TexasCHLforum.com

An interesting article that predates the new regulations quite a bit, that speaks towards the disconnect between ITAR and ATF.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... g-license/

ATF used to stipulate that if you buy a firearm, modify it, then re-sell, you qualify as manufacturing.

If you take in a weapon from a customer, modify it, then return the weapon, you only acted as a gunsmith.


If the ITAR relies on the common definition, an argument could be made that the US Government has already postulated an acceptable definition via the ATF issued opinions. Not saying it would be a free ride if the DDTC came after you, but it might be a viable argument.

I think in lieu of this, gunsmiths should be OK, as long as they ensure they don't stray from the line. The only questionable area is whether you can get away with "manufacturing" as an FFL 07 for experimentation purposes only. Such as taking in SOT items and re-configuring them for LEO demonstration, etc, assuming you do not sell the modified items.

Scott B. wrote:This is not a new regulation. It's a clarification of the existing regulation and for a fair number of Type 7 FFLs, it lets them off the hook for the ITAR fee. A huge swath were ignoring the fee, or ignorant of it, but at their peril.

I'm happy not to have to pay it again. Big pain in the day planner to go down to the bank, do a wire transfer to the State Department, use the right routing codes and a hope for a bank employee who knew what they were doing.

Initially this does look bad for gunsmiths. However, I imagine a number of them were already Type 7s who knew the drill. I've not seen the breakdown between Type 1 and 7 for gunsmiths, but it would be interesting to see. I suspect a large number will continue to ignore ITAR. That's a risk they'll have to decide for themselves.

I don't like ITAR. Don't think it should be applied to those who deal strictly w/ domestic firearms. It should be confined to import/export FFLs and that's a pretty tiny group compared to the overall number.

Not sure how a Type 07 FFL avoids ITAR, would be interested in hearing.

https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance ... blish).pdf

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;
g) Chambering, cutting, or threading barrel blanks; and
h) Blueprinting firearms by machining the barrel.

I ask not to argue but I've been researching doing gun smithing work on a small scale for a bit now and ITAR really throws a wrench into those plans. Was not planning on doing it to get rich but because I enjoy it, ITAR would really hurt.

Scott B. wrote:

cyphur wrote:In addition, in reading the law, if you are a dealer, and you buy a firearm, then modify it before sale, you absolutely are "manufacturing" if you are improving on the firearm. It appears this changes that requirement to only cases where drilling, cutting or machining is required to complete said modification. This should be a huge help for dealers who wish to customize things like AR-15s, rifles with optics packages, etc.

Yes, as far as ITAR goes, No, as far as ATF goes.

ITAR is the subject at hand. I did not reference anything about getting an FFL.

There appears to be an exception to the law, in the case where said "manufacturing" activities are solely for domestic R&D. As soon as you move to sell said item, immediate ITAR registration is required.

IANAL, so confirm with your ITAR-familiar lawyer before you embark on an enterprise on the above information.


I have been contemplating doing gun smithing for a while, first on 1911s, and eventually on Rem700s, all at a very low scale. I was hoping just to do enough work to eventually even out the cost of equipment over a few years. At such a low scale registering with ITAR would most certainly put me at a net loss for the year. Which would be good for taxes I suppose, being run as an LLC, but not great for the wallet. In the mean time, as long as I do it for myself only for R&D/educational purposes while spinning up the business, ITAR should not be required.

Good news is hydrocoating and Cerakoting are specifically exempted from ITAR registration. At least there is that.



In addition, in reading the law, if you are a dealer, and you buy a firearm, then modify it before sale, you absolutely are "manufacturing" if you are improving on the firearm. It appears this changes that requirement to only cases where drilling, cutting or machining is required to complete said modification. This should be a huge help for dealers who wish to customize things like AR-15s, rifles with optics packages, etc.