single shot?

[jamesob]

is it still ok to assemble a pistol marked ar receiver into a single shot pistol at a dealers store? i remember when people were doing this but was unsure if its still ok. i have looked at the p.c and it does not say that the pistol has to come into the state assembled yet some say it does. a friend ( ffl holder ) is going to get me a pistol receiver so i can put it together as a single shot for dros.

[Shane916]

I think they must have a manufacturing FFL license and pay an excise tax.

That's my guess.

[jamesob]

I think they must have a manufacturing FFL license and pay an excise tax.

That's my guess.

the receiver is already registered as a pistol and marked as such. i don't think mfg. is an issue.

[ke6guj]

the arguement is that if they are "adding value" to the firearm before it is sold to the end user, that they are performing a manufacturing service, and must be licensed as an 07FFL, a manufacturer. An 01FFL would not be acceptable.

[jamesob]

so a dealer would have to have a 07ffl to make a pistol into a pistol? the dealer will log it in as a pistol and log it out as a pistol. i don't see where the 07 would come into play for mfg. reasons. are you talking federally or state when " adding value " to a firearm? if thats the case when a dealer changes anything that could " raise the value" of a firearm such as adding a scope, sling and bipod they need a 07?

[Shane916]

so a dealer would have to have a 07ffl to make a pistol into a pistol? the dealer will log it in as a pistol and log it out as a pistol. i don't see where the 07 would come into play for mfg. reasons. are you talking federally or state when " adding value " to a firearm? if thats the case when a dealer changes anything that could " raise the value" of a firearm such as adding a scope, sling and bipod they need a 07?

It's received as a receiver then ends up leaving as a fully functional pistol.

If the FFL has the receiver logged as a receiver and then puts an upper receiver onto the lower receiver, they are basically manufacturing a complete firearm (pistol in this case).

That's my interpretation at least.

[jamesob]

It's received as a receiver then ends up leaving as a fully functional pistol.

If the FFL has the receiver logged as a receiver and then puts an upper receiver onto the lower receiver, they are basically manufacturing a complete firearm (pistol in this case).

That's my interpretation at least.

thats the thing, its not logged in as a receiver it's logged in as a pistol. the mfg. built it as a pistol and it's logged out from the mfg. as a pistol. when the dealer logs it in, it's a pistol. the dealer wouldn't be changing the status of the receiver at all.

[ke6guj]

OK, this was ATF's opinion on the matter.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearm...f-firearms.pdf (don't know if the pdf is available anywhere on ATF's website.

U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
Firearms Technology Branch
August 15, 2008
Martinsburg, West Virginia 25405

https://www.atf.gov

Manufacturing of Firearms

Below are examples of operations performed on firearms and guidance as to
whether or not such operations would be considered manufacturing under the
Gun Control Act (GCA). These examples do not address the question of whether
the operations are considered manufacturing for purposes of determining
excise tax. Any questions concerning the payment of excise tax should be
directed to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, U.S. Department of
the Treasury.

Generally, a person should obtain a license as a manufacturer of firearms if
the person:

1) is performing operations that create firearms or alter firearms (in the
case of alterations, the work is not being performed at the request of
customers, rather the person who is altering the firearms is purchasing them
making the changes, and then reselling them);
2) is performing the operations as a regular course of business or trade;
and
3) is performing the operations for the purpose of sale or distribution of
the firearms.

1. A company produces a quantity of firearm frames or receivers for sale
to customers who will assemble firearms. The company is engaged in the
business of manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as a manufacturer
of firearms.

2. A company produces frames or receivers for another company that
assembles and sells the firearms. Both companies are engaged in the
business of manufacturing firearms,
and each should be licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.

3. A company provides frames to a subcontractor company that performs
machining operations on the frames and returns the frames to the original
company that assembles and sells the completed firearms. Both companies are
engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as
manufacturers of firearms.

4. A company produces barrels for firearms and sells the barrels to
another company that assembles and sells complete firearms. Because barrels
are not firearms, the company that manufactures the barrels is not a
manufacturer of firearms. The company that assembles and sells the firearms
should be licensed as a manufacturer of firearms.

5. A company receives firearm frames from individual customers, attaches
stocks and barrels, and returns the firearms to the customers for the
customers’ personal use. The operations performed on the firearms were not
for the purpose of sale or distribution. The company should be licensed as a
dealer or gunsmith, not as a manufacturer of firearms.

6. A company acquires one receiver, assembles one firearm, and sells the
firearm. The company is not manufacturing firearms as a regular course of
trade or business and is not engaged in the business of manufacturing
firearms. This company does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer.

7. An individual acquires frames or receivers and assembles firearms for
his or her personal use, not for sale or distribution. The individual is
not manufacturing firearms for sale or distribution and is not required to
be a licensed manufacturer.

8. A gunsmith regularly buys military-type firearms, Mausers, etc., and
sporterizes” them for resale. The gunsmith is in the business of
manufacturing firearms and should be licensed as a manufacturer.

9. A gunsmith buys semiautomatic pistols and modifies the slides to
accept a new style of sights. The sights are not usually sold with these
firearms and do not attach to the existing mounting openings. The gunsmith
offers these firearms for sale. This would be considered the manufacturing
of firearms, and the gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.

10. A gunsmith buys government model pistols and installs “drop-in”
precision trigger parts or other “drop-in parts” for the purpose of resale.
This would be considered the manufacturing of firearms, as the gunsmith is
purchasing the firearms, modifying the firearms, and selling them. The
gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.

11. A gunsmith buys surplus military rifles, bends the bolts to accept a
scope, and then drills the receivers for a scope base. The gunsmith offers
these firearms for sale. This would be considered the manufacturing of
firearms, and the gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.

12. A gunsmith buys surplus military rifles or pistols and removes the
stocks, adds new stocks or pistol grips, cleans the firearms, then sends the
firearms to a separate contractor for bluing. These firearms are then sold
to the public. This would be considered manufacturing of firearms, and the
gunsmith should be licensed as a manufacturer.

13. A company purchases surplus firearms, cleans the firearms, then
offers them for sale to the public. The company does not need to be
licensed as a manufacturer.

14. A company produces firearms or firearm receivers and sends the firearm/receivers out for colorizing (bluing, camouflaging, phosphating, or plating) and/or heat treating. Do the companies performing the colorization and/or heat treating need to be licensed as manufacturers, and are the companies required to place their markings on the firearm? ATF has determined that both colorization and heat treating of firearms are manufacturing processes. The companies performing the processes are required to be licensed as manufacturers. If the companies providing colorization and/or heat treating have not received variances to adopt the original manufacturer’s markings, they would be required to place their own markings on any firearm on which they perform the manufacturing process of colorization and/or heat treating.

And in this ruling, http://www.atf.gov/firearms/rules/atf_ruling2009-2.pdf

In Revenue Ruling 55-342, ATF’s predecessor agency interpreted the meaning of the terms
“manufacturer” and “dealer” for the purpose of firearms licensing under the Federal
Firearms Act, the precursor statute to the GCA. It was determined that a licensed dealer
could assemble firearms from component parts on an individual basis, but could not
engage in the business of assembling firearms from component parts in quantity lots for
purposes of sale or distribution without a manufacturer’s license. Since then, ATF has
similarly and consistently interpreted the term “manufacturer” under the GCA to mean any
person who engages in the business of making firearms, by casting, assembly, alteration, or
otherwise, for the purpose of sale or distribution. Such persons must have a
manufacturer’s license under the GCA.

At least one dealer in CA was apparently "assembling" AR-pistols for customers, using the customers parts, before DROS. Word on the street was that BATF put a quash to the practice.

[Shane916]

thats the thing, its not logged in as a receiver it's logged in as a pistol. the mfg. built it as a pistol and it's logged out from the mfg. as a pistol. when the dealer logs it in, it's a pistol. the dealer wouldn't be changing the status of the receiver at all.

I don't think it can be logged as a "pistol". I believe it has to be logged as a "stripped pistol lower" / "stripped pistol receiver" - something along those lines. Then if they were to convert it to a pistol, it would then be sold as a pistol, thus the manufacturing.

[Shane916]

OK, this was ATF's opinion on the matter.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearm...f-firearms.pdf (don't know if the pdf is available anywhere on ATF's website.




And in this ruling, http://www.atf.gov/firearms/rules/atf_ruling2009-2.pdf



At least one dealer in CA was apparently "assembling" AR-pistols for customers, using the customers parts, before DROS. Word on the street was that BATF put a quash to the practice.

Wow. Nice work digging that up.

[jamesob]

so, my buddy could assemble it under the exemption shown under #6 correct?

[ke6guj]

as a one-off build, looks like it would be acceptable toATF. But if he were to regularly assemble pistols, then he would wouldn't fall under the exemption.

[jamesob]

i'm going to talk him into getting a 07 anyways. thanks guys.