So by executive order Obama changed it so you have to finger print everyone on a trust to buy suppressors and such on that trust. Trump has at one time promised to do away with his executive orders. Do y'all see it going back to how it was? I have a trust and would like another suppressor and maybe a sbr, but I have my family listed and really don't want the headache and cost of printing everyone.
Trust finger prints.
- Thread starter SamT1
- Start date
- Status
Acera
Member
I know you probably believe anything you hear and want to hate on obama, but it was not an executive order that put that rule change in place. Sorry to burst your fantasy.
You might want to read up on it.
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regul...-checks-responsible-persons-effective-july-13
.
You might want to read up on it.
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regul...-checks-responsible-persons-effective-july-13
.
So who's fault is it then? That says the attorney general, who is answers directly. Is it someone else?
Acera
Member
Obama did not make the rule. It was suggested, but the AG made and approved the changes. It fell there, no bho. (that is my understanding from what I have read)
.
.
He told her to do it. That's like my secretary turning over a late bill to collections and me telling a customer I didn't do it since she is the one that actually did it by my orders. but I see what your saying it may not get overturned since it's not technically an executive order.
The new President will be able to start the ball rolling very quickly, but many expected or hoped-for changes cannot be immediate. The changes may easily take a year or more.
Please forgive a little 'inside baseball' on how Federal regulations work. There has been a huge level confusion in the press over how the Obama Administration has taken actions without getting laws passed by Congress. Executive Action and Executive Orders are not the same thing, although an Executive Order is one form of Executive Action. Publishing Federal Regulations is another.
An Executive Order (EO) is a very specific formal document signed by the President, giving orders to the Executive Branch to take specific actions, including publishing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). An Executive Order does not apply to the general public, nor to the Congress or U.S. Courts, as a law does. It applies only to the Executive Branch departments or agencies named in the Order. You can find all EOs back to Herbert Hoover at the National Archives at
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html
The legal theory is that every EO must be based upon authority granted to the President in some Public Law.
Most of what the Obama Administration has done without Congress, including changing the rules on fingerprints for arsenal trust members, has not been through EOs, but through Department or Agency Regulations, published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR, http://www.ecfr.gov), after a publication process in the Federal Register (https://www.federalregister.gov/) and a public comment and review period, all required by law. Federal Regulations, just like EOs, are supposed to be based on authorities in law, either directly, or as directed in an EO, which is itself based on a law.
So, the new President will be able to immediately order departments and agencies to change many current regulations. However, the process to change those regulations must go through the publication, review, and public comment period required in law. That process will take many months, especially if the responsible department or agency slow-rolls first preparing the initial draft, and then reviewing and dealing with the public comments.
This entire slow regulation process is, by the way, why the current administration has been rushing thousands of pages of new regulations out in final form since the election.
Please forgive a little 'inside baseball' on how Federal regulations work. There has been a huge level confusion in the press over how the Obama Administration has taken actions without getting laws passed by Congress. Executive Action and Executive Orders are not the same thing, although an Executive Order is one form of Executive Action. Publishing Federal Regulations is another.
An Executive Order (EO) is a very specific formal document signed by the President, giving orders to the Executive Branch to take specific actions, including publishing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). An Executive Order does not apply to the general public, nor to the Congress or U.S. Courts, as a law does. It applies only to the Executive Branch departments or agencies named in the Order. You can find all EOs back to Herbert Hoover at the National Archives at
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html
The legal theory is that every EO must be based upon authority granted to the President in some Public Law.
Most of what the Obama Administration has done without Congress, including changing the rules on fingerprints for arsenal trust members, has not been through EOs, but through Department or Agency Regulations, published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR, http://www.ecfr.gov), after a publication process in the Federal Register (https://www.federalregister.gov/) and a public comment and review period, all required by law. Federal Regulations, just like EOs, are supposed to be based on authorities in law, either directly, or as directed in an EO, which is itself based on a law.
So, the new President will be able to immediately order departments and agencies to change many current regulations. However, the process to change those regulations must go through the publication, review, and public comment period required in law. That process will take many months, especially if the responsible department or agency slow-rolls first preparing the initial draft, and then reviewing and dealing with the public comments.
This entire slow regulation process is, by the way, why the current administration has been rushing thousands of pages of new regulations out in final form since the election.
Last edited:
As noted, this change was not done by executive order. It was a change in NFA regulations done through the formal rulemaking process. The formal process involves publishing the proposed regulation (or amendment to an existing regulation) together with a statement of the reason, purpose, and statutory authority for the regulation (or amendment to an existing regulation). Only after a period of public comment would the rule be made final and effective.
Whether we're likely to see any significant changes to the NFA under Trump is highly speculative. Change to this rule, without some major, parallel changes to the NFA and the GCA, is most likely problematic. The new rule is arguably more consistent with the reality of the law of trusts when considered in relation to the statutory reality of both the NFA and the GCA.
Illustrative of this is this comment by the Third Circuit looking, in a different context, at the use of a trust as a device for the beneficial ownership of NFA weapons (Watson v. Lynch (Third Circuit, No. 15-2859, 2016), slip op. at 9):
Those who believe that the new president will automatically (with a stroke of the pen) change, remove, modify or add federal regulations and laws to suit his supporters are likely to be disappointed. While he might change or eliminate some EO's or initiate changes to regulations, the process is likely to be long and cumbersome. For many minor rules/regulations (and let's fact it, most such related to guns are pretty minor in the overall scheme of things) change may never come, no matter what promises have been made.
Jim
Jim
One thing is very important to understand about all the Executive Orders issued by Obama relating to firearm regulation: There are none.
You can find every Executive Order issued by Obama here.
The whole thing is a tempest without even a teapot. The usual original reason for folks going to a trust at all is that the Chief LEO for the area would refuse to sign the application for an MG transfer, usually because the CLEO thought that he would be held responsible if the new MG owner misused the gun. Transfer to a trust did not require a CLEO approval., so MG buyers used that means to "get around" CLEO refusal to approve a transfer.
But the regulations have been changed in two major ways. The first is that the CLEO now needs to be "notified" of the transfer; he does not need to sign off on or approve anything. That means that a CLEO cannot stop a sale that is otherwise legal by doing nothing. And that eliminates the need for CLEO approval so the need for the trust goes away.
So, except in a few cases where there is a real reason for a trust, an individual can purchase an auto weapon without the need for a superfluous "trust".
Jim
But the regulations have been changed in two major ways. The first is that the CLEO now needs to be "notified" of the transfer; he does not need to sign off on or approve anything. That means that a CLEO cannot stop a sale that is otherwise legal by doing nothing. And that eliminates the need for CLEO approval so the need for the trust goes away.
So, except in a few cases where there is a real reason for a trust, an individual can purchase an auto weapon without the need for a superfluous "trust".
Jim
The reason for a trust is so when I die my boys get my toys. My understanding is that if I died today and didn't have a trust, those class 3 items would be property of ATF not my family.
Not to mention legal issues from say me leaving a suppressor in the pickup and my wife getting pulled over with it in there.
But I live In a good part of the world where you run into the sheriff at the gas pump. He probably personally knows anyone who owns class 3 stuff anyway.
I have my whole family listed on my trust as users/trustees, so it would be a huge hassle to get everyone printed and pay whatever costs are involved 9 people and one is 16 months old!
Cannibul
Member
Your understanding is wrong.
When you die your family is allowed to do a no cost transfer of the items.
wally
Member
Its even easier if you have a will and spell out who is to inherit what.
The wife or sons in possession of your suppressor is a very good reason for a Trust!
The new rules do suck. But if I get any more NFA stuff it'll be as an individual so as to not put my Trustees through this hassle and expense -- prints and photos aren't done for free.
The lack of LEO sign-off is a win for many as in most large cities its impossible to get the sign-off unless your family has political clout -- Its why I became an NRA member -- I'd never have gotten my Thompson SMG without the clout of my first wife's grandfather telling the DA to sign for me, this was before the court case that enabled Trusts -- Best $600 I ever spent!
There can be a lot more involved -- beyond Title II weapons. A lot might depend on the overall size of an estate. If there's a will, and especially if real property or a going business is involved, the will needs to be probated -- that's money, time, and work.
Afew years ago, at Sam1911's request, I looked into this. There's this 1999 letter on ATF letterhead (emphasis added):
I also found this article, "Fiduciaries and Firearms -- Dealing with Guns in Estate Planning and Administration", on an attorney site by an estate planning lawyer:
It really can't be overemphasized that this is policy, not regulation or statute. It is a reasonable, practical policy; but since it is not enshrined in regulation or statute it's easy to change at any time.
Also, this policy assumes that the decedent's estate is being wound up through formal legal process, under court supervision when required. So --
- If there's a will, someone has filed the will for probate with the proper court; and someone has received Letters Testamentary from the court designating him as the executor (the personal representative of the decedent).
- If there's no will or trust, someone has filed to have the estate subject to court supervised administration; and someone has received Letters of Administration from the court designating him as the administrator (the personal representative of the decedent).
- If there's a trust, the trustee is handling matters as a fiduciary in accordance with the trust document and applicable state law.
That's the problem with this whole deal, no one knows what going on. Dealers don't know, police dont, lawyers can argue different interpretations, ATf changes their stance in memos, a president can lean on his appointees to change interpretations and I'm over here like "shall not be infringed".
Elkins45
Member
Not that I love NFA 34, but to say "no one knows" is incorrect. I know and have known since before I purchased my first NFA item. In the age of the Internet it isn't hard to get good information.
- Status
