View Full Version : NFA changes inc?
majorleaguekennels
07-09-12, 22:19
Just wanted to share a short vid i just checked out. some NFA forms will be electronic now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VTZO3pVsAA
saddlerocker
07-09-12, 22:46
Just saw this on another forum
Im glad someone is out there talking to lawmakers and trying to get things done.
My only fear is that the tax may increase since it has been the same since the 1930's
Quiet Riot
07-10-12, 15:21
Just saw this on another forum
Im glad someone is out there talking to lawmakers and trying to get things done.
My only fear is that the tax may increase since it has been the same since the 1930's
Only Congress can change taxes, and as evidenced by the Holder contempt vote, the voting majority of Congress is going to do what the NRA tells them to do.
If Congress passes a law increasing the NFA stamp tax, it will be because the NRA let them. I don't see that happening.
everyusernametaken
07-10-12, 15:40
Just saw this on another forum
Im glad someone is out there talking to lawmakers and trying to get things done.
My only fear is that the tax may increase since it has been the same since the 1930's
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then. It had to have increased with inflation over the last 80 years.
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then. It had to have increased with inflation over the last 80 years.
SSSSHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then. It had to have increased with inflation over the last 80 years.
SILENCE! =)
I really don't want them messing with it at all.
SSSSHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
LOL! Serious.
I think $200 is plenty expensive (not to mention engraving, mailing, fingerprints (if you have to pay) etc.) to have a barrel length under 16", or to own a hearing safety device. A little ridiculous. Hopefully they already know that.
Personally I think it should be $15 for a stamp with a 2 week wait to get it. :D
$200 in 1934 would be equivalent to $3430 in 2012 dollars.
$200 in 1934 would be equivalent to $3430 in 2012 dollars.
$200 slows me down at times. $3430 would be a real breaker for me.
Hey Doc. Got my left paw fixed yesterday, carpal tunnel, it feels much better this time. Last one was 4 months ago and 110#'s ago. The Bier block worked better I needed much less numbing medicine.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
everyusernametaken
07-10-12, 17:11
Oops, sorry :D
$200 slows me down at times. $3430 would be a real breaker for me.
Hey Doc. Got my left paw fixed yesterday, carpal tunnel, it feels much better this time. Last one was 4 months ago and 110#'s ago. The Bier block worked better I needed much less numbing medicine.
Excellent! I hope you get a quick return of function.
$200 in 1934 would be equivalent to $3430 in 2012 dollars.
At least then the tax could be for a brand new machine gun.
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then.
It was more of a deterrent or "penalty".
Be careful. I remember people cheering about the NFATCA stuff that weas being done. Then they started to meddle in the trust situation among other things.
LOL! Serious.
I think $200 is plenty expensive (not to mention engraving, mailing, fingerprints (if you have to pay) etc.) to have a barrel length under 16", or to own a hearing safety device. A little ridiculous. Hopefully they already know that.
Personally I think it should be $15 for a stamp with a 2 week wait to get it. :D
Aren't stamps $0.45? That works for me. :secret:
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then. It had to have increased with inflation over the last 80 years.
No, NFA Stamp prices have changed several times.
No, NFA Stamp prices have changed several times.
? Please cite your source. I was under the impression of the exact opposite. Or did I miss your sarcasm?
No, NFA Stamp prices have changed several times.
Can you elaborate please? With appropriate citations?
AFAIK, the National Firearms Act of 1934 authorized the transfer tax and set it at $200. The only change they've made since, that I can find, was for AOWs which they lowered to $5 in 1938. Today, that transfer tax is still $200. You're saying that they've changed it several times in that interval?
From the original bill:
SEC. 3.
(a) There shall be levied, collected, and paid upon firearms sold, assigned, transferred, given away, or otherwise disposed of in the continental United States a tax at the rate of $200 per machinegun and $200 per other firearm, such tax to be paid by the person so disposing thereof, and to be represented by appropriate stamps to be provided by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury; and the stamps herein provided shall be affixed to the order for such firearm, hereinafter provided for. The tax imposed by this section shall be in addition to any import duty imposed on such firearm.
I must have missed something also. As far as I know there has never been a change.
? Please cite your source. I was under the impression of the exact opposite. Or did I miss your sarcasm?
In 1938 Congress recognized that the Marble Game Getter, a short .22/.410 sporting firearm, had "legitimate use" and did not deserve the stigma of "gangster weapon" and reduced the $200 tax to one dollar for the Game Getter. In 1960 Congress changed the transfer tax for all "any other weapon" (AOW) category to $5.The transfer tax for machine guns, silencers, SBR and SBS remained at $200.
So that is TWO documented instances of the NFA Tax being REDUCED. I think, but am not sure the $1 stamps is gone, so that would be THREE changes.
http://i839.photobucket.com/albums/zz314/Umbrarian/BATFE/NFA1.jpg
http://i839.photobucket.com/albums/zz314/Umbrarian/BATFE/NFA5.jpg
http://i839.photobucket.com/albums/zz314/Umbrarian/BATFE/NFA200.jpg
Interesting info. I knew about the AOW but did not know about the game getter. Is that basically what we would look at as an AOW today.
Excellent! I hope you get a quick return of function.
It's feeling great.
$200 in 1934 would be equivalent to $3430 in 2012 dollars.
Maybe. But if you look at gold as the purchased goods it was priced at $20 or $35 per ounce, depending on when in 1934 you're talking about.
That would make a Thompson and the transfer, at $200 each then, equal to about $9000 to $15000 each now.
If you choose to look at that comparison.
Maybe. But if you look at gold as the purchased goods it was priced at $20 or $35 per ounce, depending on when in 1934 you're talking about.
That would make a Thompson and the transfer, at $200 each then, equal to about $9000 to $15000 each now.
If you choose to look at that comparison.
LOL. Since I'd be paying with dollars, I'm just going by inflation of the dollar based on the CPI over that period of time. Gold is a completely different commodity than the dollar and exists on a completely different playing field. Not really relevant unless you're comparing buying a Tommy gun in 1934 and paying with gold compared to buying a Tommy gun in 2012 and paying with gold. I'll probably just put it on my VISA card.
In 1938 Congress recognized that the Marble Game Getter, a short .22/.410 sporting firearm, had "legitimate use" and did not deserve the stigma of "gangster weapon" and reduced the $200 tax to one dollar for the Game Getter. In 1960 Congress changed the transfer tax for all "any other weapon" (AOW) category to $5.The transfer tax for machine guns, silencers, SBR and SBS remained at $200.
So that is TWO documented instances of the NFA Tax being REDUCED. I think, but am not sure the $1 stamps is gone, so that would be THREE changes.
:rolleyes:
I stand corrected.
LOL. Since I'd be paying with dollars, I'm just going by inflation of the dollar based on the CPI over that period of time. Gold is a completely different commodity than the dollar and exists on a completely different playing field. Not really relevant unless you're comparing buying a Tommy gun in 1934 and paying with gold compared to buying a Tommy gun in 2012 and paying with gold. I'll probably just put it on my VISA card.
I understand. But I've always questioned the CPI as to its accuracy when you're really buying goods. A 1970 car at $3200 would be about $17000 by CPI calcs but the "semi-equivalent" car today would really cost $30000-$35000, at least by my estimates.
By any comparison the stable $200 transfer tax has decreased in 'real' cost over the years.
I understand. But I've always questioned the CPI as to its accuracy when you're really buying goods. A 1970 car at $3200 would be about $17000 by CPI calcs but the "semi-equivalent" car today would really cost $30000-$35000, at least by my estimates.
By any comparison the stable $200 transfer tax has decreased in 'real' cost over the years.
Your concept of "semi-equivalent" is quite a bit different than mine. My 1970 Cutlass S was really a nice car at the time, but by today's standards a pretty rudimentary vehicle -- crank windows, carburetted engine, no stereo, no cruise control, etc etc -- as opposed to a typical $35,000 Chevy today with it's expensive pollution control devices, safety devices like airbags and anti-lock brakes, traction control, fuel injection, power windows, satellite radio etc etc.
If we're comparing apples to apples, as we would be with, say, buying a tax stamp in 1934 vs 2012, we'd be comparing your $3200 1970's car to some something equally rudimentary 2012 vehicle (if the feds would let the mfgrs make something like that), probably in the $17,000 range, I'm guessing....
In 1938 Congress recognized that the Marble Game Getter, a short .22/.410 sporting firearm, had "legitimate use" and did not deserve the stigma of "gangster weapon" and reduced the $200 tax to one dollar for the Game Getter. In 1960 Congress changed the transfer tax for all "any other weapon" (AOW) category to $5.The transfer tax for machine guns, silencers, SBR and SBS remained at $200.
So that is TWO documented instances of the NFA Tax being REDUCED. I think, but am not sure the $1 stamps is gone, so that would be THREE changes.
Thanks for the lesson. In the context of the discussion, I (mistakenly) thought you were talking about changes with regards to classes (MG, Suppressors, SBR/SBS) - not an individual weapon. The person you were responding to made the statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by everyusernametaken
The $200 stamp rate has been the same since the 30s? That would have been an obscene amount of money back then. It had to have increased with inflation over the last 80 years.
Your reply implied to me the stamp price had increased several times. My mistake.
I did forget about the AOW being reduced to $5. Again, thanks for the lesson.
Those pictures of the back logged boxes of forms to be processed is something that I hope the suggestions that they were bringing to the table, will help in the future expediting of the process.
Interesting video placed by the OP.
The last calc I saw was indicating transfer times expected to run about 10 months for a current submittal.
And, to Hmac, I understand what you are saying.
The devaluation of the dollar just continues.
Your concept of "semi-equivalent" is quite a bit different than mine. My 1970 Cutlass S was really a nice car at the time, but by today's standards a pretty rudimentary vehicle -- crank windows, carburetted engine, no stereo, no cruise control, etc etc -- as opposed to a typical $35,000 Chevy today with it's expensive pollution control devices, safety devices like airbags and anti-lock brakes, traction control, fuel injection, power windows, satellite radio etc etc.
If we're comparing apples to apples, as we would be with, say, buying a tax stamp in 1934 vs 2012, we'd be comparing your $3200 1970's car to some something equally rudimentary 2012 vehicle (if the feds would let the mfgrs make something like that), probably in the $17,000 range, I'm guessing....
You really need to compare to the same level of car FOR THE TIME. If the current technology in the 70s was crank handles, carburetor etc then you compare to a vehicle in the same class or level.
It is like computers. Say I bought a computer say for $3000 in 1990. It was the top of XYZ computers line. WHat is the equivalent computer in the lineup today? And how much does it cost. Obviously it will have more bells and whistles and be a few orders of magnitude faster today. Technology advances makes different levels of technology cheaper over time and the new technology takes over in the ladder at the top as it is introduced, pushing what was once the top down to the middle and eventually lower tiers.
--
You really need to compare to the same level of car FOR THE TIME. If the current technology in the 70s was crank handles, carburetor etc then you compare to a vehicle in the same class or level.
It is like computers. Say I bought a computer say for $3000 in 1990. It was the top of XYZ computers line. WHat is the equivalent computer in the lineup today? And how much does it cost. Obviously it will have more bells and whistles and be a few orders of magnitude faster today. Technology advances makes different levels of technology cheaper over time and the new technology takes over in the ladder at the top as it is introduced, pushing what was once the top down to the middle and eventually lower tiers.
--
No you don't. We're not talking about different levels of sophisticated air bags, we're talking about the presence of air bags or not. It doesnt make sense to say that entry level then = entry level now when the govt has imposed so many additional expensive components that werent even conceived of then, and all of which cost money that isnt part of the natural market evolution of that particular manufactured item. And then to compare it to a completely non-manufactured item like a tax stamp and what it represents....apples just do not equal oranges.
And speaking of apples and oranges...you want to compare manufacturing costs and market forces of the auto industry to the computer industry....sorry, the argument just went beyond my ability to follow.
No you don't. We're not talking about different levels of sophisticated air bags, we're talking about the presence of air bags or not. It doesnt make sense to say that entry level then = entry level now when the govt has imposed so many additional expensive components that werent even conceived of then, and all of which cost money that isnt part of the natural market evolution of that particular manufactured item. And then to compare it to a completely non-manufactured item like a tax stamp and what it represents....apples just do not equal oranges.
Yes, you do. You compare the entry level car of today with the entry level car of yesteryear. Likewise, midrange to midrange, and high end to high end. The exact outfitting is irrelevant. New technology means that today's cars may have totally different stuff on them, but technology also drives costs down so what was once though exotic is now commonplace.
To go back to the computer example: when the CDROM first came out, it was very expensive and only high end computers had them. My first CDROM was an external SCSI unit that cost around $450 and was a 1x or 2x reader. And I was not on the cutting edge of adoption.
Now, if you even still have a CDROM, it is a $5 part to the manufacturer, if that. And a $12 part to the end user.
The point was to show that CPI was not a great measure of the real inflation of prices. Not to compare cars to tax stamps.
And speaking of apples and oranges...you want to compare manufacturing costs and market forces of the auto industry to the computer industry....sorry, the argument just went beyond my ability to follow.
Not apples to oranges at all. The point is merely that what was once cutting edge becomes common place cheap through advances in technology, so you cannot say that the existence and use of a particular item back then equates at all to the same level of "luxury" today. Ie, having part X on a mid level car back then does not mean that a car today at the bottom of the bucket that also has the equivalent of part X is also a mid level car due to that part being affixed (air bag, stereo, fuel injection, or whatever)
The same dynamic happens in computers as it does in cars. New technology gets introduced at the high end and filters its way down to the low end over time so the fact that a low end car today also has that technology in it means that the car in the past was low end, or that a car with that technology was high end back then means that a car with that technology today is high end.
--
one more reason why it DOES make sense to equate entry level of yesteryear with entry level of today (cars, computers, whatever) is because people will spend about the same percentage of their income for a car of a particular level in yesteryear and today. The cost to the consumer, as a percentage of income, is the same across time, within general bands.
--
The Knuckle
07-12-12, 16:01
That is such a huge pile of Forms waiting to be processed.
Talk about a work nightmare. I'm sure one of them must of had nightmares about being buried in a pile of forms that never ends. Only to wake up and realize its true.
Aren't there only like 10-15 auditors?
That is such a huge pile of Forms waiting to be processed.
Talk about a work nightmare. I'm sure one of them must of had nightmares about being buried in a pile of forms that never ends. Only to wake up and realize its true.
Aren't there only like 10-15 auditors?
Here's what I found at
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/053012-nfa-assignement-map-2012.pdf
http://SSEquine.net/nfaassignments.jpg
As to wait times, some people have declared a trend downward for wait times. From what I've read, they were down two examiners, replacements recently rehired. In addition, there was one examiner, [name redacted;)], who for health reasons was allowed to do forms from home. He, by rumor, was not terribly...uh...productive. In addition there are rumors that he was actually tossing some of the forms with longer backlogs. He is no longer an examiner.
Here's the latest trendline from some blogger who follows these things (http://www.randominfo.net/NFA/WaitTimeTrend.php). I can't attest to the accuracy of his scattergrams, but I understand he gets the data from NFAtracker.com.
http://www.randominfo.net/NFA/WaitTimeTrend_20120629.png
I will say I just recieved a stamp back in the mail. Exactly 5 months (to the day) from pending to stamp-in-hand. Examiner was Siviero. Form 1 SBR with a Trust, if it matters.
doubletap2211
07-27-12, 17:35
I will say I just recieved a stamp back in the mail. Exactly 5 months (to the day) from pending to stamp-in-hand. Examiner was Siviero. Form 1 SBR with a Trust, if it matters.
I hope the downward trend continues. I am hoping I have my stamp by November.
TriumphRat675
07-27-12, 18:01
[QUOTE=Hmac;1345982]Here's what I found at
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/053012-nfa-assignement-map-2012.pdf
http://SSEquine.net/nfaassignments.jpg
Like anything I would take this with a grain of salt; I live in Texas and Mr. Pickles handled my applications. Things may have changed since then, naturally.
Not to go too off topic, but like all BATFE employees I have dealt with, Mr. Pickles was reasonably prompt, very professional, and very courteous when I spoke to him on the phone.
My Form 4 went pending 3/28. 5 months would be nice but I'm not really expecting it to come back until the end of Sept. some time. I recently received a Form 4 stamp for my suppressor and it took 6 months.
[QUOTE=Hmac;1345982]Here's what I found at
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/nfa/053012-nfa-assignement-map-2012.pdf
http://SSEquine.net/nfaassignments.jpg
Like anything I would take this with a grain of salt; I live in Texas and Mr. Pickles handled my applications. Things may have changed since then, naturally.
Not to go too off topic, but like all BATFE employees I have dealt with, Mr. Pickles was reasonably prompt, very professional, and very courteous when I spoke to him on the phone.
This assignment list is just since May 2012.
TriumphRat675
07-30-12, 15:52
Wow, I totally missed that. Sorry for cluttering up the thread.
At least then the tax could be for a brand new machine gun.
.... And that would be a bargain these days.
Wow, I totally missed that. Sorry for cluttering up the thread.
Dana Pickles handled my last Form 1 too (Minnesota), but that was 2 years ago. I had occasion to talk with him about an issue with my CLEO signature. I also found him to be very helpful and professional, and even though my Form 1 had been returned, it didn't appear to slow things down at all...he got it processed almost immediately after I sent it back to him.
I'm in NC and Pickles did my Form 4 for a suppressor and also has my SBR. Looks like the chart is correct at least in my case.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.