Need some help from a FFL

[Deadon]

I moved to NV 5 months ago. I bought a gun when I lived in Cali and now Im selling it to someone in Cali. Its a long gun and as I understand it I can ship it to his FFL.

Problem is the FFL is saying I need a FFL to send it to them. Its a used long gun and has a pinned mag and BB that I never removed.

Is this true?

[ke6guj]

nothing in CA or federal law requires that you use an FFL to send a firearm to an FFL. an FFL is allowed to receive firearms from non-FFLs. that FFL has made it a personal decision to only accept shipments from other FFLs. he is either misinformed about the law or thinks it protects him.

your choice is to either agree to use an FFL to ship it or tell the buyer to find an FFL willing to accept shipments from non-licensees.

[Deadon]

nothing in CA or federal law requires that you use an FFL to send a firearm to an FFL. an FFL is allowed to receive firearms from non-FFLs. that FFL has made it a personal decision to only accept shipments from other FFLs. he is either misinformed about the law or thinks it protects him.

your choice is to either agree to use an FFL to ship it or tell the buyer to find an FFL willing to accept shipments from non-licensees.

Pretty much just wanted to be sure before telling the buyer. Tanks for the info.

[Deadon]

Lol now they are trying to tell him they are charging him tax WTF. this is a private party! He told them that and they said,

its just like if they sold a used gun in their shop.

[ke6guj]

unfortunately the Board of Equalization sent out a ruling/opinion that says that if the dealer facilitates the transfer as he is doing in this situation, that tax is due. there are some exemptions for stuff like CA-defined PPT, but this is not a PPT.

[Deadon]

unfortunately the Board of Equalization sent out a ruling/opinion that says that if the dealer facilitates the transfer as he is doing in this situation, that tax is due. there are some exemptions for stuff like CA-defined PPT, but this is not a PPT.

If I were to ship it from Cali would it make a difference? This is crazy I paid Cali state tax when I bought it!

[ke6guj]

even if you ship it from within CA, it isn't considered a CA PPT. its only a PPT when both parties, who are both CA-residents, both go to the same FFL to do the transfer. you need to look for the BoE letter to see exactly what situations BoE wants taxed and not.

If it was me, I'd just push all this off to the buyer, he wants it, he needs to do the legwork to find an FFL that is willing to accept from a non-licensee, and understand what his taxable liability is.

[Deadon]

even if you ship it from within CA, it isn't considered a CA PPT. its only a PPT when both parties, who are both CA-residents, both go to the same FFL to do the transfer. you need to look for the BoE letter to see exactly what situations BoE wants taxed and not.

If it was me, I'd just push all this off to the buyer, he wants it, he needs to do the legwork to find an FFL that is willing to accept from a non-licensee, and understand what his taxable liability is.

Thanks, yeah I explained everything told to me and hes fine with it so I guess whatever lol.

Just hate to see the state make it so hard these days. Dont think Ill sell to Cali again after this.

[kemasa]

If you were a CA resident, then it would not be subject to sales tax. The excuse the BOE uses is that Federal law requires it to go through a FFL, therefore it is subject to sales tax. CA sales are not required to go through a FFL under Federal law, but under CA law, and sales between residents are exempt from sales tax.

As a side note, a C&R firearm from an out of state private party seller is not subject to sales tax if it is an occasional sale and the buyer has a C&R FFL since Federal law allows for the firearm to be directly shipped, but CA law does not.