SSE and FFL issues

[EBR Works]

Well technically it could be thought of in anyway....gunsmithing or manufacturing?

But as long as the value of the weapon doesn't increase beyond MSRP....there shouldn't be any extra FED tax on the weapon....and if it doesn't than you aren't manufacturing anything....simply modifiying an existing item....gunsmithing.

If only it was that simple....

[ke6guj]

Well technically it could be thought of in anyway....gunsmithing or manufacturing?

But as long as the value of the weapon doesn't increase beyond MSRP....there shouldn't be any extra FED tax on the weapon....and if it doesn't than you aren't manufacturing anything....simply modifiying an existing item....gunsmithing.

you are describing a VAT, where only the "value added" to the item is taxed, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_added_tax, versus the FAET, which does not take into effect that a $1000 rifle already had $100 (10%) tax paid on it. When the second manufacturer does manufacturing work on it, even if it is still to be sold for $1000, he has to pay FAET of 10% again, another $100, even though it already had $100 paid by the first manufacturer.

[efillc]

Well technically it could be thought of in anyway....gunsmithing or manufacturing?

At the federal level our ATF IOI explained the difference this way:
- If we buy a gun, modify it (other than something like cleaning crud off a used gun), and then resell it, we are manufacturing.
- If a customer buys a gun and sends it to us to be modified, and we charge the customer for parts and labor, we are gunsmithing.

[INDABZ]

you are describing a VAT, where only the "value added" to the item is taxed, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_added_tax, versus the FAET, which does not take into effect that a $1000 rifle already had $100 (10%) tax paid on it. When the second manufacturer does manufacturing work on it, even if it is still to be sold for $1000, he has to pay FAET of 10% again, another $100, even though it already had $100 paid by the first manufacturer.

Not too sure about that one....I had a conversation with the guys from TTB, once it's paid it's paid for serialized item, but you could get a different answer.

Plus the FAET is calculated on a percentage of the wholesale price not on MSRP.

Tis true it's not easy and I am sure you would get different answers from various agencies.....BUT the BATF has nothing to do with the FAET tax collected. They might say you need a manufacturing license and submit the serial numbers for a variance, more paper work.

[rbetts]

Received a call this week from my local ATF agent who worked with me to get my 07 license. She had several questions for me about the SSE process and was on the phone with her superiors while she was here doing my inspections.

She responded on Wednesday 04/25/12 with the following: "SSE's don't require an 07 per the Sac Field office of the ATF as all parts are considered DROP in parts" Assembling lower receivers, however, does require an 07"

Guess I'm good to go !

[ElvenSoul]

Sweet news!

[EBR Works]

Let's hope this doesn't change!

[kemasa]

That view is not the view that all offices have, so it is not a matter of it changing, it depends on where you are. The real question is what is the official view of the BATF at a high level.

[efillc]

She responded on Wednesday 04/25/12 with the following: "SSE's don't require an 07 per the Sac Field office of the ATF as all parts are considered DROP in parts" Assembling lower receivers, however, does require an 07"

Was that in writing, or at least in an email, or verbal info?

Because if verbal, it's not worth the paper it's printed on...

[yzErnie]

A little birdie told me the SSE process isn't really a big issue with the ATF. Now, CaDoJ is another thing. Don't be surprised when the whole SSE thing is banished by this state and it is probably a lot closer to happening than most realize.

[EBR Works]

A little birdie told me the SSE process isn't really a big issue with the ATF. Now, CaDoJ is another thing. Don't be surprised when the whole SSE thing is banished by this state and it is probably a lot closer to happening than most realize.

Care to elaborate on what you know?

[yzErnie]

Care to elaborate on what you know?

Nope. Probably said to much already. Hopefully the birdie who told me does not visit the site.

[kemasa]

From that I have heard, the BATF does not have an issue with the SSE as long as it is done properly and all the requirements are followed.

[EBR Works]

Nope. Probably said to much already. Hopefully the birdie who told me does not visit the site.

Sounds like pure FUD to me.

[kemasa]

Call the CA DOJ and see what the response is (lot-o-FUD). Based on that, it is quite simple to figure that they want to do something to stop the SSE firearms.

Look at what the response was with respect to OLL.

Look at the CA DOJ view (for a short time) regarding C&R FFL holders with a COE and the exemption for the 1 handgun per 30 days.

Remember, the BOE has changed their view on sales tax from private parties even though the laws have not changed and it does not affect them, firearms purchases just have to pay more sales tax. Based on their response, I asked whether sales tax has to be collected on C&R firearms when the buyer has a C&R FFL and COE since it is CA law that requires it to go through a FFL, so sales tax should not be collected if the seller is a private party, but so far they have not answered.

Look at the high capacity magazines and how the DOJ views the law, rather than what is actually written.

The examples go on and on.

The law does not matter unless you have the time and money to win in court.