New Regulations Could Cost $2250/yr

[cyphur]

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.]

That's the argument. ITAR and ATF don't use the same definition.

There are a fair number of Type 7 FFLs that are only 'assembling' ARs. They don't actually doing any 'manufacturing' in the classic sense which is what ITAR is using, but are manufacturing according to ATF.

It's a twisted, dark mess.

There's a long and interesting thread on the FFLs only site in the legal section on just this subject. We can hope common sense will prevail, but this is the government we're talking about.

[jason812]

Which alphabet agency enforces ITAR?

I went to school for machining strictly to learn how to make firearms. 10 years later I have made countless machining programs, fixtures, and parts but nothing to do with firearms. I still have the dream of getting my own lathe and working on bolt action rifles but if there's no way to pay for the costs or even a part of the costs cause the government fees will be a big chunk, I may have to just kiss this dream goodbye.

[Scott B.]

State Department is the agency for ITAR.

Another fun part about ITAR concerns instructors and international students. Most organizations, like NRA, are saying only accept US Citizens. Nobody wants to be the test case on that one.

What I take issue with, on that front, is that with the right VISA/resident status a non citizen can legally purchase firearms or even obtain a LTC. Are you going to deny these individuals basic firearms safety training or say they can't attend your LTC class?

[jason812]

More reading material: http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/obama-a ... b756ae67f1

[OldCannon]

There's really a lot of hyperbole going on about this right now.

Let's make it simple:
1) If you're not an FFL, stop worrying. Seriously. Neither the state department nor the ATF care (or are anywhere close to staffed) to investigate individuals doing things, or even doing things for a friend or neighbor, unless you're pumping out enough work to be considered "in the manufacturing business" (that is -- you run machinery that modifies/creates firearms and you do it in non-trivial volume). If you DO this kind of stuff, you should already be an 07 FFL (and if not, your problems existed LONG before this incident)
2) If you're an 01 FFL, you should know what already truly constitutes "manufacturing" and whether you need to convert to an 07
3) If you're an 07 and not paying ITAR fees, you are likely in the "sweet spot" for scrutiny, and are best advised to make sure you (and your lawyers) are totally aligned with the (often murky) definitions coming from the two agencies. Generally speaking, if you can't afford lawyers or annual ITAR fees, you probably shouldn't be an 07.

We can separately complain about the unfair barrier to entry that these ITAR fees create for small businesses, but that's a completely different matter (and, shockingly, those fees were signed into law by George Bush).