SBR / Pistol Brace / Tax stamp situation – New Rule

I know this has came up several times in the past on several topics on here. If I understand the new ruling it goes into effect the date of publication in the federal register ( Date not know at this time ) It does say that there will be a 120 day grace period from that date to allow people to comply with the new rule. The whole issue surrounding pistol braces and the ATF enforcement of laws has been a rather GREY area for awhile now and it seems this new ruling is a attempt to clear up that Grey area. From what I understand, people who own a Short Barred rifle ( SBR ) with a pistol brace were not required to get a tax stamp for it. This new ruling now requires you to do one of the following 4 options:

1. Apply for and get a Tax stamp to register it as a SBR.
2. Put a Longer legal length Barrel on it.
3. Remover the Brace totally.
4. Surrender the gun to the ATF

I’m sure there will be many motions and lawsuits than may come into play before this is all finalized.

I’m curious for those here who have a SBR with a pistol brace, what your thoughts are on all of this and what your plans are if this new ruling goes through.

I’m torn what to do . I have a pistol length ar for suppressed coyote hunting . Really was just going to hope this went away .

The ATF has been shot down many times trying to make new rules/laws.
It is speculated that this too will go away in court as it has been ruled prior the ATF can not create law.

However, that is not to say we should sit back and let things happen. Specific political groups will keep on trying to widdle away at our Constitutional Rights.

…shall not be infringed.

isu22andy wrote:

I’m torn what to do . I have a pistol length ar for suppressed coyote hunting . Really was just going to hope this went away .

I thought you lost that in a boating accident?

Just to clarify option 1 it’s “free” during the 120 day period so you don’t have to pay $200. You do end up with an NFA gun though which means you have to store several forms, can’t move it across state lines without approval, and it will affect future transfers.

Isn’t this one of those – take note, and file it under “who gives a sh**” deals?

The government cannot regulate or enforce what it has on the books, much less what may or may not be in my possession on my own property.

Not to mention the atf has zero authority to create laws.

I would hope most people don’t fall for the “free” tax stamp. It’s only 200 bucks. Hopefully the atf gets their hand slapped again for this bs.

Reef W wrote:

Just to clarify option 1 it’s “free” during the 120 day period so you don’t have to pay $200. You do end up with an NFA gun though which means you have to store several forms, can’t move it across state lines without approval, and it will affect future transfers.

That’s new Info. to me. If they are going to give a free Tax Stamp for a SBR during the 120 day grace period, Not sure why someone would not just go that route and not have to worry about it going forward.

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Reef Whooligan wrote:</div>
Just to clarify option 1 it’s “free” during the 120 day period so you don’t have to pay $200. You do end up with an NFA gun though which means you have to store several forms, can’t move it across state lines without approval, and it will affect future transfers.

That’s new Info. to me. If they are going to give a free Tax Stamp for a SBR during the 120 day grace period, Not sure why someone would not just go that route and not have to worry about it going forward.

Sending in finger prints and being added to a list most likely.

ajw wrote:

Not to mention the atf has zero authority to create laws.

I would hope most people don’t fall for the “free” tax stamp. It’s only 200 bucks. Hopefully the atf gets their hand slapped again for this bs.

Its not the ATF that is creating the Law. They will just be one of the parties responsible for enforcing it.

Youbetcha wrote:

<

Sending in finger prints and being added to a list most likely.

You already have to do that to own a Short Barred rifle with a actual stock now. Same as required to own a suppressor.

isu22andy wrote:

I’m torn what to do . I have a pistol length ar for suppressed coyote hunting . Really was just going to hope this went away .

Just curious. Why would you want a pistol length Barrel for Coyote hunting? I would think most would prefer a longer length Barrel for that.

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>isu22andy wrote:</div>
I’m torn what to do . I have a pistol length ar for suppressed coyote hunting . Really was just going to hope this went away .

Just curious. Why would you want a pistol length Barrel for Coyote hunting? I would think most would prefer a longer length Barrel for that.

Might be using 300 blackout and a shorter barrel helps keep the subsonic ammo below supersonic with the suppressor added

Jeremy wrote:

Might be using 300 blackout and a shorter barrel helps keep the subsonic ammo below supersonic with the suppressor added

Oh that would make sense. I could see that.

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Carter Johnson wrote:</div>
<

Sending in finger prints and being added to a list most likely.

You already have to do that to own a Short Barred rifle with a actual stock now. Same as required to own a suppressor.

Right but if an individual only owned pistols with a brace they would not have to submit to that until now.

Take the brace off, save $200

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>isu22andy wrote:</div>
I’m torn what to do . I have a pistol length ar for suppressed coyote hunting . Really was just going to hope this went away .

Just curious. Why would you want a pistol length Barrel for Coyote hunting? I would think most would prefer a longer length Barrel for that.

Supressed thermal rig . It’s only a 14 inch barrel so not much shorter – I just wanted to build something lighter to shoot of a tripod . When you add the can it feels way longer in the truck front seat . I’ll be honest though – mainly just wanted another gun ha

fishthumper wrote:

Its not the ATF that is creating the Law. They will just be one of the parties responsible for enforcing it.

the atf is 100% pushing this and came up with it. they dont make the laws, they got shot down for this not long ago and had there pee pee slapped for this same type of BS. im not paying $200 per brace.

Jeremy wrote:

Take the brace off, save $200

so just take it off and throw it in the garbage or what? ill take yours then let me know where i can pick them up

fishthumper wrote:

I know this has came up several times in the past on several topics on here. If I understand the new ruling it goes into effect the date of publication in the federal register ( Date not know at this time ) It does say that there will be a 120 day grace period from that date to allow people to comply with the new rule. The whole issue surrounding pistol braces and the ATF enforcement of laws has been a rather GREY area for awhile now and it seems this new ruling is a attempt to clear up that Grey area. From what I understand, people who own a Short Barred rifle ( SBR ) with a pistol brace were not required to get a tax stamp for it. This new ruling now requires you to do one of the following 4 options:

1. Apply for and get a Tax stamp to register it as a SBR.
2. Put a Longer legal length Barrel on it.
3. Remover the Brace totally.
4. Surrender the gun to the ATF

I’m sure there will be many motions and lawsuits than may come into play before this is all finalized.

I’m curious for those here who have a SBR with a pistol brace, what your thoughts are on all of this and what your plans are if this new ruling goes through.

The atf keeps playing games that could eventually make people felons. They cannot make a law. There is no gray are until recently with pistol braces. They have sent letters to manufacturers of saying they were legal. Now they change their opinion. They did the same with forced reset triggers and 80% lowers.

Coletrain27 wrote:

the atf is 100% pushing this and came up with it. they dont make the laws

Fishthumper is correct, the ATF is an executive branch agency that enforces law. They cannot make up new ones. It may appear that they did such that in this case, but they only do what they are told to by the current administration in power. That would be Uncle Joe.

It’ll never hold up in court anyways. It would essentially turn the 3 million law-abiding citizens who own one into criminals.

The only legal way to change laws like this is through Congressional legislation, followed by a signature from the President. Every President does this sort of thing, its not anything new. If you have one, just let the lawsuits play out.

Lean heavy on your local politicians and enforcers on this. Look at the Assault weapon ban in certain states. The local sherriffs got together and drafted a letter saying they wouldnt enforce.

As far as the tax stamp, I cant figure out why those that are choosing to not file would stick with a brace? Slap a stock on it and call it a day, if this sticks its the same punishment either way.

I agree with letting the lawsuits play out at this time. There is no way to enforce it and we need to stick to the common use theme.

ekruger01 wrote:

we need to stick to the common use theme.

Does calling it a “Short Barred rifle ( SBR ) with a pistol brace” help?

I’m thinking of buying extra lowers and just having them registered for SBRs for free. thinking down the road, i could then make actual SBRs out of them and not have to pay the tax stamp per lower.

Steven Krapfl wrote:

I’m thinking of buying extra lowers and just having them registered for SBRs for free. thinking down the road, i could then make actual SBRs out of them and not have to pay the tax stamp per lower.

This may not work. To be free you have to 1) possess it at the time the rule is published which will be soon and 2) it has to configured in a way that is covered by the rule. The form says “To confirm the application qualifies for tax-free registration, ATF may require additional supporting documentation, such as photographs of the firearm to be registered.”

dbright wrote:

There is no gray are until recently with pistol braces. They have sent letters to manufacturers of saying they were legal. Now they change their opinion. They did the same with forced reset triggers and 80% lowers.

There has always been a Grey area around this. Its not just recently. A true pistol brace was never made and intended to be shouldered. Most of the pistol brace’s I’ve seen on short Barreled rifles are extendable or foldable with a butt stock. The Grey came in when those ” Pistol Brace’s ” are extended and then shouldered and then shot like a rifle. The gun then is no longer a pistol with a arm Brace. Its now a SBR Rifle and shooting it without the proper Tax stamp could be considered Illegal. You, I, and everyone knows exactly how MOST people intended to use these so called Pistol Braces. It was just a way for owners to get around a law that has been on the books for a really long time. This new law would just make what they are doing truly illegal. If this ends up passing and going into effect.

Just so we are clear. I’m not saying I agree with this, or most any additional gun laws.

The semantics around such a rule are absolutely astounding. The fact that a “pistol brace” all of a sudden turns into a “stock” simply by placing it against your shoulder should tell you all you need to know about the thin grasp the ATF has on such things. What if I rest my pistol brace against my forehead? Accuracy may suffer a tad LOL but would it then be considered a brace or a stock? I could do the same thing with a plain buffer tube; and to believe that any of these changes increase the effectiveness of the weapon is also a false.

Rather or not this clears all the hurdles and legal issues that are likely to be waged against it, No one knows. My thoughts are this one may have a little better chance than some other ones in the past. To me this is not really a new law, but rather simply clearing up one that has already been on the books for a long time.

waldo9190 wrote:

and to believe that any of these changes increase the effectiveness of the weapon is also a false.

So you are telling me that you could shoot a short barreled AR with a pistol brace being used in the intended manner, as you could using it shouldered and shot as a rifle. I’m sure there are many people who would take you up on that challenge. Myself included. I’m not saying I disagree with the rest of your reply though.

the atf went back and fourth about 4 times with the brace being illegal/legal to shoulder. last i heard the rule was you can legally use the brace against your shoulder.