Thread muzzle pay ITAR

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by guncrank

No it does not apply to any personal gunsmithing , only regulated firearms trade

Guncrank, I think that you need to take a nuanced look at the way the letter is phrased.

The law says this (22 USC § 122.1):

Any person who engages in the United States in the business of manufacturing or exporting or temporarily importing defense articles, or furnishing defense services, is required to register with the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls under §122.2.

The law clearly says that the AECA applies to persons "engage[d]... in the business". However, don't forget this little gimme in the letter...

...the requirements for obtaining FFLs under the GCA are separate and distinct from the requirement under the AECA and ITAR to register with DDTC.

Clincher #1: the familiar ATF definition of "engaged in the business" per 18 USC § 921(a)(21) is irrelevant here.

Clincher #2: there is NO clear and concise definition of "engaged in the business" in the AECA [22 USC § 120].

The very broad definition of "manufacturing" potentially encompasses businesses that manufacture gun parts but don't necessarily work on entire firearms and hence aren't required to have a FFL, such as a guy who carves grip panels for pistols and sells them on eBay. These folks are NOT engaged in the "regulated firearms trade", but the letter implies that they ARE required to register with the DDTC.

Here's how I would answer the question:

Originally Posted by LogicMan

So does this apply to doing gunsmithing in one's home?

If one receives compensation for working on firearm parts and/or advertises one's services in return for compensation, potentially yes. However, if the work is strictly confined to personal firearms and/or free favors for your friends and family, then no.

[guncrank]

Like I said the ruling from the DDTC does not apply to personal
This current ruling does only apply to regulated firearm industry.
It changes what was gunsmithing to manufacture with "because we said so"

I was not commenting to what other activities it may apply too.

[HiBC]

My concern is twofold.First,for our culture,and the LGS smith,the cranky old guys who do everything from making BPCR silhouette rifles out of a rolling block to rebarreling a centerfire to putting choke tubes in a shotgun.
And to the younger folks who aspire to be gunsmiths.To Brownell's,Obermeyer,Clymer,and other folks who take good care of us,and their livelihoods.
The extra red tape and $2250 a year will cost us all in resources.

It will be a lot harder and more expensive to,for example,make a 6.5 Grendel on a CZ bolt rifle.People will close shop and we will lose that whole gun crank culture.

Me? From the start,I have enough projects of my own.When people ask if I'm a Gunsmith,I tell them "Hobby Amateur"
When they ask me to do something for them,I say"I do not have an FFL.I do not take on gunwork.I cannot legally accept or keep your firearm overnight.I work on my own stuff"

But 30 years in the machine trades and access to machines....They seem to be outlawing who I am.

This is like the British telling Ghandi he could not make salt.

[Palmetto-Pride]

This law is so unenforceable it's not even funny, albeit I do understand wanting to operate within the law I don't see how anyone could ever get caught or prosecuted, but then again common sense has left this government many moons ago!

[mehavey]

This law is so unenforceable....

All you need is a few high-visibility/well-publicized prosecutions of
someone financially unable to fight back.... and res ipsa loquitur
(to borrow a phrase).

[Dixie Gunsmithing]

Oh, it will be enforceable under Obama all right. The Dept. of State has access to the registrations at the BATFE. Once they finalize all this, I would not be surprised if they sent out agents of their own, or use the BATFE agents to police the gunsmiths. Most gunsmiths, who do not sell firearms, are not bothered with visits too much now, but those that have a gun store will most definitely be scrutinized, and I imagine the ones that don't, will start getting visits that they have never had before. Obama will demand that, along with his protege, who is running now.

I would not put it past them to look for any machine shop equipment, even a drill press or a simple hand drill.

I'm glad that I retired when I did.

[natman]

2.Registration Required –Manufacturing:
In response to questions from persons engaged in the business of gunsmithing, DDTC has found in specific cases that ITAR registration is required because the following activities meet the ordinary, contemporary, common meaning of “manufacturing” and, therefore, constitute “manufacturing” for ITAR purposes:
a)Use of any special tooling or equipment upgrading in order to improve the capability of assembled or repaired firearms;
b)Modifications to a firearm that change round capacity;
c)The production of firearm parts (including, but not limited to, barrels, stocks, cylinders, breech mechanisms, triggers, silencers, or suppressors);
d)The systemized production of ammunition, including the automated loading or reloading of ammunition;
e)The machining or cutting of firearms, e.g., threading of muzzles or muzzle brake installation requiring machining, that results in an enhanced capability;
f)Rechambering firearms through machining, cutting, or drilling;

These requirements most certainly do NOT meet the "ordinary, contemporary, common meaning of 'manufacturing'”, they meet the definition of machining. Someone who performs machining on an existing firearm is no more a gun manufacturer than the mechanic who turns my brake rotors is an automobile manufacturer.

Moreover, the justification behind ITAR is: "The U.S. Government views the sale, export, and re-transfer of defense articles and defense services as an integral part of safeguarding U.S. national security and furthering U.S. foreign policy objectives." How in the heck does drilling a receiver for a scope base threaten U.S. national security? Is it a secret?

Welcome to common sense gun laws.

[johnwilliamson062]

If I personally thread all my barrels and increase the value of my collection by maybe $1000 dollars or so, is that a profit putting me "in the business," and am I now in violation of ITAR?

In conjunction with the recent MA changes this seems like a full court press to me. The may well be looking at their last desperate minutes for quite some time, so it does make sense on one hand, but this is going to tick off a lot of people by November.

[guncrank]

No ITAR

[HiBC]

It boils down to politicized unelected bureaucrat agencies given the power to write regulation with the force of law,including "fees",prosecution,and other forms of coercion.
Its an end run around the Constitution and the Legislative process,separation of powers,etc.

Another good example is attacking ammunition via the EPA and lead.

Fat chance we will reverse that any time soon.

[tobnpr]

^^
Which is also why this Administration has been fighting- for many years now- to have "gun violence" studied (with a known, end conclusion) and declared a threat to the public health- thereby giving them "grounds" to intervene and ban firearms- the Second Amendment be damned.

[WV_gunner]

I know this is old but I’ve got to ask, is this stuff still out there? I can handle the FFL 06 tax but a few grand for export taxes for ammo I won’t be exporting is ridiculous.

[SGW Gunsmith]

I just stumbled onto this thread, only because it has been resurrected, but let me tell a story concerning a "compliance check" I received a few years back.

I was building 1911 pistols using Caspian Arms grip frames and slides, so the grip frames, serial numbered, were entered into my bound book. So, the records need to comply with what was actually in my inventory. I was told by the agent doing the compliance check that I was manufacturing and needed to apply for that type license.
The only fly in the soup was that if a customer were to buy a serial numbered grip frame, and THEN, bring me that grip frame, I could then fit and assembly all of the requisite parts involved and that would be OK. Talk about being confused! Now, I'm not sure that this agent had all the information he passed along to me, correct, but I do things much differently these days. I will only do modifications on serial numbered 1911's that come to me as previously manufactured.
I gotta wonder if those who build-up AR's could also get trapped by the lack of more positive descriptions on what constitutes "manufacturing" and what involves replacing worn parts? Maybe we need another "Executive Order"?

[HiBC]

I too,am interested in the current status of this reg.
As near as I can tell,I may be OK because I am an amateur hobbyist who works on my own guns.I do not have an ffl and I don't take in work.

But what if,for no charge,I cut a sight dovetail for a brother? Its the ambiguity that is unsettling.I choose to be law abiding.I'm not trying to get away with anything.My problem is "law abiding" is a moving target very poorly defined.
It would make as much sense (none!) to include edged weapons.Knives get used for the horrible decapitations.And if you modify or improve an edged weapon by cutting steel (sharpen) a knife,you may be guilty.Ridiculous....but folks have been put in Federal prison for complying with all the laws in Montana and building a duck pond because the feds changed water rules.
If yourseptic system goes bad and your yard gets wet,you now have a federally controlled wetland in your back yard (OK,I'm being snarky,but its not far from true)

I'm not a lawyer,and I certainly don't know the answers.

With all due respect to the gunsmiths who have responded,what we understood to be the Federal Firearms rules a couple of years ago is not the topic.I understand you must know the rules to be in business,but the topic is ridiculous rules that are new.
We all have an interest in what the lawyers and bureaucrats resolve.

My understanding is by the stroke of a pen,not Congress,a different agency has gained power and authority to persecute anyone who does the "smithing" part of gunsmithing by classifying us as part of international arms trade.

I understand Obama is not in the White House anymore,"maybe" we are OK.

But that "maybe" is not something to make business plans on,and I don't need the stress of wondering if I'm in the shadow of potential felony prosecution.

IMO,current status of this topic is important ,for the peace or for the battle to reverse it.

[WV_gunner]

I emailed them. A few days later they replied with a message saying they’ll give me an answer later, typically within one business day. It’s been a few weeks now. I hate this whole thing, I have a great business idea but no way I’m paying their fee just because they say so. I’m not going to prison either so I’ll forget that idea. I did find some of their “rules” and it appears, I’m not a lawyer or in an interpreter of a made up law, that a manufacture of ammo that does not use automated equipment does not have to pay.

[HiBC]

Realize they may consider a progressive press "automated equipment"

[WV_gunner]

I’ve considered that and I’m more than sure it’s left to the discretion of the inspector. They don’t seem to want to define their own laws. Luckily my product, if I can even do it without the crazy fee, will be for hunting so big production numbers aren’t a great concern. A single stage will be adequate. My plan is to ease in and hopefully make it a fulltime thing. Crunching some numbers and I believe it’s feasible.

[std7mag]

WV,
As a side note, don't forget to check with your insurance agent. From what i was looking at last year, a gun shop/ gun smith is way cheaper than ammo manufacture.
Just something to consider.

[weaselfire]

First, the rule is in effect. Has been for decades. How it's applied is all that changed, about six or eight years ago.

Second, there is an ongoing process to move enforcement from Dept of State to Dept of Commerce that will alleviate this issue somewhat. Also, since the 2016 election, enforcement efforts are way down.

Now, as to what constitutes manufacturing, the ATF interpretation and the Department of State interpretation are different. An 07 FFL, manufacturing, is required to assemble a firearm from parts for sale, as in building an AR and selling it. To ATF, that is manufacturing. To Dept of State, it is not and there is no ITAR fee required.

If a customer brings parts to a gunsmith for assembly, that is not manufacturing for sale as far as ATF is concerned and merely requires an 01 FFL.

All of this is spelled out in numerous decisions and determination letters by State and ATF. ITAR is administered by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, which is part of the Dept of State.

So, is this clear? Of course not. It's a product of bureaucracy. But, if a simple $2,250 annual fee stands between you and becoming a professional, you need to rethink your desire to go pro. It's a cost of business, insurance will cost you more.

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[HiBC]

Weaselfire:

First,I'm not a lawyer,I don't know the answers and I'd really like to understand,for sure,how this applies.

With all due respect,your post leaves me more confused.

You wrote with confidence,I'm sure you were giving your best in good faith.

My problem with what you wrote is your timeline. You suggest this information is years old.
My guess your information was accurate then,but it may not be now.
In July 2016 President Obama sent out a memo that changed some critical definitions and requirements.

The concerns we express and the answers we need will not be answered by what was true before July 2016.

Perhaps this will be enlightening.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016...ve-gun-control

I come from a time when the small mom and pop local gunstore was often a gunsmith and his wife,and maybe an hourly worker or two.

I think your characterization that an extra few thousand dollars a year and overwhelming paperwork requirements shouldn't be any big deal for a "professional" is not accurate.

These shops face online and big box competition. Part of their niche to survive is gunsmithing.

This memo makes drilling and tapping or threading and chambering a barrel into the equivalent of international arms trading.

Your local gunsmith is an endangered species.

[weaselfire]

HiBC -

The information is old, this thread started two years ago. But even more than that, the actual law is the Arms Export Control Act from 1976. Any manufacturer, broker or exporter of controlled arms is required to register with the Department of State, currently at $2,250 a year. In the Department of State, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, DDTC, administers ITAR.

Anything listed on the US Munitions List, which changes regularly and includes firearms, as well as things like submarines, guided missiles and technical data (think plans for 3D printing of guns), currently falls under the DDTC authority.

President Obama never sent any memo, it came from the DDTC, and the memo mentioned merely clarified what DDTC had been practicing for decades. The increase in enforcement actually started in the late 1990's when the State Department took control over the export of satellites. Until the mid 2000's, nobody paid attention to gunsmiths. Then the DDTC started sending notices to any newly registered 07 (Manufacturing) FFL, whether a major manufacturer or your mom and pop shop, about the required registration. And yes, drilling and tapping has always been, since 1976, the equivalent of international arms dealing, by definition of the laws. There's no distinction between drilling and tapping a hole to mount a scope on grandpa's single shot .22 and drilling and tapping a hole to mount a camera pod to the underbelly of a B52.

ITAR has no application for private individuals. It actually hasn't been applied to 01 FFLs (Dealers), which includes many gunsmiths. And it doesn't apply to all 07 FFLs either. And the reason for that is one of the reasons DDTC issued the clarification memo.

As defined by ATF, assembling a firearm from parts for sale is considered manufacturing and requires an 07 FFL. As defined by DDTC, assembling a firearm from parts is not manufacturing and does not require ITAR registration. The various functions listed in the memo are what DDTC considers typical of manufacturing.

As for payment of the fee being a cost of business, for thousands of gunsmiths across the country, it is. Compared to rent, insurance and other professional fees, it's in the smaller range of required payments. The paperwork is already required for any 07 FFL, it's a manufacturers report filed annually along with the excise taxes on each firearm manufactured. If that's an "overwhelming" regulation for your gunsmith, tell him not to perform manufacturing operations, many gunsmiths don't. Keeping the gunsmith's bound book and filling out occasional 4473 forms and background checks is a lot more paperwork.

As for the current situation, 07 FFLs haven't been receiving notices from DDTC about ITAR registration for over a year. The NSSF has been working with congress since 2016 to get responsibility for a lot of the US munitions list, including small arms and ammunition, transferred to the Department of Commerce, which deals with almost all other trade. The completion of this process is near.

As for the local gunsmith being endangered, every year there are more registrations for new gunsmiths than the prior year. Gunsmithing is actually back into an upswing. But the local gunsmith being doomed is a story that's been repeated for the last five decades. Just like the ATF not granting FFLs for home-based operations.

Lastly, don't assume every gunsmith threads barrels. Or performs machining operations. Most suppressors and muzzle brakes are sold for firearms with existing threaded barrels. And, in a few states, that muzzle brake is illegal anyway, unless it is welded or pinned on. Most scopes are mounted to existing rails or mounting holes in the rifle. Over the last five years or so, ATF has even pushed gunsmiths toward the 01FFL since it doesn't require ITAR registration, even for those gunsmiths who do thread a barrel.

Jeff

[hooligan1]

My local Smith folded tents because he understood that he had to pay all the back payments to stay in business. He had no such bankroll.

[weaselfire]

Originally Posted by hooligan1

My local Smith folded tents because he understood that he had to pay all the back payments to stay in business. He had no such bankroll.

He was either misinformed or misinformed you. At worst, he could have opened under a new name and FFL.

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[4V50 Gary]

I thought Trump backed us off from ITAR.

[HiBC]

Weaselfire:

Thank you.I have a little better understanding.

I get it that you are telling me the way the law is.

Where we seem to differ is in how to look at it.I know,that makes me the joke. There is something to being able to adapt and accept.

But,NO! I don't think its OK. I prefer its a legislative priority to fix it.

I don't have a shingle out that says "Gunsmith",I don't have an FFL,and I don't take in gunwork.
But I am a guncrank.I spent 30 years in the machine trades and I have machine tools.
The law may not apply to me,but to someone like me who ,as a retiree would want a side business building a few custom rifles or 1911's,it is an oppressive burden to tax as much as the years income might be.
IT IS TYRANNY to tell me I cannot drill and tap a hole.

And it seems another front to eliminate the firearms tradition and freedom from the USA.

Perhaps I misunderstand you, but you seem to be saying "Don't worry,its all good" to the frog in the pot that is slowly being boiled.

I'm alarmed by the idea of control of munitions being shifted to The NSSF and Dept of Commerce.

IMO,the EPA's focus on lead is another threat to the availability of ammunition.
The direct efforts of anti-gunners to take down the 2A have failed,but the indirect strategies continue on other fronts.

Roadblocks to transferring firearms to family members or youth,restrictions on shooting on public land,demonization of lead ammunition,
And now the attack on the local gun crafter.

Our natural,God given rights are not limited to those written in the Constitution.

One of my God given natural rights is to be able to take a piece of wood and a piece of steel and craft any object or device that is legal for me to own.

I reject the notion that I should accept bureaucratic efforts to eliminate a competency from the Citizen.

I will teach my Grandchildren ,my niece, and my nephew how to run a lathe,a mill,a grinder,thread and chamber a barrel,drill and tap holes,and fit one part to another if they show any interest.

I have done a lot of rapid protoype work (3 D printing). IMO,the available materials are not quite ideal for making safe and durable firearms,(with a few exceptions)
But I applaud and support the Gentleman who is fighting for our rights to share databases and create.

The point is Freedom vs Government Control.