41P is coming, who do we lobby for "shall certify"?
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: 41P is coming, who do we lobby for "shall certify"?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Boynton Beach
    Posts
    47

    41P is coming, who do we lobby for "shall certify"?

    Title says it all, CLEO signature will be required in the very near future for NFA items, excluding many people in the state of Florida, an overnight loss of significant gun rights. Obama's great gun grab! So who can we lobby to get "shall certify" as many other states have already done?


    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...e-and-make-our

  2. #2
    Distinguished Member ctsheepdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Palm Beach area (Connecticut escapee summer 2015)
    Posts
    2,096
    Anyone want to guess how this will work? If ATF is currently "finalizing a rule", will the new rule be subject to review and comment period?

    Beyond that, will forms submitted ahead of implementation date be handled as they are currently or will even "in process" forms be returned for processing under new rules?

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Boynton Beach
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by ctsheepdog View Post
    Anyone want to guess how this will work? If ATF is currently "finalizing a rule", will the new rule be subject to review and comment period?

    Beyond that, will forms submitted ahead of implementation date be handled as they are currently or will even "in process" forms be returned for processing under new rules?
    41p was initially proposed in 2012 (or 2013, it's been a while) it's been pushed back 6 months at a time due to 9,500+ comments (including one from me) the BATFE needed to respond to, however this past December it was moved back only 1 month and now Obama admin discussed it in their press release I linked above.

    Historically BATFE will give a grace period, maybe 60 days, maybe 90, nobody knows for sure. For all I know the rule will change overnight (but I doubt it, would create too many headaches for the NFA branch with pending Form 1, 3 & 4s).

  4. Remove Advertisements
    FloridaConcealedCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member 7.62Kolectr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    On guard.....
    Posts
    16,011
    ATF is finalizing a rule that makes clear that people will no longer be able to avoid background checks by buying NFA guns and other items through a trust or corporation
    I believe finalizing this to be all but impossible. There are too many defense contractors who send their operators into harms way that use corporate trusts to purchase NFA items for their personnel. You cannot force an employee of Blackwater or the like to personally seek registration of an SBR or suppressor he may need for deployment/employment. I just don't see how that's gonna work? And I believe this will be our saving grace as the govt and many statesmen depend on these operators for their safety.

    Either way I'm stocking up.
    ¥ The origin of your right to keep and bear arms ¥
    http://constitution.org/lrev/rkba_wayment.htm
    COTEP#782

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Boynton Beach
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Blanca Busa View Post
    I believe finalizing this to be all but impossible. There are too many defense contractors who send their operators into harms way that use corporate trusts to purchase NFA items for their personnel. You cannot force an employee of Blackwater or the like to personally seek registration of an SBR or suppressor he may need for deployment/employment. I just don't see how that's gonna work? And I believe this will be our saving grace as the govt and many statesmen depend on these operators for their safety.

    Either way I'm stocking up.
    You'd be wrong, do not underestimate the tyrannical, anti-American poop stain that currently calls himself POTUS. He wants it, he will get it.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Spring Hill, Florida
    Posts
    3,960
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrioticDisorder View Post
    You'd be wrong, do not underestimate the tyrannical, anti-American poop stain that currently calls himself POTUS. He wants it, he will get it.

    Yeah! Maybe not legally - but, I haven't seen anyone doing much to stop him?!
    "The government that cannot protect the public must not strip them of the right to protect themselves." - M. Ayoob, In the Gravest Extreme

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    3,454
    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...cleo-sign-off/

    The ATF has issued its long awaited final ruling expanding the requirement for fingerprints, photo IDs, and background checks for “responsible persons” listed on a trust used to purchase items restricted under the National Firearms Act (such as silencers). The single most concerning possibility of this whole proposal was the idea that by expanding the requirement for a Chief Law Enforcement Officer to sign off on every single NFA application then that would effectively enable local police chiefs to eliminate the ability for law abiding citizens to purchase legal items simply by refusing to sign such documents and without needing to change any laws. That was the primary driving factor behind trusts in the first place (skipping the CLEO sign off), but now it looks like the ATF has eliminated that requirement in its entirety.


    First things first, the main thrust of the ruling says that everyone listed as a “responsible party” of a trust must submit (1) a set of fingerprints, (2)all relevant personal information, and (3) a set of photographs for the ATF and FBI to conduct a background check. The ATF further defines “responsible parties” as anyone who can posses the items under the terms of the trust. This can be a bit of a pain in the butt if you’ve got a trust with a large number of people on it, as now every single person will need to submit these items for every single new application and transfer.

    The news isn’t all doom and gloom, though. The ATF has officially removed the requirement for your local CLEO to sign off on your paperwork, no matter if you’re an individual or a trust. From the final rule:

    My take:

    • The whole gun trust business just took a huge hit. You can file as an individual and just get photographed and printed.

    • The ATF, of course, knew who was behind the trust, but now they can know who it is with less of a barrier.

    • No more CLEO sign-off required.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member ctsheepdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Palm Beach area (Connecticut escapee summer 2015)
    Posts
    2,096
    From David Goldman at guntrustlawyer.com:

    JANUARY 5, 2016
    Most of 41P is gutted by change to CLEO Notification
    by David M. Goldman

    Tonight we found a copy of the proposed final rule for 41P. It can be downloaded from this link 41P final.pdf

    In general, most of what the public was concerned about was removed from 41P by changing the CLEO Certification requirement that was proposed for trusts to be a CLEO Notification.

    It will not take effect until 180 days after publication in the Federal Registry so there is still time to purchase items under the existing rules and more reason than ever to create your Gun Trust now.

    While I am still reading the 248 pages, so far here are the highlights.


    1. The final rule only requires that the applicant maker or transferee, including each responsible person for a trust or legal entity, provide a notice to the appropriate State or local official that an application is being submitted to ATF
    2. The final rule also adds a new section to ATF’s regulations to address the possession and transfer of firearms registered to a decedent. The new section clarifies that the executor, administrator, personal representative, or other person authorized under State law to dispose of property in an estate may possess a firearm registered to a decedent during the term of probate without such possession being treated as a “transfer” under the NFA. It also specifies that the transfer of the firearm to any beneficiary of the estate may be made on a tax-exempt basis.

    Amendments to §479.62 proposed to change the following for Trusts:

    1. Provide that all information on the Form 1 application must be furnished for each responsible person of the applicant;
    2. Each responsible person must comply with the identification requirements prescribed in the proposed§ 479.63(b); and
    3. Require the applicant (including, if other than an individual, any responsible person), if an alien admitted under a nonimmigrant visa, to provide applicable documentation demonstrating that the applicant falls within an exception to 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(B) or has obtained a waiver of that provision.

    For individuals it is not as easy as they propose the following

    Amendments to§ 479.63, where the applicant is an individual, proposed to maintain the CLEO certification but omit the requirement for a statement about the use of a firearm for other than lawful purposes. This section proposed to require, instead, that the certification state that the official is satisfied that the fingerprints and photograph accompanying the application are those of the applicant and that the official has no information indicating that possession of the firearm by the maker would be in violation of State or local law.

    Additionally, amendments to a Form 1 or Form 4, where the applicant is a trust, or corporation, proposed to:

    1. Provide that the applicant must be identified on the Form 1 / Form 4 application by the name and exact location of the place of business, including the name of the county in which the business is located or, in the case of a trust, the address where the firearm is located. In the case of two or more locations, the address shown must be the principal place of business (or principal office, in the case of a corporation) or, in the case of a trust, the principal address at which the firearm is located;
    2. Require the applicant to attach to the application:

    • A completed ATF Form 5320.23 for each responsible person. Form 5320.23 would require certain identifying information for each responsible person, including each responsible person’s full name, position, Social Security number (optional), home address, date and place of birth, and country of citizenship;
    • In accordance with the instructions provided on Form 5320.23, a 2 x 2-inch photograph of each responsible person, clearly showing a full front view of the features of the responsible person with head bare, with the distance from the top of the head to the point of the chin approximately 1 V4 inches, and which must have been taken within 1 year prior to the date of the application;
    • Two properly completed FBI Forms FD-258 (Fingerprint Card) for each responsible person. The fingerprints must be clear for accurate classification and should be taken by someone properly equipped to take them; and
    • In accordance with the instructions provided on Form 5320.23, a certification for each responsible person completed by the local chief of police,.sheriff of the county, head of the State police, State or local district attorney or prosecutor, or such other person whose certification may in a particular case be acceptable to the Director. The certification for each responsible person must be completed by the CLEO who has jurisdiction over the area in which the responsible person resides. The certification must state that the official is satisfied that the fingerprints and photograph

    Beneficiaries not not considered responsible persons
    Therefore, the Department believes that it is not necessary to positively identify a beneficiary as a “responsible person” within the definition unless they meet the definition of a responsible person.

    There is no requirement to update the ATF with changes in responsible persons after an application.


    Page 124: Department is not requiring in this final rule that new responsible persons submit a Form 5320.23 within 30 days of any change in responsible persons.

    So what does all this mean, most of the benefits for a trust will remain intact and a properly drafted Gun Trust is still the best way to purchase, own, possess, and transfer NFA firearms. Watch this page for more updates over the next few days
    Last edited by ctsheepdog; 01-05-2016 at 08:43 AM.

  10. #9
    Super Moderator
    BeerHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    PBC
    Posts
    23,801
    -BH

    Member: Florida Carry, COTEP 766, SAF, GOA, NRA Endowment Life
    FFL 03, NRA CRSO & CI: P-R-S-PPITH
    Former USAF NCO 1980-1984, DoD 1987-Present
    Please consider joining NRA at www.nra.org and Florida Carry at www.floridacarry.org

    “The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.”
    -- Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States

    "Those who 'abjure' violence can only do so because others are commuting violence on their behalf."
    -- George Orwell


    "The ultimate result of shielding men from folly is to fill the world with fools."
    -- Herbert Spencer

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member ctsheepdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Palm Beach area (Connecticut escapee summer 2015)
    Posts
    2,096
    This was posted on my CT forum by one of the guys with many a tax stamp:

    More, this from the Prince Law Blog. Note the doc is 248 pages.

    Well, in spanning 248 pages, with 236 pages of preamble and the actual final rule only spanning 12 pages, it says a lot, as there were a plethora of issues raised by the public comments for which ATF was required to respond. Boiled down to its most simplistic terms, this is what the final rule in ATF-41p provides:

    Effective Date: It will not take effect for 180 days after publication in the Federal Register. I checked the Federal Register this morning and there was no notice regarding ATF-41p. Hence, the exact effective date is still unknown.

    CLEO Signatures: ATF has replaced the CLEO signature requirement with a CLEO notification, which will be required for all transferees and makers of NFA firearms and their Responsible Persons (explained below). While clearly a CLEO notification requirement is far better than a CLEO signature requirement, as the CLEO signature requirement could be utilized as a defacto ban on NFA firearms, it is extremely concerning as the Government is mandating the disclosure of confidential tax information. Not to worry, ATF responded to that on page 84. Since it is requiring that YOU disclose the confidential tax information, no law is being broken, because it is YOU that is disclosing YOUR confidential tax information (did I mention the Government is forcing you to do so?). See also page 96, where ATF states that it is legally prohibited from disclosing that same tax information….

    Responsible Persons (RPs): Throughout the final rule, ATF seemingly proposes several different interpretations of what constitutes a Responsible Person based on the entity type. This results in serious questions, such as whether the language is overly vague. Are now all employees who can possess a firearm of an LLC/Corp RPs? And also, whether ATF is treating different fictitious entities differently in violation of the law. Are trustees who can possess firearms of the trust RPs, but employees who possess firearms of LLC/Corps not? Moreover, what is the basis for treating non-licensees and licensees differently? The exact language for an RP can be found on page 238-239, which declares"

    Responsible person. In the case of an unlicensed entity, including any trust, partnership, association, company (including any Limited Liability Company (LLC)), or corporation, any individual who possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority to direct the management and policies of the trust or entity to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of, the trust or legal entity. In the case of a trust, those persons with the power or authority to direct the management and policies of the trust include any person who has the capability to exercise such power and possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority under any trust instrument, or under State law, to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of, the trust.

    Impact of RPs: One of the largest impacts ATF-41P will have on fictitious entities is the requirement that all RPs will have to submit photographs, fingerprints, a CLEO notification and an NFA Responsible Person Questionnaire (Form 5320.23). See pages 232, 239-247. Further, based on page 96, individuals will be unable to roll their own fingerprints, as has been custom for some over the past decade. However, the final rule includes an exception on page 242-243, where the if the applicant entity has been approved as a maker or transferee within the prior 24 months, there has been no change to the “documentation previously provided” and the entity certifies this by specifying the previously approved form by form type, serial number of the firearm and date of approval, it does not need to submit the photographs, fingerprints and Responsible Person Questionnaire. The final rule, pages 100 and 239, also states that generally speaking, a beneficiary will not be an RP.

    Changes to RPs: Another issue that ATF was considering was whether there would be an obligation on part of the fictitious entity to submit notification, within 30 days, of the change in those who constitute RPs for the entity. See pages 206 – 209. The final rule, on page 209, declares, “The Department is not requiring, in this final rule, that new responsible persons submit a Form 5320.23 within 30 days of any change of responsible persons at a trust or legal entity.” However, if a new application (Form 1 or Form 4) is filed, clearly the updated documentation must be filed with ATF for all RPs.

    Retroactive Effect: As stated on page 198, “The final rule is not retroactive and therefore the final rule will not apply to applications that are in ‘pending’ status, or to previously approved applications for existing legal entities and trusts holding NF A items.” Unfortunately, ATF failed to define what constitutes “pending status.”
    Estates: In relation to estates, ATF has clarified, on page 247, that an “executor, administrator, personal representative, or other person authorized under State law to dispose of property in an estate (collectively “executor”) may possess a firearm registered to a decedent during the term of probate without such possession being treated as a transfer” and that, as has been ATF’s practice, a transfer to a specific beneficiary, whether through a will or trust, will transfer tax-free.

    Estates: In relation to estates, ATF has clarified, on page 247, that an “executor, administrator, personal representative, or other person authorized under State law to dispose of property in an estate (collectively “executor”) may possess a firearm registered to a decedent during the term of probate without such possession being treated as a transfer” and that, as has been ATF’s practice, a transfer to a specific beneficiary, whether through a will or trust, will transfer tax-free.

    The above are merely the key-aspects to ATF-41p. There are some very interesting statements, or lack thereof, by ATF in the final rule, such as in relation to an issue we raised with ATF’s prior practice of institutional perjury (page 195). ATF’s response, page 196, is merely that they did nothing wrong in this rulemaking. Also of interest, ATF acknowledges that it did not make the underlying information available and that it did not provide a 90 day comment period as required by the law and denies that it placed irrelevant materials into the docket (even though there was evidence submitted reflecting such) or precluded interested parties from obtaining the information (pages 185 – 193). As a side note, we submitted a FOIA almost three years ago for the information, and ATF has failed to produce anything in relation to it, but it is completely transparent….

    In the next week, we will be taking a comprehensive review of all 248 pages and providing further insight into the final rule, ATF’s responses and a potential legal challenge to the final rule. In the meantime, we’re working on an Amicus Curiae brief in support of the United States Supreme Court granting certiorari in Bonidy, et al., v. United States Postal Service, et al, docket no. 15-746, which is due later this week.
    Last edited by ctsheepdog; 01-05-2016 at 03:57 PM.

Sposors

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

41p

Click on a term to search for related topics.