11% excise tax

[smittty]

So much for stocking ammo dealers in this State.

The FFL's around here disagree with what was explained yesterday, at least to a certain degree; but, don't think any objection they lodge will be 'heard.' Put another way, they don't agree with the tax/fee as a whole and they certainly don't agree with the State's 'interpretation' of it.

They're scrambling to figure out ways to survive the 'lag time' until buyers come to simply 'accept' the situation. From my point of view, even worse is the idea that none of them around here feel as though they have the wherewithal to sue or join in a lawsuit.

They all got the same letter.

I can understand Turners trying to stop guys buying before July 1 and dros'ing several guns 30 days apart after July 1, but to set a date of the 20th was wrong. Now that they got the letter and know what the state wants from them, if they keep that date they're just scamming their customers.

Guns and gun rights are emotional topics, for them to take a stance that screws customers is ****ty thing to do. I avoid buying from them.

[Scooooter7]

On a side note, the state of Kansas is floating the idea of not taxing guns, ammo and accessory purchases. Sorry, but the democratic state of CA sucks and is definitely falling off the deep end.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

...Guns and ammo you order online are sold by that business and it's up to them to collect the tax, your FFL who receives the shipment cannot legally charge you the tax as he did not sell that product...

So much for stocking ammo dealers in this State.

The FFL's around here disagree with what was explained yesterday, at least to a certain degree; but, don't think any objection they lodge will be 'heard.' Put another way, they don't agree with the tax/fee as a whole and they certainly don't agree with the State's 'interpretation' of it.

They're scrambling to figure out ways to survive the 'lag time' until buyers come to simply 'accept' the situation. From my point of view, even worse is the idea that none of them around here feel as though they have the wherewithal to sue or join in a lawsuit.

[smittty]

FFL letters were sent and should be received by now.

Inside the letter it states the following are subject to the 11% tax:
- firearms
- firearm precursor parts
- ammunition
The 11% tax, to be collected by the business that makes the sale, and they send tax payments to the state every 90 days.

Consignments are sold by the business so they ARE subject to the 11% tax.

The dros fee is NOT taxable. If your FFL calc's the tax with the fees in it then he's scamming you.

Reloading supplies are NOT firearm precursor parts and are NOT subject to the 11% tax.

Private party transfers are NOT sold by the business therefore they are NOT taxable. The ffl's service for dros'ing the PPT is a service and is NOT taxable.

Guns and ammo you order online are sold by that business and it's up to them to collect the tax, your FFL who receives the shipment cannot legally charge you the tax as he did not sell that product.

Regarding Turners, they're full of ****. They cannot legally charge you the 11% tax until July 1.

After I post this, in protest of the new tax, I'm going to order a new gun and dros it when it arrives after July 1, and it will not be subject to the 11% tax.

[Mute]

FYI, for an additional data point, I had a deposit for a custom gun that's awaiting delivery at Kovert Projects. Customers were asking if they could pay in full prior to July 1 to avoid the 11% excise. We finally received clarification today from Kovert. In email I received, the following was noted:



Hope this is helpful to those of you who may want to purchase items that will not be available until after July 1.

[enorbit3]

OK that makes sense (even tho the new tax is garbage). So if I were to purchase a gun off the forums here then I should only be responsible for the DROS and transfer fees.

[Supersapper]

So I saw on turners instagram that used and consignment is still subject to the 11% tax. Not sure how accurate it is since these damn laws are eso hard to navigate.

Are PPT treated differently than used/consignment?

Yes and no. PPT is not treated the same as a used/consignment gun. It all comes down to who is selling the gun. For example, if the gun was sold to the LGS, who then sold the used gun to the public, then it's a used gun subject to the tax. Perhaps the LGS got it at an auction or acquired it some other way that placed the gun on their books for them to dispose of. If that happened, then they charge the tax because they're the seller. As far as consignment, I can only share the experience I had with a local LGS.

In my case, the LGS had a pistol on consignment from the owner, who was out of state. They told me that I had to pay tax on the firearm because it was on their books as a consignment, rather than just a holding bin for a firearm where the money was transferred outside of the shop and the pistol just brought in for the BG check and waiting period.

[smittty]

So I saw on turners instagram that used and consignment is still subject to the 11% tax. Not sure how accurate it is since these damn laws are eso hard to navigate.

Are PPT treated differently than used/consignment?

Turners is making things up, unless, and this a possibility, they're helping DOJ write how this this will play out.

Last week, my local FFL told me that California is supposed to send them instructions which he hasn't received.

I'll visit him tomorrow and ask if he got them.

[enorbit3]

So I saw on turners instagram that used and consignment is still subject to the 11% tax. Not sure how accurate it is since these damn laws are eso hard to navigate.

Are PPT treated differently than used/consignment?

[Tere_Hanges]

Not trying to argue with you but to understand it better, why would 2 and 3 be the same?

I thought if you use a middle man (FFL), you pay tax where the middle man is based out, so then when the middle man ships it to your local CA FFL, then it is treated as a out of state PPT?
I've not done this before, so there might be some gaps in my logic.

I'm just guessing but I would think the CA FFL that is transferring the gun to you would collect any taxes. The middle man isnt transferring the gun to you, they are just shipping the gun to the FFL that is transferring the gun to you.

[RUSN007]

2 and 3 are the same. Whether or not the gun goes through a middle man in another state is irrelevant. It still has to go to local FFL for the transfer.

Not trying to argue with you but to understand it better, why would 2 and 3 be the same?

I thought if you use a middle man (FFL), you pay tax where the middle man is based out, so then when the middle man ships it to your local CA FFL, then it is treated as a out of state PPT?
I've not done this before, so there might be some gaps in my logic.

[Tere_Hanges]

A couple of questions on this new tax:

1. Does this tax affect private party purchases? My guess it will not be since the price agreed is between the private parties.
2. Buying a gun out of state and having it shipped to a local FFL? My guess the tax will be imposed since it is calculated based on CA location?
3. Buying a gun out of state and using a middle FFL to make it CA compliant? For example, I'm buying an out of state rifle (non-CA compliant) and have it shipped to a middle person (FFL outside of CA) who will then make it CA compliant and then ship it to a local FFL. My guess the tax collected will be on the middle person's state and no additional tax is assessed when it finally arrives to a local FFL.

2 and 3 are the same. Whether or not the gun goes through a middle man in another state is irrelevant. It still has to go to local FFL for the transfer.

[RUSN007]

A couple of questions on this new tax:

1. Does this tax affect private party purchases? My guess it will not be since the price agreed is between the private parties.
2. Buying a gun out of state and having it shipped to a local FFL? My guess the tax will be imposed since it is calculated based on CA location?
3. Buying a gun out of state and using a middle FFL to make it CA compliant? For example, I'm buying an out of state rifle (non-CA compliant) and have it shipped to a middle person (FFL outside of CA) who will then make it CA compliant and then ship it to a local FFL. My guess the tax collected will be on the middle person's state and no additional tax is assessed when it finally arrives to a local FFL.

[jayhuh]

Thanks for the correction. I missed that.

[kenl]

^^^
The bill says, firearms, ammo and precursor parts. Precursor parts are defined generally as lower receivers and barrels.

According to the DOJ's guidebook, barrels are not precursor parts. Only unfinished frames are targeted.

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/bof-reg-rev-fpp-id-guidebook.pdf