Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Comments Needed on BATFE’s Extension of the Multiple Rifles Sales Reporting/Registration Requirements

Friday, May 23, 2014

Since August 2011 BATFE has required Federal Firearm Licensees in states bordering Mexico to fill out special reports whenever two or more of certain types of rifles are sold to the same buyer in the same transaction or within a five-day period.  Because these records are not subject to the same destruction requirements as most records of approved transfers, they can be retained indefinitely, effectively creating a partial federal firearms registry.  NRA opposes these multiple sales reports because BATFE lacks the statutory authority to require them, they unnecessarily burden FFLs with more federal paperwork, and they only affect law-abiding gun owners because straw purchasers can easily avoid them by going to different shops to make multiple purchases. 

We have reported on the multiple sales report requirement numerous times since it was first proposed by the Department of Justice's Inspector General.  Shortly after the requirement was approved by the Obama administration, NRA supported and funded multiple lawsuits challenging the illegal mandate.  These lawsuits have so far ended unfavorably, but there is now another opportunity to oppose this ineffective and burdensome requirement. 

BATFE's authorization to require these reports ends in August, unless it is extended, and BATFE has published a notice in the federal register soliciting comments on the proposed extension of the reporting requirement.  The reason for the notice is to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, but BATFE is grossly underestimating the increased paperwork and time burdens that the requirement will impose on the public. 

In the notice, BATFE indicates that "[a]n estimated 2,509 respondents will take 12 minutes to complete the form" and "[t]he estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 3,615 hours."  These estimates seem to be based only on the time taken to complete the reporting form itself, but they exclude what is actually the greatest burden created by the reporting requirement. 

Since the form is required whenever the same buyer purchases two or more rifles of certain types within a five-day period, FFLs must come up with a system (which is neither required nor authorized by the federal Gun Control Act) of tracking who purchases these rifles, and this system must track the purchases for at least five days.  Without such a system, an FFL employee (especially of a large retailer with multiple salespersons) would not necessarily know if a buyer purchasing a qualified rifle had purchased another such rifle within the prior four days.  To comply with the reporting requirement, FFLs in the border states must track every sale of qualifying rifles because the same buyer could potentially return in the four days following the sale to purchase another qualifying rifle.  Since BATFE is excluding the necessity of this additional record keeping system from its burden estimation, the burden estimation in the notice is significantly lower than the true public cost associated with the requirement.

The comments that BATFE are seeking with this notice are comments "on the estimated public burden or associated response time."  We therefore encourage FFLs -- especially FFLs in the affected states of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas -- to submit comments describing how BATFE has underestimated the burden associated with the reporting requirement.  While BATFE is specifically seeking comments on the public burden and response time, all thoughtful and respectful comments may be helpful in illustrating to BATFE the true cost of the reporting requirement to honest, law-abiding businesses. 

Comments should be submitted to Natisha Taylor at fipb-informationcollection@atf.gov, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Firearms Industry Programs Branch, Washington, DC 20226.  Comments will be accepted until June 16, 2014.

TRENDING NOW
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Ignores Heller: No Protection for Guns It Deems “Dangerous”

News  

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Ignores Heller: No Protection for Guns It Deems “Dangerous”

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinions in Heller and McDonald, many of the lower U.S. courts have been making up their own rules when it comes to the Second Amendment. Tuesday’s outrageous opinion by ...

Hawaii: Anti-Gun Legislation Passes Committee

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Hawaii: Anti-Gun Legislation Passes Committee

SB 898, sponsored by state Senator Ronald Kouchi (D-8), would permanently strip an individual of their Second Amendment rights, not based on a criminal conviction or mental adjudication, but based on a quasi-criminal proceeding.  The ...

Kentucky: Senate Constitutional/Permitless Carry Legislation Amended

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Kentucky: Senate Constitutional/Permitless Carry Legislation Amended

Today, Senator Robin Webb (D-18) offered a strike and insert amendment to constitutional/permitless carry legislation, Senate Bill 7.

New Hampshire Governor Signs Constitutional Carry Into Law

News  

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

New Hampshire Governor Signs Constitutional Carry Into Law

Measure Effective Immediately. Today was a great victory for gun owners in New Hampshire when Gov. Chris Sununu signed Senate Bill 12 into law, allowing law-abiding New Hampshirites to carry their firearms in the manner that ...

Washington: Anti-Gun Legislation Could be Heard on the Floor Next Week

Friday, February 24, 2017

Washington: Anti-Gun Legislation Could be Heard on the Floor Next Week

As early as next week, the Washington House of Representatives could hear and vote on House Bill 1122 and House Bill 1483.

Amicus Briefs Filed in Support of Petition for Supreme Court Review in Peruta Right-to-Carry Case

Friday, February 24, 2017

Amicus Briefs Filed in Support of Petition for Supreme Court Review in Peruta Right-to-Carry Case

In January, California Rifle & Pistol Association attorneys filed a petitionwith the United States Supreme Court asking the Court to review the NRA-supported case of Peruta v. California, which seeks to confirm that the Second ...

West Virginia: Pro-Carry Legislation Introduced

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

West Virginia: Pro-Carry Legislation Introduced

Multiple pro-gun bills were introduced this week in the West Virginia Legislature that seek to provide protections to West Virginians who choose to carry a firearm for self-defense. 

South Dakota: Bill Attempting to Silence NRA Passed by House Committee

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

South Dakota: Bill Attempting to Silence NRA Passed by House Committee

Today, the House Judiciary Committee heard and passed House Bill 1200 by a 9-3 vote. 

DNC Chair Frontrunner Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) Hides from his Radical Anti-gun Record

News  

Friday, February 24, 2017

DNC Chair Frontrunner Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) Hides from his Radical Anti-gun Record

With the Democratic National Committee’s officers election set for Saturday, earlier this week CNN hosted a debate featuring the candidates vying to be the next DNC chair. During the debate, CNN’s Dana Bash confronted Rep. ...

Taxachusetts: Bay State Politician Wants to Soak Gun Owners

News  

Friday, February 24, 2017

Taxachusetts: Bay State Politician Wants to Soak Gun Owners

In an attempt to further punish Massachusetts’s beleaguered gun owners, on January 20, Massachusetts State Senator Cynthia S. Creem filed SD.1884. The legislation includes a raft of gun control measures, not the least of which ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -
NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.