Pmags for export

**Avenger11** · 08-17-08, 14:24

Well, sometimes it doesn't pay to save a buck. I am not saying who I was ordering from, but the price was cheaper than dirt.

Perhaps I will learn to stick with those businesses I know and trust.

**TimW** · 08-17-08, 14:57

Part of the problem is that the issue is vague...I've had multiple MANUFACTURERS tell me their items require export licenses or fall under ITAR, including nearly all of Mag-Pul's items. Whether this is Mag-Pul "over-interpreting" to be conservative, I can't say, but as a mere retailer I rely on manufacturer's to know if their products require such licenses or are otherwise restricted. And those that mention the restrictions say that APO/FPO addresses are included, since the items are being "exported", that is, leaving the country.

ATF's recent interpretation of regulations and laws have drastically changed how gunsmiths are viewed...meaning most everything they do short of just installing sights or cleaning up a gun before selling it, is now considered manufacturing and requires a manufacturer's license.

Given that, would be be any surprise for a government official to deem a small plastic part as falling under ITAR regulation?

I have neither the time, money nor desire to take on the federal government should they somehow deem that something I've exported actually did fall under ITAR, nor would I expect any company from which I purchase anything to take that risk, either.

Just as it sometimes doesn't pay to save a buck, it also sometimes doesn't pay to earn a buck, either.

**Iraqgunz** · 08-17-08, 15:56

Tim,

I don't think it is a matter of "taking on the gov't" it's a matter of just seeking written clarification concerning the guidelines. No different that seeking clarification from BATFE or the local city council in regards to an ordinance.

Here is a link to the State Dept. website which talks about ITAR. Specifically read section 123.17. It essentially states that parts less than 100.00 wholesale in value, with the exception of barrels, receivers, breeches, and cylinders may be exported w/o a permit.

http://pmddtc.state.gov/docs/ITAR/20...R_Part_123.pdf

Originally Posted by TimW

Part of the problem is that the issue is vague...I've had multiple MANUFACTURERS tell me their items require export licenses or fall under ITAR, including nearly all of Mag-Pul's items. Whether this is Mag-Pul "over-interpreting" to be conservative, I can't say, but as a mere retailer I rely on manufacturer's to know if their products require such licenses or are otherwise restricted. And those that mention the restrictions say that APO/FPO addresses are included, since the items are being "exported", that is, leaving the country.

ATF's recent interpretation of regulations and laws have drastically changed how gunsmiths are viewed...meaning most everything they do short of just installing sights or cleaning up a gun before selling it, is now considered manufacturing and requires a manufacturer's license.

Given that, would be be any surprise for a government official to deem a small plastic part as falling under ITAR regulation?

I have neither the time, money nor desire to take on the federal government should they somehow deem that something I've exported actually did fall under ITAR, nor would I expect any company from which I purchase anything to take that risk, either.

Just as it sometimes doesn't pay to save a buck, it also sometimes doesn't pay to earn a buck, either.

**TimW** · 08-17-08, 16:22

Originally Posted by Iraqgunz

Tim,
Here is a link to the State Dept. website which talks about ITAR. Specifically read section 123.17. It essentially states that parts less than 100.00 wholesale in value, with the exception of barrels, receivers, breeches, and cylinders may be exported w/o a permit.

That might be, but the stuff I sell that would require such a license, like body armor, isn't under $100.

Hell, even screws for an AR-15 grip, which secures it to the receiver, fall under ITAR classifications.

**Iraqgunz** · 08-17-08, 16:47

Tim,

I understand. FWIW- I have had body armor shipped over here, NVG's and plenty of other stuff via the APO. Not one time since 2004 have I had any issues at all. My only guess is that someone must be turning a blind wye when sending it to an APO/FPO address.

**NickB** · 08-18-08, 00:31

Anyone interested in exporting PMAGs for any reason should contact me directly: call 1.877.4MAGPUL and ask for Nick. ITAR is complicated, but I can assure you that we've made every attempt possible to clarify the State Department export restrictions on PMAG and other items. Needless to say, the few answers we've received have not been promising. We do have avenues through which to export our magazines, but it's not as easy as dropping them in a FedEx box.

**Avenger11** · 08-18-08, 02:24

NickB, would one of those options be to ship to an APO?

I see many of these ITAR items, including Magpul products, in the PX here in Iraq. The problem is, the PX takes over 9 months to restock items, so it's not the most expeditious means to get items you need.

I am not looking to get around any laws that prevent the wrong people from getting restricted items in a foreign country. I just cannot believe that so many people in the USA pay lip service to supporting the troops, but when it comes down to "supporting" the troops, we are left in the cold. I don't need P-Mags and other firearm associated parts at home as much as I need them here in Iraq, right now.

**Iraqgunz** · 08-18-08, 08:55

So I sent an email to the DDTC office to try and get some clarification on this issue. So here it is.

I am seeking clarification on an issue that seems to continually pop up. Specifically in relation to sending weapons parts, scopes, accessories and such overseas. Are military personnel serving overseas i.e. in Iraq and Afghanistan exempt from ITAR/ DDTC restrictions. For example- a Soldier wishes to purchase a sight or extra magazines for his weapon. He contacts a company in the U.S, places the order and then provides an APO address for shipping. Would that company legally be allowed to send those items to that soldier or is that prohibited? It seems as if there are different schools of thought on this as well varying interpretations. I appreciate any clarification that can be provided in this matter.

The export of ITAR controlled items from the United States by commercial vendors requires an export license issued by the Department of State (DDTC). This includes commercial purchases such as rifle magazines and military scopes sent through the APO to individual members of the armed forces.

Can you then provide some clarification on the exemption under section 123.17which states items that are less than 100.00 in wholesale value, as long as those parts are not a receiver, barrel, slide or cylinder do not require an export permit? Can you possibly tell me where specifically one can read the specific regulations that you refer to?

If the value of the parts is less than $100, the exemption can be used by the exporter in most cases. However, it cannot be used for shipments to Afghanistan and Iraq. Both are still prohibited countries under part 126.1 of the ITAR. Although there are exceptions to permit the licensing of exports to governments of those countries and to coalition forces and coalition contractors, the use of the 123.17 (a) exemption is not allowed. ( See the language of the 123.17 (a) exemption itself.)

So even though the end user(s)/ recipient(s) are U.S military personnel because they are in Iraq or Afghanistan it is not allowed. Of course, this would be a moot point if we lifted the arms embargo which is still in place. That in and of itself makes no sense either as we are currently exporting weapons and other items to the gov'ts of both countries.

**TimW** · 08-18-08, 10:25

First, thanks for taking the time to do this. Very interesting replies.

Originally Posted by Iraqgunz

That in and of itself makes no sense either as we are currently exporting weapons and other items to the gov'ts of both countries.

Yes, but they're being done under an export license, which means our government is keeping track of such things. Theoretically, someone could value an EOTech or other controlled item at $100 or less, and circumvent the export restrictions. I think that's what the government is wanting to avoid...that and small vendors cutting in on the profits.

Not that I like it, just sayin'.