You don’t need a lawyer for a trust. Just visit a Class 3 dealer who is versed in making up trusts and it will cost you less than $100. Most lawyers aren’t familiar with trusts for weapons and would do you more harm than good, leading to holdups in ATF processing due to errors and/or omissions.
I dealer making trusts for customers is likely practicing law without a license. RUN don’t walk from a dealer offering this service.
I personally, would be outraged if this were the case. a $3,000.00 tax to own a rifle is insane. The tax would be roughly twice the cost of the rifle it self and roughly ten times the cost of a full auto lower. This would put owning a full auto out of most law abiding citizens hands, still.
I sure as hell couldn’t afford to pay a $3,000.00 tax on something.
You beat me to it Robb. Unless they’re also an attorney that is a big no no.
There isn’t one around here and if there was I wouldn’t trust the gun store commando behind the counter (no matter how versed) in making me a trust. Not to mention I believe that this would be considered practicing law with out a license. The local class three dealer referred me to a local lawyer that specializes in NFA trusts, they said his going rate for forming a trust for NFA weapons was about $600.00.
I thought about getting quicken willmaker but, I have NO idea how to make a trust and wouldn’t want to screw my self with the ATF.
EDIT: Just saw Robb said it first.
Quicken and other computer programs are made to do the trust without a lawyer. It’s just that the dealers who work with them “know the wording” that will get you through. Their name isn’t on it. You still have to have the trust notarized, and then you send it off. No big deal.
Well, you don’t need a lawyer to create a firearms trust. A lot of people do that using programs like Willmaker or other boilerplate programs online to create a revocable living trust. I can see a Class III FFL offering to steer people through the steps of creating a firearms trust and getting a Form 1 or Form 4 approved without practicing law any more than the people who wrote Willmaker are practicing law. Seems like a nice service for an FFL to offer to help his customers (and himself).
The part that concerned me was the charge of $100. That is where the issue of practicing law came in for me. Free advice is one thing. Selling the legal advice is what lawyers are trained and licensed to do. 
Your better dealers are offering the Trust paperwork for free and charging for the transfer, which they’re licensed to do. It’s semantics either way. You do not need a lawyer to form a Trust. All you need is the required text, fill in the blanks with your information and get it notarized. Some states may require you to register your Trust for estate purposes (mine does not).
You can pretty much find NFA trust samples on the internet these days.
Yup did mine with a little help.
The true tests of these ‘trusts’ come after you leaving this place called earth. The trust might be 100% legal but your stuff owned by the trust might become ‘contraband’ upon the trustee(s) death.
I own several thousand of dollars of NFA stuff. I’m leaving it to friends and family. I don’t trust the cheap/free trust wording to ensure that they’ll actually receive the items legally.
I’m not sure you’re seeing the forest for the trees.
First, this is exactly what the 1934 National Firearms Act did in terms of relative dollars. The average citizen who might otherwise have taken an interest in owning one of the restricted weapons generally had no ability to pay the special tax.
Second, although it would be a prohibitive tax for most to pay, it wouldn’t be quite so difficult to bear if it meant that we regained access to select-fire weapons at standard retail pricing, instead of the exponentially-inflated prices that we’re dealing with today.
Finally, all of this is wildly conjectural. No one has proposed anything of the sort, and it would surely go nowhere if they did. I was simply attempting to point out that, constitutional implications aside, it would have made far more fiscal sense for the government to bring the tax up to date than it did for it to impose an outright ban.
As odd as it sounds, this time it really isn’t about money; it’s simply about the power of populist politics … and unfortunately, we’ve got ourselves a losing issue.
AC
I don’t want any changes to the existing set up other than a repeal of the Hughes amendment.
I don’t want attention brought to anything else dealing with NFA.
If you can’t afford $200 or get a CLEO signature or set up a trust/corp that is tough shit.
I don’t mind the way it is now. It keeps many shitbag people out that would otherwise bring us more negative attention and restrictions.
You may be interested in the link below. Understanding how we got to the point we’re at today is important if we’re to make any progress in eliminating or streamlining the hurdles to MG ownership.
http://www.guncite.com/journals/hardfopa.html
For the record, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about lowering the tax. Despite the intent of the tax as originally framed, the fact that it hasn’t been adjusted since 1934 is probably a good thing. I don’t find the paperwork process too egregious, despite my personal problems with an overzealous local chief who didn’t want to sign off on my form. I wouldn’t mind that section going away, and I think a case for it could be made in this age of computerized records where a clerk can easily check the zip code of the person applying for the item and verify that those items are allowed in that jurisdiction.
The Hughes amendment is the thing that should be looked at. Adopted incorrectly, in the midst of mass confusion, it’s the true hurdle to affordable machine guns for most of us.
I agree. $200 is well worth the price of admission and drawing attention to the issue is not in our best interest.
+1 100% agree.
To the OP,
You need to be in survival mode right now buying every firearm item you can afford before the next ban, not worrying about theory.
Not everyone is entitled to a firearm just like everyone shouldn’t be able to vote. Only property owning men should be allowed to vote.
If someone is too stupid to navigate the NFA, then that is the desired end state for them.
I agree with Mr.Goodtimes here. But, of course. Libby will have his way, because there’s, apparently, an “exception to the rule”. Unfortunately, partners, the liberals view that the Constitution of the United States of America, from which the words of the Second Amendment are printed on, as high as something of used toilet paper.
Someone have the gumption to say there isn’t something wrong with that. Anybody…
But, regardless. I would own multiple items down the road, I just think the whole NFA thing needs to be pulled out of commission.
Ok… This was pretty typical thread about NFA. Not quite as many people here crying about how their “investments” would lose value though… Then I got to this: women shouldn’t be allowed to vote? That is outta left field! I guess they shouldn’t own firearms or drive either… o.O
As to retards, the NFA actually doesn’t deter retards. Remember your local yokel gun dealer has went through pretty much the same process getting an FFL.
Definitely need to let sleeping dogs lie on the NFA issue. I think even going after the Hughes amendment could make things worse. Part of a compromise to get it repealed might include an increase in the tax.