ATF Rulemaking about trusts please comment

[ekg98]

Regulations.gov

Please make a comment on this page. ATF is going to require every trust owner to finger print, photograph, and obtain cleo signoff for every member of the trust. We need to tell them how the citizens feel.

Thanks
Will

 

[ViperJock]

I'd like to know if the EO has to be approved in some way or if it is a done deal?

 

[JoshuaW]

Just remember, in the past when they have requested public comments, they publish the letters in full, including ANY info you give them. So be cautious about handing out your street address, phone number, email address, etc.

Chances are this is happening, regardless of what we say. It doesnt change the fact that we need to be vocal, but dont think you are stopping anything by commenting.

 

[inav8r]

"Although ATF agrees in principle with some of petitioner's assertions (for example, with the fact that ATF independently verifies whether receipt or possession of a NFA firearm would place the applicant or transferee in violation of state or local law), ATF does not propose to eliminate the CLEO certificate requirement at this time. Rather, ATF proposes extending the CLEO certificate requirement to responsible persons of a legal entity. ATF also proposes amending the language of the certificate to omit the requirement that the certifying official state that he has no information that the applicant or transferee will use the firearm for other than lawful purposes." [emphasis added]

So much for forming a trust if this goes through.

 

[ctbreitwieser]

Of course any answer would be speculation, but what might happen to those forms that have already been sent and are being put into trusts? I sent one in a couple weeks ago, and did the same as I always have hoping it might get grandfathered, but I'm hoping worst case senario is I get it back as an error and I just have to get the sign off, photos, and fingerprints

 

[MontereyC6]

Of course any answer would be speculation, but what might happen to those forms that have already been sent and are being put into trusts? I sent one in a couple weeks ago, and did the same as I always have hoping it might get grandfathered, but I'm hoping worst case senario is I get it back as an error and I just have to get the sign off, photos, and fingerprints

I did the same. Once they give the ruling and decide what they want to do, I will ammend my trust accordingly. The way I see it, being the founder, I can delete any trustees any time that I would like with a simple ammendment with my trust. Once my items get approved, I can then amend my trust and add any trustees that I would like with out notifying the ATF. That's why this whole thing is so stupid.

 

[engineerpower]

Well, there's a strategy for transferring a NFA item via trust without actually transferring it. In the same neighborhood as you, Monterey, You can add another individual to your trust (giving them possession rights) then write yourself out, giving them sole possession rights without the 9+ month wait and associated paperwork.

I think in both cases, they would view it as "tax evasion" and would sic their IRS dogs on you. After burning down your house and shooting your own dog, of course.

 

[ryknoll3]

Well, there's a strategy for transferring a NFA item via trust without actually transferring it. In the same neighborhood as you, Monterey, You can add another individual to your trust (giving them possession rights) then write yourself out, giving them sole possession rights without the 9+ month wait and associated paperwork.

I think in both cases, they would view it as "tax evasion" and would sic their IRS dogs on you. After burning down your house and shooting your own dog, of course.

Be sure to mention your cat named "Ruby" and your dog named "Weaver" in that sham trust.

 

[revsaxon]

I have to ask the obvious question here... How many undesirables have ever used a weapon owned by a trust they were part of to commit a crime?

I'm betting none... Yet still we are getting more over regulation.

 

[captpaul]

Unfortunately, a recent incident precipitated much of the public debate. Christopher Dorner used a trust, although, as the article states, would have likely passed a background check.