Thoughts on how to re-open the MG registry

Status
Not open for further replies.
MachIVshooter

MachIVshooter

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
17,936
Location
Elbert County, CO
Just something that popped into my mind this morning. We all know that the fed's see no good reason to re-open the MG registry, therefor it likely won't happen. But what if they stand to make a considerable profit? I mean, since when has the gov't had a problem with revenue, regardless of how it's generated? So, my idea/propostition is that the registry is re-opened and post-86 MG's can be transeferred to civilians-for, say, a $5,000 tax. Pre-86 would be unaffected and still have the $200 NFA stamp. Granted, this would hurt the value of some older registered MG's, but only so far. A pre-'86 M-16 could still be sold for ~$6,000, while a new one with the post-'86 tax stamp would be ~$6,500-$7,000. OTher MG's that are no longer produced would be unaffected.

I dunno, maybe I'm way off base. But I would happily pay $7,000 for a brand new select fire AR-10 or FAL, rather than the current $15,000+ for a 7.62mm MG-even if most of it does go to the fed's.
 
Sure, but would you pay +$5000 for a short barrel shotgun? Because, your NFA Tax hike would affect everything else.
 
Sure, but would you pay +$5000 for a short barrel shotgun? Because, your NFA Tax hike would affect everything else.
Click to expand...

Do you understand the difference between the '34 NFA, the '68 GCA and the '86 FOPA. Or the difference between title I, II and III weapons?
 
Do you understand the difference between the '34 NFA, the '68 GCA and the '86 FOPA. Or the difference between title I, II and III weapons?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. But an NFA Tax hike would affect ALL NFA weapons, not just MGs. He's saying reopen the MG list, hike the tax. Well, the $200 tax also affects SBRS, SBS, Silencers, Destructive Devices, and AOWs (ones that are made by the individual). It's the SAME tax, and I'd bet my bottom dollar that if the goal is to make money off of the tax, the BATF won't limit the tax to 'just' newly manufactured MGs.

So that $300 37mm flare launcher that you want to register as a DD, will turn into a $5300 venture. There's more to NFA than MGs you know. I can think of a number of people in the Silencer owning community that will be mighty angry at a price hike.
 
I doubt they would accept such a multiple level tax scheme, they would want to raise the tax for all NFA items, and thus it would affect all short barreled shotguns, SBRs, suppressors, etc.

I think the best solution would be to show practically non-existent crime associated with NFA items and a projection showing how their tax revenues would be increased with the existing $200 make/transfer tax.

I think this projection is the only viable method of opening the registry. Politicians of all flavors love the smell of money.

Selecting an arbitrary transfer/make tax amount really isn't the answer -- that becomes a "find the price point for maximum profit" type of question. Before going off and finding that price point, I think it'd make more sense to determine what the demand would be at the current pricing point, and use that to sway opinions. I think at this point in the game money is the only answer, any other reasoning will be struck down.

(um, what's title III? I've always understood Title II to be anything NFA, Title I, not...)
 
Yes, I do. But an NFA Tax hike would affect ALL NFA weapons, not just MGs. He's saying reopen the MG list, hike the tax. Well, the $200 tax also affects SBRS, SBS, Silencers, Destructive Devices, and AOWs (ones that are made by the individual).
Click to expand...

Clearly not. AOW's, SBR/SBS, etc. are title II and that registry was not affected by the '86 FOPA; It has remained open. DD's are also a different registry.

I doubt they would accept such a multiple level tax scheme, they would want to raise the tax for all NFA items, and thus it would affect all short barreled shotguns, SBRs, suppressors, etc.
Click to expand...

They already have different tiers for NFA regulated stuff. AOW transfer is $5.

And the arbitrary figure I gave was for the sole purpose of an example. Something that appeals to the fed's, makes MG's more affordable for those of us who want them, but still expensive enough that the anti's can't claim "every dilinquent will have one of those $500 baby-killers!".
 
They already can't claim that - it takes quite a bit to get an NFA weapon. More in-depth background check than the NICS.


Of course, criminals don't obey the law, and there are plenty of MGs out there unregistered. What was the last estimate? 20 times the registered number of MGs, I believe?
 
I think we have more luck setting up a CMP program for m14s in storage then this. But its a good idea, how about $300 for all NFA weapons, not parts like barrels and silencers.
 
I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy. It is a worthy idea, and could work with some additional compromising.

Move suppressors, sbr/sbs, AOW, to title I.

Keep pre-86 machine guns, DD's, at $200 tax

Move post-86 machine guns to $5,000 one-time tax with $200 transfer with open registry. Amnesty would involve paying the 5G one-time for items that are currently contraband.

Valid idea, and could work. It would be a step in the right direction, and if we hold out for all or nothing we will keep nothing.

We aren't going to see ideas if all we do is slam them right away.
 
MachIV,
While I'd be ecstatic over the opening of the registry, I'll have to disagree with your basic concept. If the Feds, or any gov't needs more money, they will take it. Period. You can't bribe a system that gets your check before you do, and then decides to let you keep whatever portion they deem fit. It's just not logical.
Change the tax system, then maybe it's got a shot.

Dan
 
First off, I'm not sure about the government loving money. Saving money is making money and I think we all know about government efficiency.

Proving to them that legal machineguns aren't used in crime doesn't seem like it would matter either. Every study of "assault rifles" I've ever seen shows that they're pretty much never used in crime. That seems to be accepted by both sides, yet plenty of folks think another AWB is on the way.

The majority of the population seems very content to say guns are bad and no one needs them. Why on Earth would a politician push to get machineguns into the hands of more people? Logic doesn't seem to enter into it. We're dealing with a system where I can have a 16" AR rifle, an AR pistol, but not an AR rifle with an 11" barrel.

How much more does it cost Colt to make a FCG for an M-16 than an AR, $50? Why the hell should I have to pay $5,000 for that?
 
If the tax was bumped up to $500, then it would be acceptable.

But think of it like this: a MAC SMG could be purchased for $300 before 1986 (+ the $200 tax). It would be unacceptable to pay over 10,000% tax on any single item.
 
I'd love to see the registry reopen but if we bribed them by saying we'll take a $5000 per transfer hit they'd gladly accept our money and then find another way to restrict it. The old cliche about give them an inch.

I heard on some MG owner site that the registry is so disorganized and screwed up even if they wanted to reopen it they'd have to get it cleaned up and organized first. Seems like a good project for a crack team of accounting students who are good at Excel and a weekend or two, but I digress.
 
But think of it like this: a MAC SMG could be purchased for $300 before 1986 (+ the $200 tax). It would be unacceptable to pay over 10,000% tax on any single item.
Click to expand...

They're already ~$4,000. How long do you think it will take for them to go up another 25%?

The prices of MG's are only going to go up unless we get a few more on the registry. I was only tring to think of a way that might happen.

Besides, even if a hefty transfer tax was imposed on all MG's, they'd still be cheaper than they are. AC-556's go for right about $8k and are the cheapest of the rifles. Even with a transfer tax that is 25 times the current amount, a new AC-556 would only be about $700.

I think a lot of you are missing the point. WE need the registry re-opened, period. It's not gonna happen if the gov't does't stand to benefit.
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point. WE need the registry re-opened, period. It's not gonna happen if the gov't does't stand to benefit.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Which goes back to my point:

If new MGs were allowed to be registered at the current tax level of $200, how many would be registered?

That's the important question, how many registrations could be expected right now at $200? Once that data point is in place, then the question of "how much benefit" can be answered.

And yes, considering that this "registry" goes back to 1934, it is messed up.
 
I would be more concerned about tax stamps on semi auto firearms. After all, the tax scheme seemed to work OK on full auto's. What's to stop a rogue administration to pass that kind of legislation sometime in the future? After all, you wouldn't have to give up your semi's then. :eek: :barf:
 
Decent info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act_of_1934

The short version:

The National Firearms Act of 1934 imposed a tax on the manufacture and transfer of certain weapons and accessories -- full auto, suppressors, short barreled rifles and shotguns, "destructive devices". These are "Title II" weapons. Title I is all the non-taxed stuff -- "regular" guns.

The '68 Gun Control Act prohibited importation of machine guns, amongst other things (focusing on NFA items here). Due to this the vast majority of transferrable Uzis and Sterlings you see, for instance, were made from semi autos or parts kits, rather than being imported originals.

The 1986 legislation halted the manufacture of new machine guns for civilian sales. Before May of '86, if you had an AR or an M1 and wanted an M-16 or M2, you could file a form 1, pay your $200 and Bob's your uncle. After May of '86, no more. When this was coming a whole lot of receivers, sears, etc were "made" by manufacturers.

I'm not sure what the driving force was in '68 importation ban, perhaps it was low cost full-autos coming in from overseas?

But that's pretty much the situation in a nutshell. Remember, the '86 "ban" stopped manufacture for civilian sales -- but still allows pre '86 guns to be transferred, hence the insane prices for full autos. A fixed/diminishing supply and increasing demand.
 
My random hope is that some lame-duck politician from Montana will sneak Registry Reopening into a larger bill, or as a "poison pill" amendment.

Hmmm...

$200 tax stamp for FA
$200? for forged FA receiver
$500? for 10" .22LR barrel, upper, XM607 stock, carbine triangular handguards
$150 Ceiner AR .22LR conversion bolt
$200 tax stamp for XM607 moderator (no baffles, but still legally a suppressor)

=$1250

CAR15_M607.jpg


Would pay it happily. One guy on ARF has exactly what I describe above, says it sounds vaguely like a weed-whacker as it buzzes out 30rds of .22LR

Most expensive .22 I've ever wanted, and only unholy interference with the Invisible Hand puts it out of my reach...

-MV
 
I'm not sure what the driving force was in '68 importation ban, perhaps it was low cost full-autos coming in from overseas?
Click to expand...

Whats funny, is that the import ban was largely due to some US firearm manufactures lobbying against a flood of cheap military style rifles that were being "sporterized" for less $$$ than you could buy an American hunting rifle.

:what:

Sometimes lions eat their young.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
How do Re-open the Machine Gun Registry
Replies
3
Views
604
General Geoff
General Geoff
B
  • Locked
A Monkey Wrencher's Guide to the Canadian Gun Registry
Replies
1
Views
539
Bless The Throne Of Tyranny
B
O
  • Locked
Is That Thing Legal: Understanding NFA 34
Replies
15
Views
1K
ptmmatssc
P
G
  • Locked
Thoughts on a complete rewrite...
2 3
Replies
73
Views
9K
Robert
Robert
B
  • Locked
Cops source of [machine] gun sales
Replies
16
Views
1K
Fisherman_48768
F
Back
Top