Two questions on using a trust for NFA acquisitions

Status
Not open for further replies.
And let's be honest here ... :scrutiny: Most who've chosen to go the trust route in the first place did so precisely to avoid the burden of pursuing the CLEO sign-off.
I would give a lot more credence to multiple family member use and protecting unsophisticated heirs from accidental violations. That was why I went that route despite a friendly sheriff.

That said, if the ATF really does not like trusts, some word from them disclaiming the theoretical possibility of a relative, range buddy, fellow camper being charged with possession when you are temporarily away would serve that goal.

Mike
 
* * * Plus, having the trust allows me to leave my SBR or silencer home with my wife and not accidentally make her a felon.

That's largely an internet myth, and as a practical matter, it's a non-issue. Leaving your NFA items locked in your safe doesn't make her a felon while you're away at work or travelling.

And even if she's got a key to your safe (and therefore arguably has "constructive" possession), unless she's out running around with the SBR or can while engaged in illegal activity, like robbing a bank, I've never heard of an ATF prosecution of the spouse of a legit NFA holder for "illegal possession" on those facts.
 
We (my wife and I) went for a trust to avoid the constructive possession problem. We use the same gun safe, and we use the same suppressors. I don't always go to the range when she does.

One can say the risk of prosecution is small, but I like to eliminate even small risks when I can easily do so. It's the classic small risk/big consequence kind of decision.

It will be a happy day when they just classify suppressors as normal firearms, instead of NFA items.
 
For those of you who said the whole CLEO signature going away bought you off, with trusts, there is none of that. No CLEO signature, no fingerprints, no photographs. Even if you get a trust and only list yourself, it is worth it to avoid all those items.

Also, my understanding is that 41P does not come into effect until 180 days after the ruling is published in the federal registry. the final-ish version of 41P came out this past week, but it has not been published yet. What was released this past week was what the published version will more or less look like. Therefore, the clock on the 180 days has not yet started.

That is why I am urging everyone to write to your politicians and request that they work to stop 41P from being implemented. For those of you who have a beef with the CLEO signature and want to continue to buy NFA items as an individual, I would encourage you to have your politicians push to have that requirement removed altogether or to have your state bodies mandate a shall issue requirement.
 
Question re: CT

Can anyone tell me if it is legal in CT to do the trust thing for NFA items or
(as I was told by my LGS) is this prohibited?
Thanks.
 
For those of you who think 41P/F is so wonderful because the CLEO signoff is going away, I ask why you would buy NFA items as an individual. The benefits of buying with a trust are far greater than buying as an individual. As an individual, you need fingerprints, photos, and CLEO signoffs for each NFA item that you purchase.

With a trust, my fellow trustees can receive my NFA items when the ATF sends back the tax stamp (this is useful if I am out of state either on a deployment, vacation, etc), they can use the items, they can possess the items, and in the event of my death, there is no additional paperwork or confusion over who owns the items as they are owned by the trust.

With trusts, you can either draft your own for free or get a lawyer to draft one for you for. I had an attorney draft mine. He charged either $400 or $500... I can't remember. Before anyone says that that's a lot of money, I argue that it's petty cash considering that it was done by an attorney who specializes in gun law and when we spend $200 per NFA item on the tax alone, $500 to eliminate all the fingerprinting, photos, and CLEO signoff and to fast-track NFA purchases is a small price to pay. All I had to do was send him a list of names of people that I wanted on the trust and talk with him for about 15 minutes. With trusts, no one needs to get fingerprinted, photographed, and no CLEO signoff is needed.

For those who whine that the CLEO signoff is difficult to obtain, you could have easily gotten a professionally-drafted trust with a few minutes on the phone and a few bucks and been buying NFA items as you wished without having to get fingerprints, photos, CLEO signoffs, or make any CLEO notifications. The CLEOs in my area are all gun-friendly and I was able to literally walk in and out in 5 minutes with the CLEO signature. I know this because I purchased my first NFA item as an individual before finding out about the benefits of a trust. My point is the regardless of whether the CLEO signoff was easy or difficult to obtain, a trust is still the best way to make NFA purchases. I can literally buy an NFA item and give a copy of my trust to my Class III/SOT and wait for the tax stamp to come back.

A trust might not be appealing if you do not know the law and cannot draft a trust for yourself, if you think that paying an attorney to draft one is too costly (if you think that is too costly then you probably should reconsider getting into NFA), if you purely plan to be the only one to shoot/possess/use your NFA items, you do not care what happens to your NFA items if you die or are otherwise incapacitated, or if you just don't have any family/friends.

My point is that it is irresponsible to not have a trust if you are plunging into NFA. Those of us who make multiple NFA purchases and are serious about NFA items, typically have trusts. While I agree that having to get fingerprints and photos every 2 years is not terrible, it is definitely worse than simply giving a copy of my trust to my Class III/SOT. And besides that, you could theoretically have hundreds or thousands of trustees listed in your trust. While most trusts likely have 1-5 persons listed, there is no limit as to the number of trustees. They just have to be able to legally possess NFA items. Getting all of the trustees listed can potentially become problematic if you have a lot of people in your trust and if they live in various locations.

For those of you who wish to dispute what I said, I encourage you to talk to others who are into NFA items as well as your Class III/SOT and attorneys who specialize in gun law. You will find that trusts are not time-consuming, not expensive, and are the fastest, easiest, and make the most sense from a legal perspective.

That is what I wrote on a separate thread after people were talking about how they liked 41P/F. 41P/F is not a good thing. Buying NFA items as an individual and not using a trust is irresponsible.
 
Ive got a trust that I'll never change. It has 18 items on it. I drafted it myself and there is one more item in the pipeline . I am the only trustee and quite frankly would never let anyone else use any of my stuff. That includes my kids and relatives etc. I would have gone individual a LONG time ago had I been in a area that the sheriff wasnt a complete ( non high road name ). To me that trust is now dead. Oh, its still valid but I won't be adding anything new to it. Next thing I buy will be a SIG MCX SBR if they ever get off their keisters and release them for sale. It will be as an individual. If I had been able to do individual years ago I would have gone that route. The trust route never was something I wanted.Now that its going to be simpler to do individual I'll just do that.

"Buying NFA items as an individual and not using a trust is irresponsible."

What?
 
Just posting this FYI ...

A rather well thought-out analysis of the post 7/1/2016 NFA game, I thought (and not by me, although I agree with it):

After thinking about this for a couple of days, overall I think this is probably a overall net neutral to potentially positive, assuming it all plays out as advertised.

Looking at this from the individual filer perspective this removed a huge hurdle with the removal of the CLEO sig and the need to endlessly send in fingerprint cards. I currently see no negatives for the individual applicant and only benefits. (removal of CLEO sig and only submitting prints/pics every couple years assuming regular applications are filed)

That said, for the legal entity applicant, there is no doubt that there are a bunch of new requirements that primarily center around getting all the responsible persons background checked via a name/prints/pic requirement.

Overall as somebody who has filed as both an LLC and individual over the years, I am pretty well versed in these identification requirements for individual transfers and that they are really not a huge roadblock to NFA ownership.

Picture are easily done at home and are virtually free as long as you own a computer and printer if you are doing a F1. I suspect most dealers will figure out how to take mugshot pictures for their customer’s F4s for free or at nominal cost.

Prints do usually cost money (usually around $25 per set) but this will only have to be done once every two years. Once again I suspect that many dealers will get into the fingerprint business as a result and make this a pretty minor speed bump for most folks. (I know if I was a dealer I would invest $100 in an inking station and then charge $20 for a set of prints and passport pic)

CLEO notification is essentially free (minus the cost of the envelop and stamp)

My personal take is that this change will bring in many new folks to the NFA ownership game (although I understand other feel differently). The reality was the CLEO sig requirement was a huge hurdle for many folks. Was it insurmountable...no. Obviously you could always move to a new area, rent a second residence, or go down the endless chain of acceptable CLEO signatures in your area till you found somebody whose palm just needed a little greasing.

The reality is that very few people are going to rent a second home, move, or schedule endless meeting with potential hostile CLEO signatories in order to obtain an NFA firearm.

So that left many folks with the remaining option of bypassing the CLEO sig via a legal entity transfer. Talking to many of my coworkers who were interested in NFA firearms, the minute you started to talk to them about setting up a Trust with Attorney and Notary fees or incorporating an LLC and filing tax reports every year their interest waned pretty quick. Usually the conversation ends with “that sounds like a pain in the ass”. Tell them about a CLEO sig and visiting the Sheriff and its more of a response of “screw that”. I don’t personally know anybody who wanted a CHL that didn’t get one because of the pics and prints requirement.

Of the couple dozen friends and co-workers who have been interested in purchasing NFA firearms over the years and asked me how it was done, exactly two have ended up buying an NFA firearm which is a pretty lousy conversion rate.

Now if I could just send them over to Capitol Armory and say, Hey CA will need to take your picture and roll a set of prints for you for minimal to no cost just like they did for your carry license, they would be over there that afternoon.

As mentioned above, the folks who this really is going to hurt are the Trust Attorney’s who sold NFA trusts hand over fist the past couple of years. It’s probably also a net losing proposition for outfits like SilencerShop who have built a sizable business model on Trusts (selling them and submitting Form 4s for customer 24 hours after the Form 3s is submitted, etc._

Sure there are other benefits of Trusts other than bypassing the CLEO sig. However, nothing in the new regulations prevent you from continuing to use a Trust for all those other benefits (estate planning, multi-access trustee, etc.)

Getting rid of the CLEO sig to allow more folks to enter the NFA community while at the same time reducing the overall initial acquisition burden (since profession attorney drafted Trusts are not cheap) is probably more of a net positive than having to provide pics and prints for future legal entity responsible parties.

I guess there may also be the potential loss of the eForms site given it cant accept fingerprints, but given that site’s functionality in my experience I am not sure how much of a loss it really is. I personally spend less time hitting “print” on my F1 and apply a postage stamp than ****ing with that disaster of a website.

Ultimately time will tell to see if this change is a net benefit, loss or ends up being neutral for the NFA community.

Link to thread:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_17/4...to_Questions_and_Defunding_ATF41F.html&page=3
 
For those of you who said the whole CLEO signature going away bought you off, with trusts, there is none of that. No CLEO signature, no fingerprints, no photographs. Even if you get a trust and only list yourself, it is worth it to avoid all those items.

You keep saying that like the cost of a trust is a non issue.
 
jerkface11 said:
You keep saying that like the cost of a trust is a non issue.
With reputable online trust companies like 199trust.com offering trusts for as low as $79 (or less at times), the cost is pretty much a non-issue.
 
Quote:
For those of you who said the whole CLEO signature going away bought you off, with trusts, there is none of that. No CLEO signature, no fingerprints, no photographs. Even if you get a trust and only list yourself, it is worth it to avoid all those items.

You keep saying that like the cost of a trust is a non issue.

That's because the small financial cost of paying to get a trust drafted so that you can simply submit a copy of your trust when you want to make an NFA purchase and avoid costs in gas, time wasted waiting in lines, and other inconveniences associated with gathering fingerprints, photos, and sign-offs for every NFA purchase made as an individual is worth it.

Like was stated above, you can draft your own trust for free, use an online template for well under $100, or have an attorney draft one. When we in the NFA community are shelling out $200 in a tax stamp alone plus hundreds or thousands for a single NFA item, the cost of a trust, especially considering its advantages, is a non issue.
 
He never said he paid for the Will Maker software - his $12 cost was for the notary (which is still a rip off if you ask me). Either way, I think his point is that $12 in expenses to setup a trust is a non-issue.
 
So you suggest violating federal law to make getting a trust cheaper?

I violate federal law when I walk into the marijuana store down the street. OK. Just making a point. I dont really smoke weed. My wife won't let me. We do have a marijuana store down the street.

If Quicken were to continue to sell Willmaker '07 or '08 I'd buy it. They don't any more and those are the last versions that gives full trust capabilities.Yep, I know. Its not High Road . I also watch torrent download movies sometimes.


As far as the notary costs go the only place I could find to notarize it was the CPA down the street and she charges $12. None of the banks I bank with would touch it with a ten foot pole.
 
He never said he paid for the Will Maker software - his $12 cost was for the notary (which is still a rip off if you ask me). Either way, I think his point is that $12 in expenses to setup a trust is a non-issue.
Missed that pesky little period on my phone screen.

I get free notarization at work either from admins or the Chase Bank kiosk (where I did my trust). Pretty sure BofA would have been free too.

Mike
 
I violate federal law when I walk into the marijuana store down the street. OK. Just making a point. I dont really smoke weed. My wife won't let me. We do have a marijuana store down the street.

If Quicken were to continue to sell Willmaker '07 or '08 I'd buy it. They don't any more and those are the last versions that gives full trust capabilities.Yep, I know. Its not High Road . I also watch torrent download movies sometimes.


As far as the notary costs go the only place I could find to notarize it was the CPA down the street and she charges $12. None of the banks I bank with would touch it with a ten foot pole.
What reason did these banks give you for not notarizing a signature?
 
There are differences in examiners.

I had sent in my trust at least 3-4 times without a schuelde A, all items were listed under the disposition of proceeds, on the 4th or 5th stamp it was returned for correction ... I didn't understand the problem because I'd used the trust several times without incedent so I called and talked to my examiner which was not the same guy that had signed my other F1's & F4's and he explained that on page one there is a reference to my schuelde A and that it wasn't with the trust, and that when I get it that I could just fax or email it to him ... I had it by the end of the day & emailed it to him.

On one of my recent F1's I accendently and incorrectly put the importer name & location information in place original maker and location ... When I noticed it it was pending, I called and emailed the "Experts" for weeks to contact someone and finally got a responce but that very same day it was approved and was told not to worry about it now.
 
What reason did these banks give you for not notarizing a signature?
They wouldnt notarize a trust they didnt draft. It could have been anything else but not a trust. Took it to 3 different banks and no dice in any of them and I have long standing accounts in all three.They wouldnt budge. BofA , Chase and Washington Federal.
 
I don't understand why they would refuse ... Notarizing is just a statement that the person signing the document has provided identification that they are the person that they represent themselves to be.

My first few times I went to a local grocery store that notarized it for $5 ... Then I found a girl at work that's a Notary and she does it for "nothing" ... for payment she has asked me to bring my toys to the range so she can play with them a bit too ... As a bonus, she easy on the eyes ;)
 
I don't understand why they would refuse ... Notarizing is just a statement that the person signing the document has provided identification that they are the person that they represent themselves to be.

My first few times I went to a local grocery store that notarized it for $5 ... Then I found a girl at work that's a Notary and she does it for "nothing" ... for payment she has asked me to bring my toys to the range so she can play with them a bit too ... As a bonus, she easy on the eyes ;)
It was all three banks position that they wouldnt notarize a trust they didnt draft. Keep in mind this was not a NFA TRUST !!! . It was just a plain jane trust with a schedule A. Nothing to suggest firearms and they still turned it down. ALL THREE !!!
 
I wonder, is preparing a trust something that banks do?
I mean, was bringing in a trust for notarizing somehow infringing on their business?

That's just weird ... Are you a customer of any of those banks? If not, maybe that's a service they only provide for their customers, but you wouldn't think so.

BTW, I bought a software package called "Perfect Wills, Living Wills - Trusts & Estate planning" on sale at Best Buy for $10 back in 2007 ... Advertised as legal in all 50 states, of course wills & trusts need to be notarized and some have to be filed with the state. My cousin is a retired lawyer, after I printed it he read it over and said it was fine as far as the state of Kansas was concerned.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top