My question is, does a firearm become an SBR after you get your stamp back, or when you actually chop the barrel? I have gotten my stamp back but haven’t chopped the barrel yet. Do I still need to have a copy of the paperwork with me while transporting?
Also, for those interested I sent the paperwork on June 19th, received the stamp August 15th.
I guess it’s an SBR once they approve it. It’s in the NFA registry at that time.
I’m not a big fan of chopping barrels… even if a good smith is doing it. I prefer to buy a factory short barrel.
And, yes. It’s a good idea to have a copy of your paper work with you when you transport.
Yea, I’m with you on that but this one is an AK that I’m making into an AK104 clone. Not many of those floating around from the factory :D. My next one, yes there will be a next one, will be an AR SBR. I want to do a Noveske 12.5 build.
As soon as the stamp was approved.
This seems kind of murky to me since the paperwork submitted is an application to “Manufacture” an NFA item. Technically it can’t be "manufactured until after the paperwork is received, but better safe than sorry I’ll follow all the rules as if the firearm was completed.
It is a little murky indeed. You’re not truly manufacturing anything. You’re not assigning the gun a new serial number like you would if you were making your own silencer or something.
There’s nothing murky about it. When the BATFE approves it, it is registered as such, regardless as to whether or not you’ve received the paperwork or the work is completed. If the work isn’t completed months from now, it is still registered as an SBR once the paperwork is approved.
Status changes from a Title I (non-NFA) firearm, to a Title II (NFA item) as of the date on the approved Form 1.
It does not matter the timing for which you add the upper afterwards. As of the date the examiner signed and “cancelled” your tax stamp with the serial number, it is an SBR.
Period.
Yes. That aspect is clear. It’s an NFA weapon at that point.
The application to “manufacture” is and odd process though since most of us aren’t really manufacturing anything… rather we’re modifying an existing weapon.
If you look at section (i.) in the definitons on the Form 1 – “Make.”
It is defined as such in Title 27 Part 479 Section 11 - :
“This term and the various derivatives thereof shall include manufacturing (other than by one qualified to engage
in such business under this part), putting together, altering, any combination of these, or otherwise producing a firearm.”
The Form 1 is titled: “Application to Make and Register a Firearm”
I see. The act of putting together a Title II weapon is the basis for the application.
Demigod,
You are not manufacturing because it is not for resale or distribution. They require your name and city/state as the maker of the NFA weapon. If you then sell more than one of them. You could be a manufacturer.
As you can see when you sell them you are in a gray area and some agent could interpret that as manufacturing. I doubt it would happen but if the SBR in question was used in a crime someday, I wouldn’t want to have my name and city/state on it. Also note that in the above it says makes ONE. What about two or three… they have yet to say how many more than one it takes to meet the criteria. Then there’s the taxes that go to the TTB. They have their own rules about who is a manufacturer and when the excise tax is applied.
Also see the below about what the atf says about manufacturing.
7.2.2 “Manufacturing”. “Manufacturing” is not defined by the law, regulations, or any formal ATF ruling. Nevertheless, the term has been interpreted by ATF to cover activities other than producing a firearm from scratch. As interpreted by ATF, the term covers virtually any work performed on a firearm during the process of preparing the firearm for subsequent sale. For example, a person having a contract with a manufacturer to apply finishing or other work on firearms, or firearms frames or receivers, to prepare them for subsequent sale by the manufacturer would be a “manufacturer” required to qualify as such. Of course, if the person produced firearms parts other than frames or receivers for the manufacturer or performed work on firearms parts not defined as “firearms,” the person would not be a “manufacturer.”
I don’t have a clue when it actually becomes officially an sbr. I bet that there’s never been a ruling that is written down either. I’d carry the paperwork as soon as you get it because I don’t want to be the one to find out!
see the quote by Patrick Henry below.
It does not say “manufacture”
It says “make”
There is a distinct legal difference between the two.
The barrel attached to the receiver is irrelevant. Once the lower is registered, it is an NFA weapon.
Now just to look at it from the other side, If what you say is true, how bout all the manufactures who registered lowers,tubes & sideplates just before the 86 ban but didn’t get around to doing the work?
Many of their MG’s have benn determined to be post 86 &/or contraban.
I was an 03 from '78 to '92, in late '85 I could just taste that a shitstorm was coming.
Luckily I had teamed up with a local 02 mfr and had him registering every M16 auto sear I could find.
Even those DIAS, which everyone thought was a piece of junk got a number on it.
Just before the ban he did a run of HK auto sears…ATF found that half of those were incomplete and considered post.
Being that just one part was still straight it was a no-no, if they would of been bent, then they would of been good to go…DAM!!!
The problem with your statement is that since ATF itself says there is no legal definition for manufacture, how can there be a distinct legal difference.
7.2.2 “Manufacturing”. “Manufacturing” is not defined by the law, regulations, or any formal ATF ruling.
I do agree though that it is best to consider it as an sbr upon receiving notification that it has been registered as such. I wouldn’t travel with it without the paperwork. I also know for sure that ATF considers me as the manufacturer of my two SBRs. However, since there isn’t a legal definition to manufacture, it really is irrelevant what they call me as long as I follow the laws rules and regulations.
The word itself, the legal definition in the US code, or other trivial discussions surrounding “manufacture”, and it’s derivatives, is not germane to this discussion.
The topic at hand was an individual inquiry about an application to “Make and Register a Firearm” aka Form 1.
The word “make” has a distinct meaning in the context of a Form 1, and manufacturing does not play a part. Please stay on topic – and “manufacturing” isn’t it.