Using A Trust For A Form 1

[Sinsaba]

I paid a firm to create a trust for me to use for NFA items. I had some questions about using it when filling out a Form 1 and they wouldn't answer me without even more money. Therefore, I hope that you all can shed some light on it for me.

Among other things I want to turn one of my AR receivers into a SBR. I've had the trust formed and executed so I'm good to go. However, I am somewhat at a loss as to how to fill out the Form 1. The law firm that created my trust won't answer any of my questions without a significant fee. I was wondering if anybody here might be able to shed some insight.

The questions I have are as follows:

I currently have an AR pistol with a short barrel. I wish to file a form 1 for my trust to make an AR15 short barrel rifle (using a different receiver than the pistol). My intent is to utilize a receiver manufactured by Smith & Wesson that has the S&W logo as well as the S&W model number as well as a serial number already stamped on it. I currently have a 16 inch upper on it so it is currently in a carbine configuration.


Box 4a - do I put the S&W information or the name of the trust
Box 4h - if I put the name of the trust in 4a, is this the box to put the information about the S&W manufacture of the receiver, model number &/or serial number?
Box 1d - Do I put the S&W model number here?
Box 1e & F - if my measurement is off (I don't recall if the barrel is 10" or 10.5" is this an issue.
Box 1f - how do I know the overall length without putting the 10.5" upper onto my current carbine lower (which I understand would be unlawful until I get the stamp)
Box 1g - this is the S&W serial number?

Does the fact that I'm going to engrave "HOMESTEAD TRUST, ANNANDALE, VA" on the receiver appear anywhere in the Form 1?

 

[bikemutt]

Here is the link I used to assist me with my Form 1: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_17/415446_Visual_guide__How_to_fill_out_a_Form_1_using_EFORMS.html

It wasn't obvious to me from your post but you do need to make certain that your S&W receiver was first made in a pistol configuration and not a rifle.

 

[Ryanxia]

The sticky in this section on how to file as a Trust is very helpful and spot on.

The measurement being off is not an issue.
I assume you're e-filing? Much quicker approval times than paper.
Make sure you engrave your item exactly has your Trust name is listed on your trust form and how it's submitted as on the form 1. Check out the sticky in this section of the forum, pretty much everything is answered in it.

Good luck.

EDIT: Read the whole thing but Post 3 should answer most of your questions.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=733393

Bikemutt - not sure what you're trying to say but if he is turning it into an SBR it doesn't matter how it started out. Your advice is only applicable when putting a short barrel upper onto a pistol lower (receiver had to start as a pistol and not as a rifle). If that's what you meant then I just misread.

 

[bikemutt]

Bikemutt - not sure what you're trying to say but if he is turning it into an SBR it doesn't matter how it started out. Your advice is only applicable when putting a short barrel upper onto a pistol lower (receiver had to start as a pistol and not as a rifle). If that's what you meant then I just misread.

You are correct Ryanxia. I should have had that extra cup of 'joe this morning

 

[Aaron Baker]

they wouldn't answer me without even more money

Now that's just sad.

What the heck is the point of drafting a trust for a client if you're not going to provide support for him when he goes to use it?

Gives attorneys a bad name. Sorry about your bad experience, Sinsaba. The link Ryanxia posted is a sticky I wrote with instructions for using a trust to do a Form 1. If any of your questions aren't answered, feel free to reply and I'm sure myself or someone else can answer them.

Aaron

 

[pjeski]

The OP says he "paid a firm" to create his trust. Was it a law firm? Or one of those Internet based trust makers? If you paid an attorney to create your trust and you don't get simple answers like this for free, that attorney should not be in the business of generating trusts. IMHO.

 

[Elkins45]

Aaron's FAQ answers almost everything you asked except for this:

Box 1f - how do I know the overall length without putting the 10.5" upper onto my current carbine lower (which I understand would be unlawful

Measure it now, then subtract the difference in the length of the barrels. If it has a 20" barrel now and you're putting on a 9" then the length is 11" less than when you bought it.

 

[Sinsaba]

Thank you everybody for your input, it has been supremely helpful.

 

[Sinsaba]

The OP says he "paid a firm" to create his trust. Was it a law firm? Or one of those Internet based trust makers? If you paid an attorney to create your trust and you don't get simple answers like this for free, that attorney should not be in the business of generating trusts. IMHO.

It was a law firm that created my trust. The name of the firm is Arsenal Attorneys, they advertise with the NRA among other places. The lawyer interviewed me over the phone (I don't count that against them I do a lot of my business over the phone too) and they set up the trust. I needed them to make a couple of changes and they did with no problems.
I'm not going out of my way to badmouth them but when the topic comes up I am more than willing to give my opinion of them. I surely wouldn't use them again.

 

[joem1945]

Why do a trust? I filed paper work to make a rifle into a SBR, paid my $200.00 and waited for my stamp. Got my stamp and made my SBR.

 

[Aaron Baker]

Why do a trust? I filed paper work to make a rifle into a SBR, paid my $200.00 and waited for my stamp. Got my stamp and made my SBR.

I'll assume this is a real question and hit the high points:

You can share your NFA firearm with anyone else named as a trustee.
You don't have to submit fingerprints, photographs or get CLEO signoff.
You can use eForms for Form 1, which reduces wait times to about 1 to 1.5 months.

Aaron

 

[Theohazard]

Why do a trust?

Aaron posted some good reasons to use a trust. I'd like to add another reason; when it comes to NFA items, many of us have the following choices:

A) use a trust.
or
B) never own any NFA items.

It seems like an easy choice to me.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I'll assume this is a real question and hit the high points:

You can share your NFA firearm with anyone else named as a trustee.
You don't have to submit fingerprints, photographs or get CLEO signoff.
You can use eForms for Form 1, which reduces wait times to about 1 to 1.5 months.

Aaron

In addition to what Aaron said, with a trust you have a mechanism to guide your heirs so they don't make a mistake and become accidental felons. My named successor trustee has several NFA weapons and know the process very well.

Expounding on Aaron's first point, going to the restroom while someone watches your guns or having another member of your household knowing the combination to your safe (or not even having a safe) could put them within the legal definition of "possession". You can remove all doubt by adding them as a trustee.

Mike

 

[GE-Mini-Gun]

Why do a trust? I filed paper work to make a rifle into a SBR, paid my $200.00 and waited for my stamp. Got my stamp and made my SBR.

I've wondered the same thing...if your local LEO won't sign then that's the only reason I would do a trust. As for letting someone else use my gun without me being there...unless he paid for it not going to happen. I've lent out Title I guns and they've came back damaged, again not going to happen. As for your heirs...simple Form 5 takes care of that...do you think your heirs even want them? As for the time, who cares, I waited 10 months for a suppressor couple years back...walked in paid my money and told the guy you won't see or hear from me unless I need something you sell until you call me telling me the suppressor is good to go. What if the ATF "changes" their mind and "outlaws" trusts, then what? Personally I like just my name on it, if I get pulled over it has my name and not Bedrock Quarry and hopefully I go on my way, but I can see it going different if it's under a trust...Johnny Law isn't there to help you in this case their are going to cover their backside before listening to you. All my opinion.

 

[kanook]

Why do a trust? I filed paper work to make a rifle into a SBR, paid my $200.00 and waited for my stamp. Got my stamp and made my SBR.

If you decide you want another SBR, you print out your papers, go get fingerprints, get pictures, get LEO signature, write a cheque, go to post office, keep looking at bank statement to know when it was cashed,

OR

go to computer, fill out forms, hit send

 

[Arizona_Mike]

As for letting someone else use my gun without me being there...unless he paid for it not going to happen. I've lent out Title I guns and they've came back damaged, again not going to happen.

Forget use, even possession is illegal if your wife or a relative knows the combination of your safe, they are in possession.

As for your heirs...simple Form 5 takes care of that...do you think your heirs even want them?

If my heirs don't want them they would be even more likely to not know what NFA weapons or a Form 5 even is. My successor trustee not only knows the process but has a pretty good idea what they are worth if my heirs don't want them.

As for the time, who cares, I waited 10 months for a suppressor couple years back...walked in paid my money and told the guy you won't see or hear from me unless I need something you sell until you call me telling me the suppressor is good to go.

God for you . . . I guess Not everyone enjoys waiting.

What if the ATF "changes" their mind and "outlaws" trusts, then what?

That would take an act of Congress. Not really in the realm of possibilities.

Personally I like just my name on it, if I get pulled over it has my name and not Bedrock Quarry and hopefully I go on my way, but I can see it going different if it's under a trust...Johnny Law isn't there to help you in this case their are going to cover their backside before listening to you. All my opinion.

As grantor of the trust, your name appears on the paperwork.

Mike

 

[dogtown tom]

Arizona_Mike ....Forget use, even possession is illegal if your wife or a relative knows the combination of your safe, they are in possession.

100% absolute nonsense.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

100% absolute nonsense.

Have a nice day too

Mike

PS. While you are having a nice day you may want to read US v. Turnbough, 1997 or any of a number of cases like it. In that the 7th circuit ruled a felon who had keys to his girlfriend's house had "dominion and control" over a handgun in her house. It real theoretical legal risk that can be resolved with a trust. Sure it would take bastard prosecutor but those have been proven to be more than theoretical.

 

[GE-Mini-Gun]

What if the ATF "changes" their mind and "outlaws" trusts, then what?

That would take an act of Congress. Not really in the realm of possibilities.

Quote:

Interesting...Sig Brace legal to shoulder...wait a minute...not legal to shoulder. 100% positive Congress had nothing to do with either making it legal then changing their (Congress) mind to make it illegal. I could go on with other legal/illegal thing Congress had nothing to do with in regards to ATF.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

Interesting...Sig Brace legal to shoulder...wait a minute...not legal to shoulder. 100% positive Congress had nothing to do with either making it legal then changing their (Congress) mind to make it illegal. I could go on with other legal/illegal thing Congress had nothing to do with in regards to ATF.

The ATF has changed their mind on technical rulings many times but for them to say NFA weapons can't be licenced to trusts would be as radical as them saying natural persons can't have them. This is not a technical ruling but a core part of the definition of "Person" in 26 USC.

If they were willing to go this far being a natural person puts you in no safer a position.

Mike

 

[Theohazard]

Forget use, even possession is illegal if your wife or a relative knows the combination of your safe, they are in possession.

100% absolute nonsense.

I've seen you post before that this isn't true, but I've never seen you explain why. I haven't studied actual cases like Arizona_Mike has, but it's always been my understanding that he's correct.

For example, when moving out of state the ATF says it's OK to leave your NFA firearms in a safe at someone else's house as long as the people in that house don't have access to the safe. That implies that it wouldn't be OK if they did have access to the safe.

So what are we missing here? Why is the ATF fine with someone having access to NFA firearms that aren't registered to them? Please notice that I'm not arguing with you, I'm just asking a question.

 

[Aaron Baker]

Trusts aren't necessary for everyone. They have concrete benefits that some people value, but those benefits are not important to everyone. For the people who don't place value in the benefits, the cost of a trust outweighs the benefits. That's fine. Everyone SHOULD do a cost-benefit analysis before investing in a legal instrument like a trust.

But some people are so certain that it must be "their way or the highway" that they want to come up with arguments why the benefits of a trust are somehow a great conspiracy perpetrated by lawyers, or why our big, evil government can just do whatever it wants to screw us over. I really don't understand the motivation of these people.

It's a benefit of a trust that you can share NFA firearms with other people you name as trustees. If you don't want to do that because your "friends" or family can't take care of things properly, then that's fine. Maybe a trust isn't necessary for you. But some people do have friends and family they trust.

It's a benefit of a trust that you don't have to worry as much as about your family (or other household members) being in technical violation of a law that could end them up in federal prison. If you have a safe that only you know the combination to, then maybe you don't really need a trust. That's fine. Maybe you're comfortable with the idea that the ATF is unlikely to ever discover your family in illegal possession of an NFA firearm. If you (and with their knowledge, your family) are okay with taking that risk, then don't get a trust. That's fine.

But don't try to pretend that "constructive possession" isn't a valid legal theory under which real people go to real prison. I am a defense attorney. I have an actual client serving actual prison time because he was a convicted felon and didn't know there were firearms in an unlocked safe in his girlfriend's house, where he was staying. He never touched those guns and the prosecutor never proved he did. It was enough that he was in the house and could have exercised dominion and control over them. He's a convicted felon and these are regular firearms, but the analogy is clear. Convicted felons can't legally possess regular guns. Your family can't legally possess NFA firearms that aren't registered to them. Although it's unlikely that a prosecution would ever happen, it's not impossible. Some people like the peace of mind a trust brings in this scenario.

There are other trust benefits. No fingerprints. No photographs. No chief law enforcement sign-off. Those aren't hard for most people to get. In my state, the sheriff can't refuse to sign off under state law. So no one "needs" a trust for that reason. But boy, those things can be a real pain. Compare the cost of a $200 trust to having to go through that hassle a half dozen times (once for each NFA firearm I own) and it makes sense for me to have a trust. Don't mind the extra requirements? That's fine. Don't have a trust.

A big benefit, lately, is that you can't use eForms without a trust. eForms are a lot faster than paper ATF forms. That's important to some people. Not important to you? You don't mind the wait? That's fine. Don't have a trust.

Also, I understand that not everyone has legal training or understands the differences between agency policy, regulations, and statutes. That's fine. I don't expect everyone to. Law school wasn't the easiest three years of my life, and those topics aren't something that are usually important to most people's daily lives. But there is a difference. The ATF can change their mind about whether they consider a Sig Brace to be an SBR, because that's a technical ruling. There's oversight of those rulings, in the sense that you can sue them if you think they're wrong and fight it out in court. But the ATF doesn't get to change their mind about whether trusts can own NFA firearms. That's a statutory issue. The federal statutory law says that trusts can own firearms. The ATF can't just "change its mind" about that. They would have to get Congress to change the law. Just because you don't understand why the Sig Brace and NFA trusts aren't treated the same way under the law doesn't mean they're not. I understand mistrusting the government--they've done a lot of awful stuff. But this isn't within their power. Reclassifying the Sig Brace was. It may have been an unpopular decision, but it has a fairly solid legal basis (like it or not). There's no legal basis to just stop allowing trusts to own firearms.

And as a final note to address something that was said in this thread: the reason that I always name my clients' trusts "Lastname Firearm Trust" is precisely to make it easier for local law enforcement to understand that they are connected to the trust and can legally own their firearms. Personally, I've never had a single person, law enforcement or otherwise, question my ownership of NFA firearms. I think it's fairly rare, nationwide. But every state is different. In my state, there are no state laws about NFA firearms, so it's really no concern of the state law enforcement officers. That's not true everywhere. But frankly, if you live in a place where you're likely to get hassled by the police about NFA firearms, I doubt the difference between having your name on a Form 1/4 and having your last name as part of a trust name on a Form 1/4 is going to be what makes all the difference. It's the old "you can beat the rap, but you can't be the ride" idea. Still, if that's your concern and your reason for not having a trust, that's fine. No one is insisting that everyone have a trust.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about whether a trust is right for them. But no one is entitled to their own version of the truth. The truth is that there are certain things that are true about trusts that are not true about individual ownership. There are benefits to trusts. The benefits may not outweigh costs for a particular person, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

If anyone wants to have an intelligent, civil legal debate about a particular area of law pertaining to trusts, that's okay and I'm up for it. But you should be ready to support your argument with actual legal precedents, not unfounded opinions or layperson's faulty interpretations of statutes.

Aaron

 

[dogtown tom]

Arizona_Mike Quote:

Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
100% absolute nonsense.

...While you are having a nice day you may want to read US v. Turnbough, 1997 or any of a number of cases like it. In that the 7th circuit ruled a felon who had keys to his girlfriend's house had "dominion and control" over a handgun in her house.

Key word there my friend is felon.

Theohazard Quote:

Originally Posted by dogtown tom
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arizona_Mike
Forget use, even possession is illegal if your wife or a relative knows the combination of your safe, they are in possession.

100% absolute nonsense.

I've seen you post before that this isn't true, but I've never seen you explain why. I haven't studied actual cases like Arizona_Mike has, but it's always been my understanding that he's correct.

Because there is no Federal law that prohibits your wife, son, daughter, or even your neighbor from knowing the combination to your safe. There isn't even a Federal law that requires a safe for NFA firearms.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

It is against the law for a felon to posses a gun.
It is against the law for a person to possess an NFA firearm (with exceptions).

The definition of constructive possession does not differ from one gun statute to another nor between gun and drug statutes for example.

Mike

 

[dogtown tom]

Arizona_Mike It is against the law for a felon to posses a gun.
It is against the law for a person to possess an NFA firearm (with exceptions).

The definition of constructive possession does not differ from one gun statute to another nor between gun and drug statutes for example.

Not exactly......
You take your machine gun to the range and hand it off to your brother in law:
-if he's not a felon............no problem.
-if he's a felon or prohibited person he's now in unlawful possession of a firearm.

It matters not one bit that its an NFA firearm or Title I firearm and both are performing the exact same act of possession.....simply holding the firearm.