

 

[SwissArmyDad]

There is =nothing= to be gained by shipping all this stuff to California just so a non-ffl can try to sell all that stuff from there. All you are going to do is waste a lot of peoples time and pour your money into the coffers of the state of California, and spend a bunch of $ on shipping.

Find some local FFL that will handle the items as a consignment sale for a reasonable fee (I charge 15%, and market nationwide via the internet). This will save a ton of money, time, trouble and sweat on everyones part.

And if you can't find an FFL willing to handle the stuff .... let me know. ;-)

The guns will not be brought to cali for the purpose of resale. No worries there. Thanks!

 

[SwissArmyDad]

Thanks again for all the input, I've passed it onto my FIL. I keep this thread updated.