PPT Charges

[DMCA]

It is time to put this argument to rest. While FFLs feel like they should be getting more than $10, they are not losing money, and if they are smart, can use this as a chance to make a lot more money by building their customer base. It costs them $25 plus the cost of ink, they make ten bucks. Everything else is a fixed cost that they'd have to pay no matter if they did a PPT or didn't do one. It costs them no more to have another two bodies in their shop, they don't take on another employee, have to purchase special equipment, increase the money the spend on utilities, etc. The whole opportunity cost argument is bunk as well, because you can't say every customer who does a PPT only spends $35, and that every customer that waits while a PPT is handled would have spent hundreds of dollars if they weren't so inconvenienced to have to wait 20 minutes. They are actually getting the government to subsidize their advertising budget by forcing people to conduct transactions in gun shops.

I now head to Livermore to visit Doms and J&R instead of Kevin Smith in Martinez because Kevin charged me $45 for a PPT. That extra $10 has probably lost him at least $2500 in transfer fees alone. By charging more than $35, FFLs lose money. They do not lose money on a PPT at $35.

Lastly, if a FFL doesn't do PPTs, they don't get to have their license and can't sell guns. PPTs keep them in the good graces of the people they need to stay in good graces with if they like to do any business. It is much more expensive NOT do to a PPT, or to refuse a PPT. They don't have to spend any money and get foot traffic, and some have the business skills to not treat those customers like crap. If they had any sales skills, they'd be asking customers about what holster they'll be using, if they have snap caps, if they want any ammo, do they need cleaning supplies, do they want a gunsmith to check it out, etc.

There is much about your argument I like and agree with. However, I will add that the 2 PPT's I undertook in the last 3 months, each took 30 minutes. One involved 2 pistols and the other, 1. On each occasion, the store employees conducting them were competent and polite.

It helped that myself and the other consumers also had all of the appropriate paperwork and did nothing to impede the transaction. We didn't wander far from the counter and there was little opportunity for the employee to engage us in banter about other topics. My conclusion about PPT's is that you would require a significant volume and a data link to the state which never slowed or stopped, in order to make any money.

30 Minutes and the full time attention of a store employee isn't covered by the $10 or even $20.

The state has mandated that gun retailers become revenue collectors and compliance agents. OK, that's the law, but as long as it remains so cumbersome and unprofitable for these guys, expect a lot of truculent attitudes.

Imagine, if you will, every private auto transaction had to be carried out on the premises of a licensed auto dealer and they had to input information in real time, to a state database, compile the same amount of documentation as for a new car sale and charge a nominal fee for their services.

Everyone on the lot would hide when they saw you coming.

[hill billy]

Regardless of how "hard" it is, there is value to the transaction; that value should not be defined by the government.

True, but right now it is. End of discussion.

[wildhawker]

It is time to put this argument to rest. While FFLs feel like they should be getting more than $10, they are not losing money, and if they are smart, can use this as a chance to make a lot more money by building their customer base. It costs them $25 plus the cost of ink, they make ten bucks. Everything else is a fixed cost that they'd have to pay no matter if they did a PPT or didn't do one. It costs them no more to have another two bodies in their shop, they don't take on another employee, have to purchase special equipment, increase the money the spend on utilities, etc. The whole opportunity cost argument is bunk as well, because you can't say every customer who does a PPT only spends $35, and that every customer that waits while a PPT is handled would have spent hundreds of dollars if they weren't so inconvenienced to have to wait 20 minutes. They are actually getting the government to subsidize their advertising budget by forcing people to conduct transactions in gun shops.

I now head to Livermore to visit Doms and J&R instead of Kevin Smith in Martinez because Kevin charged me $45 for a PPT. That extra $10 has probably lost him at least $2500 in transfer fees alone. By charging more than $35, FFLs lose money. They do not lose money on a PPT at $35.

Lastly, if a FFL doesn't do PPTs, they don't get to have their license and can't sell guns. PPTs keep them in the good graces of the people they need to stay in good graces with if they like to do any business. It is much more expensive NOT do to a PPT, or to refuse a PPT. They don't have to spend any money and get foot traffic, and some have the business skills to not treat those customers like crap. If they had any sales skills, they'd be asking customers about what holster they'll be using, if they have snap caps, if they want any ammo, do they need cleaning supplies, do they want a gunsmith to check it out, etc.

Glad you seem to enjoy wielding your $2500 of buying power around for a $10 issue. Must be nice being an expert on creating markets out forced sales. I assume you regularly put on seminars for FFLs to make them aware if these unique strategies?

I grant that businesses must use all their creativity within the confines of their industry's given laws and regulations to make a sale. The issue becomes that, one way or another, we ALL PAY for the "cheap PPTs" in so many ways.

Again, I am NOT condoning or justifying illegal acts- I am simply trying to point of some grossly-overlooked business aspects of this seemingly minor process madated by our government.

Respect for the customer is shown by those FFLs who understand and follow the law, and charge only the $35 allowed. Respect for the business is reciprocated by understanding the imposition and impact of these transactions and doing business with them accordingly. Empathy is a powerfull thing.

[Z ME FLY]

I didn't read all of this but normally, when I do PPTs the guys there try to sell me some ammo or something for the gun I am picking up. Normally I pick something up if things go OK but if things take a long long time then I just leave afterwards without buying anything.

[STAGE 2]

Now imagine a scenario where there's two not-so-prepared customers trying to transfer half a dozen long guns. Their licenses are old and won't swipe on the computer. Now we have to manually input the information. If there's issues regarding proof-of-residency for their residences, they want to know why their old address (or PO Box) on the license is not acceptable, or if there's an issue of establishing citizenship. The guns have to now be entered into the disposition and take up a lot more room in the limited-capacity safe (six long guns vs. one handgun), and then there's the issue of having to sell the buyer six locks even though there's no legal requirement to actually USE them. He wants to know why he has to buy $40 in locks. Total time can go from 15 minutes to 45 minutes pretty fast and you have a situation where $10 is DEFINITELY not enough money for the trouble.

And God forbid the buyer gets denied on the DROS.

Two points.

First, there isn't any excuse an FFL can give because you were made aware of this requirement when you got your license. It was there in black and white and remains there in black and white. If you didn't like it then you shouldn't have applied for the license.

Second, how many customers come in and take up the time of the people behind the counter only to kick the tires and not spend any money at all. The answer is plenty. Once again, this is just part of having a business. It would be silly to complain that customers have the audacity to walk in the store without spending money. Its only slightly more ridiculous to complain that a customer is only giving you $10

[elSquid]

Regardless of how "hard" it is, there is value to the transaction; that value should not be defined by the government.

There is no value in PPTs for me as a customer. If I could opt out I would.

What aspect of a PPT do you find necessary? If California was a normal state and you could do a true private party exchange, would you still go through an FFL? Why?

-- Michael

[MiguelS]

Kinda thinking this as a PPT of a car.

The seller needs to send in the release of liability and you don't know if you are selling to a DUI felon illegal immigrant or some law abiding citizen.

How would one know that you are not selling to some felon? I personally would not want to sell a gun to someone that is going to use it later for some crime.

[TitanCi]

So IF you send a gun to an FFL, they can charge DROS plus whatever fees they want? but if it's a PPT then the max they can charge is $35 for the first handgun???

is that correct?

[Mssr. Eleganté]

So IF you send a gun to an FFL, they can charge DROS plus whatever fees they want? but if it's a PPT then the max they can charge is $35 for the first handgun???

is that correct?

Yes, that is correct. $25 for DROS and $10 for the Dealer. And just to be clear, a PPT is when two California residents go to a California Licensed Dealer together for the transfer. For everything else the Dealer can charge whatever he wants.

[TitanCi]

Yes, that is correct. $25 for DROS and $10 for the Dealer. And just to be clear, a PPT is when two California residents go to a California Licensed Dealer together for the transfer. For everything else the Dealer can charge whatever he wants.

many thanks sir, as I will keep this in mind for future purchases...

[epic4444]

i dont get why people think that we should have to pay more for the PPT fee..35 buck while not a huge amount always seems to make a sweet deal alot less sweet....why doesnt the DOJ just make it easier...im sure there alot of wasted info on those forms...and honestly a clerk can still help other people while letting the two members of the PPT fill out the forms

[dfletcher]

There is no value in PPTs for me as a customer. If I could opt out I would.

What aspect of a PPT do you find necessary? If California was a normal state and you could do a true private party exchange, would you still go through an FFL? Why?

-- Michael

With the caveat that pretty much anyone can sue anyone for any number of reasons, I think independent documentation of disposal of a gun is a value. If a gun you owned but sold was subsequently used in a crime, would you prefer to have legally disposed of it through an FFL or by a direct (but for this example legal) private sale?

Also, there may be protection from civil liability if your gun is disposed of through an FFL. Similar question - if little Jimmy shot his friend dead would you prefer having sold the gun to his Dad directly or that he bought it from an FFL?

So I think there is a value, especially in CA, to using an FFL even if in theory we didn't have to.

[elSquid]

With the caveat that pretty much anyone can sue anyone for any number of reasons, I think independent documentation of disposal of a gun is a value. If a gun you owned but sold was subsequently used in a crime, would you prefer to have legally disposed of it through an FFL or by a direct (but for this example legal) private sale?

Also, there may be protection from civil liability if your gun is disposed of through an FFL. Similar question - if little Jimmy shot his friend dead would you prefer having sold the gun to his Dad directly or that he bought it from an FFL?

Does California law specifically give a private seller immunity from civil actions related to a firearm lawfully sold via PPT? If not, then it doesn't matter. You, and probably the gunstore, will get sued regardless.

The way I see it is that the majority of states get along just fine with purely private firearm transactions, so I'm not sure why California wouldn't as well.

I should probably come clean on one thing: when I've sold guns I've either sold to people I know directly/indirectly or I've put them up on consignment. So I'm personally not overly concerned about my legal or moral exposure when disposing of firearms.

-- Michael

[dfletcher]

Does California law specifically give a private seller immunity from civil actions related to a firearm lawfully sold via PPT? If not, then it doesn't matter. You, and probably the gunstore, will get sued regardless.

The way I see it is that the majority of states get along just fine with purely private firearm transactions, so I'm not sure why California wouldn't as well.

I should probably come clean on one thing: when I've sold guns I've either sold to people I know directly/indirectly or I've put them up on consignment. So I'm personally not overly concerned about my legal or moral exposure when disposing of firearms.

-- Michael

I don't know, I'm not an attorney, but I'd presume California law does not provide immunity. I would prefer being able to say the FFL and the state of CA put their stamp of approval on the process & the buyer instead of simply saying - "well, this guy had the money and I had the gun so we did the deal, I wasn't aware he just got out of jail." So I suppose in some circumstances an FFL could help, in others perhaps not. Using an FFL may not prevent me from being sued in civil court but it may well help me win.

I've done pretty much the same (before CA) as mentioned regarding selling - sold some to friends and do consignment for everything else. Personally I don't think using an FFL should be required - private property is just that and an adult should be able to do what they want and take their chances as they see fit.

[kemasa]

Yes the shop now has the gun for the 10 day waiting period, that is why I don't want to publicly name them yet until recieve the gun.


I did get a receipt it indicates the following:

DROS fee for used firearms $35
Transfer Fee $70
Misc Discount -$5
Subtotal $100
Sales Tax 0
Total $100

There is another problem with the receipt. It appears to me that they are representing the DROS fee as being $35, which is also illegal to represent it as something which is it not. The DROS fee is $25 ($19 + $5 + $1, to be exact).

One question I have is if they are normally overcharging for the DROS fee.

What fees can I charge in addition to the DROS?

In addition to the State's $19.00 DROS fee, you must also charge a $1.00 Firearms Safety Testing fee and a $5.00 Safety and Enforcement fee. If the transaction being processed is a dealer sale, consignment return, or return from pawn, you may impose other charges as long as this amount is clearly shown as a "dealer fee" and not misrepresented as a State fee.

(PC sections 12071(b)(11), (12))

BTW, I talked to the CA DOJ and they do go after those who charge too much and/or misrepresent the fees.