Obama's new ITAR directive going after gunsmiths?

[Angel Eyes]

http://personalliberty.com/obama-regime-targets-gunsmiths-new-executive-order/

The above article is a bit alarmist.  I couldn't find a source for the annual $2,250 fee mentioned.

State Department document on applicability of the directive:
http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/Applicability%20of%20the%20ITAR%20Registration%20Requirement%20to%20Firearms%20Manufacturers%20(Publish).pdf

ITAR  registration  is  required  of  persons  who  engage  in  the  business  of  manufacturing  defense articles.    Persons  who do  not  actually manufacture ITAR-controlled firearms  (including by engaging in the activities described below, which DDTC has found in specific cases to constitute  manufacturing) need not  register  with  DDTC  – even  if  they have an FFL  from  ATF.


...



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.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable about ITAR can chime in:

Does this affect all gunsmiths, or just those who work on ITAR-controlled "defense articles"?

What is a "defense article" per ITAR?

Could owning and operating a progressive reloader (e.g., Dillon) fall under category d) above?

[MechAg94]

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160727/just-in-time-for-his-party-s-convention-obama-administration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control

http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/Applicability%20of%20the%20ITAR%20Registration%20Requirement%20to%20Firearms%20Manufacturers%20(Publish).pdf

The upshot is that DDTC is labeling commercial gunsmiths as “manufacturers” for performing relatively simple work such as threading a barrel or fabricating a small custom part for an older firearm. Under the AECA, “manufacturers” are required to register with DDTC at significant expense or risk onerous criminal penalties.

The AECA/ITAR require anybody who engages in the business of “manufacturing” a defense article to register with DDTC and pay a registration fee that for new applicants is currently $2,250 per year. These requirements apply, even if the business does not, and does not intend to, export any defense article. Moreover, under ITAR, “only one occasion of manufacturing … a defense article” is necessary for a commercial entity to be considered “engaged in the business” and therefore subject to the regime’s requirements.

This is the sort of thing we expected a few years back when Obama threatened executive orders.  I thought I would make sure everyone saw this.

[Angel Eyes]

http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=52300.0

[birdman]

Paging rev...paging rev...

[RevDisk]

Arms Export Control Act of 1976 governs all defense articles and services. It has ALWAYS applied to gun manufacturers, gunsmiths, gun trainers, etc. Most just didn't know or didn't comply with the law as it was written. Calling it an Obama thing is misleading and inaccurate. Blame Gerald Ford. ITAR and ATF regs are wholely independent and have nothing to do with each other. They're separate, totally. Some things the ATF cares about, DDTC doesn't. Some things DDTC cares about, ATF doesn't. For example, if you modified a tail pipe to only fit military HMMWVs, you would need to register as a defense article manufacturer but wouldn't need a single license from the ATF.

The $2250 fee is the DDTC registration fee. You'd have to look up their current fee schedule, but it's probably accurate.

In short, it's been this way since 1976. Just most folks didn't know about it. More than a few gun trainers probably violated the hell out of US federal law by giving 'advanced' training to foreign persons (ie not US citizen, green card holder, etc) without an export license. Showing a person basic safety operations doesn't require a license. Providing tactical training does. I swear I should write a small book and sell it on Amazon.

What doesn't apply:

Painting doesn't apply. A lot of accessories don't apply. Simple repairs don't apply, mostly. Direct replacements don't apply (ie swapping barrels, triggers or stocks). Even swapping receivers may not apply. Basic assembly doesn't apply. Think assembling an AR15 from parts kits. Most AK builds would require an DDTC registration. Cleaning products generally don't apply. Cleaning weapons doesn't apply, generally.


What does apply:

Manufacturing any firearm parts. Materially improving weapons. Doing any significant (non-cosmetic) cuts by any means. Making ammo. Making changes to the weapon where you are increasing ammo capability, changing caliber, etc.

In short, 'light gunsmithing' doesn't apply. Significant gunsmithing does. If you're not cutting metal essentially or making new stuff, you're generally good to go. Only tricky thing is mods that increase ammo capacity or change caliber. IMHO, swapping AR15 uppers doesn't count. It's a one to one replacement, even if it's a different caliber. But modifying a barrel to take a different caliber would.


Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. If I was a lawyer, I would not be your lawyer. Consult a export control and compliance lawyer before providing defense articles or services. This is meant to give basic guidance to provide general awareness, and is not situational applicable.

[RevDisk]

Is home gunsmithing or reloading ITAR? 

Generally No.

Generally to be "Yes" and you don't already have an FFL, you're probably violating other federal laws already. Generally you have to be selling or providing stuff to the public. I'm not sure if you made YouTube videos on operator level gun fu 'advanced training', that it may be considered an ITAR issue. There's no hard line between First Amendment and providing ITAR technical information. Generally open source stuff is not considered ITAR tech data.

Essentially, ITAR strictly has to do with manufacturing defense articles and providing defense services. Private non-commercial stuff is virtually never applicable. Unless you're bringing it in or out of the country, giving it to foreign persons, doing activities with prohibited or proscribed persons even if they are a US person, etc. You can get into hot water even if you're not charging a dime. If you decided to provide gun training to a neighbor, that you didn't know was a foreign national, you could get into trouble even if you didn't charge a dime. ITAR handles essentially 'transfers', not the direct actions of end consumers.

[MechAg94]

What about modifying an AR upper, changing out barrel and bolt to convert to say 300 blackout?

[MechAg94]

I guess the other question would be something like threading a barrel to add a recoil buffer. 

[tokugawa]

Rev, what I get from your post, is that it is open ended enough so anyone who have ever put a file to a gun could be charged and broken with process or plea bargained into prison if the feds targeted them as a "problem".

[birdman]

Generally open source stuff is not considered ITAR tech data.

Essentially, ITAR strictly has to do with manufacturing defense articles and providing defense services. Private non-commercial stuff is virtually never applicable. Unless you're bringing it in or out of the country, giving it to foreign persons, doing activities with prohibited or proscribed persons even if they are a US person, etc.

Open source...unless you are defense distributed...that is.

Also, on the other quoted paragraph, no transfer is required to pose a need, even if wholly US, if your service or product qualifies, you need the registration..the import/export is a whole additional ball of worms.

Basically, AFAIK, if it's ITAR qualified, and you are -selling- it (service or product) you need the registration...regardless of whether you provide the service to foreign people/countries.

[RevDisk]

What about modifying an AR upper, changing out barrel and bolt to convert to say 300 blackout?

Personally or paid for a client?
If paid for by a client, and rechambering the existing barrel then generally yes.
If rip out existing barrel and drop in a new barrel, either for yourself or for someone else, generally no.
If for yourself, generally no.

Rev, what I get from your post, is that it is open ended enough so anyone who have ever put a file to a gun could be charged and broken with process or plea bargained into prison if the feds targeted them as a "problem".

This is very incorrect. I must have royally screwed up somewhere in my post. Which part gave that impression?

You need to be materially altering a firearm in specific ways for transfer purposes, generally speaking.

Cosmetic alternations, commercially or not, don't count.
Altering your own firearms, especially if you don't sell or transfer them, isn't covered by ITAR. ATF, yes. ITAR, no.

If you make a nuclear weapon in your basement out of a Mtn Dew bottle and some screwdrivers, it's not an ITAR violation until you try to transfer it or technical data on it to another non-US person party. You're not being a defense product manufacturer or defense service provider, unless something is actually transferred. Could be physical object, training or even just data. But a transfer has to be involved.

I guess the other question would be something like threading a barrel to add a recoil buffer. 

If done for another party, then yes. For your own usage, no.

[RevDisk]

Open source...unless you are defense distributed...that is.

Also, on the other quoted paragraph, no transfer is required to pose a need, even if wholly US, if your service or product qualifies, you need the registration..the import/export is a whole additional ball of worms.

Basically, AFAIK, if it's ITAR qualified, and you are -selling- it (service or product) you need the registration...regardless of whether you provide the service to foreign people/countries.

It's complicated, but just dumping something on the internet doesn't necessarily qualify. If it's "commonly available" in academic material, public domain or open source, then it's not ITAR technical data. If it's leaked or stolen or improperly sent outside of the US, it doesn't magically become non-ITAR. If you're thinking "Well, that's insanely vague but also hilariously impractical", you would be correct. Welcome to export control. Even DDTC admits how vague it can be. They try to stay away from the margins, for many many reasons.

And ayep, no export of ITAR material to foreign persons or outside the country is needed to be required to register with the DDTC.

One qualification on the last sentence, "transferring".  Selling is common, but not strictly required.

[Scout26]

Bogie, if you are still around, you might want to check this out.


What about a certain member and his Flash Hiders.  Would those be considered "Comestic Mods" or ITAR/ATF items?

Literally asking for a friend (and before I order one/some.)

[Scout26]

Similiar Topics Mergenated....

[roo_ster]

Similiar Topics Mergenated....

Does merginating an AR15 have ATF, ITAR, or EAR implications? 

Oh, and yes, this is the sort of thing implemented to suppress the practical exercise of the RTKBA.

[MechAg94]

So what is the actual threat here?  Is the Justice Department going to find a couple gunsmiths to prosecute? 

[RevDisk]

Does merginating an AR15 have ATF, ITAR, or EAR implications?  

Oh, and yes, this is the sort of thing implemented to suppress the practical exercise of the RTKBA.

Potentially yes.

And no, it's not an anti-2A thing. Plenty of non-firearm folks get bent over the table by ITAR on a regular basis. This is hilariously uncomplicated compared to aerospace. Satellite manufacturers and launch facilities would break ribs laughing at someone saying this was a move strictly to harm RKBA. And if you think aerospace export issues are complicated, don't ask about textiles. Textiles are the crown jewel of international "WTF" import/export regulation.

Bogie, if you are still around, you might want to check this out.


What about a certain member and his Flash Hiders.  Would those be considered "Comestic Mods" or ITAR/ATF items?

Literally asking for a friend (and before I order one/some.)

Borderline. If a manufacturer is unsure of their product being EAR or ITAR, you must submit a commodity jurisdiction (CJ) request from the State Department. Unlike the ATF, if you have a CJ in hand, you cannot be screwed if someone changes their mind later. Unless you're really stupid or shady. If someone screwed up and you find out about it twenty thousand shipped units later, you're fine if you start handling it as ITAR after you've been notified. If you intentionally don't find out, then yes, you're intentionally violating US export regulations.

https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/commodity_jurisdiction/

You do not need to be registered with DDTC to get a CJ.
There is no cost to filing a CJ. Or at least wasn't.
You can electronically file. And it's pretty decent turnaround. Just be thorough when filling out the form.

If you make a firearm accessory that could possibly end up on the USML, submit a CJ if you can't accurately self-determine.

So what is the actual threat here?  Is the Justice Department going to find a couple gunsmiths to prosecute?  

State Department can fine you for not registering. If you refuse to pay the registration fee, then maybe they'd turn it over to the Justice Department. You'd have to be really stupid or go completely sovereign citizen stupid to get dragged to jail. For everyone thinking this is a nefarious plot to drag gunsmiths to prison, dude, even Blackwater/Academi/Xe/whatever didn't go to jail. And they really should have. They were exporting to proscribed countries and giving firearms training to foreign military/militias actively committing atrocities.

There's no reason to go tin foil over the matter. The law hasn't changed since 1976. Gun stores, manufacturers and gunsmiths just haven't been complying fully with the law. Could DDTC try to wiggle out of enforcing this part? Ehh, maybe, maybe not. Even with extra millions of dollars of registration fees they're 'entitled' to, DDTC isn't thrilled with this. They're not stupid and don't want to deal with thousands of angry, badly informed (or completely misinformed) paranoid gunsmiths that think this is the opening move by the UN to exact a one world government by evil liberals.

[tokugawa]

 “only one occasion of manufacturing … a defense article” is necessary for a commercial entity to be considered “engaged in the business”

 "A commercial entity"- any commercial entity?  or a firearms manufacturing commercial entity? 
 forgive my cynicism, but laws tend to be stretched as far as they can be.

[RevDisk]

“only one occasion of manufacturing … a defense article” is necessary for a commercial entity to be considered “engaged in the business”

 "A commercial entity"- any commercial entity?  or a firearms manufacturing commercial entity? 
 forgive my cynicism, but laws tend to be stretched as far as they can be.

Being a commercial entity is not a strict requirement. ie if you don't have a business but you're still shipping aerospace equipment to China without an export license, then you're still breaking the law.

But if you're a commercial entity manufacturing defense articles or providing defense services, yes, you need to register. No, not all commercial entities.

I'm not going to pull my "I did this for a living for one of the largest defense contractors in the US, plus regularly met with DDTC" card, but would recommend further research would show that this is not the stuff of tin foil. DDTC is too small and narrow in scope for stuff the ATF or other big boys would do in a heartbeat.

[birdman]

So then...why is the Obama admin doing this?

[RevDisk]

So then...why is the Obama admin doing this?

This was being discussed by DDTC back during the Bush years. It just takes, well, years to say DDTC intends on enforcing the law as it is already on the books and has been since 1976. Essentially this is only one part of DDTC showing they're serious about enforcing export control. In reality, it goes back to the 1990's. Loral and several other companies were violating the hell out of US law providing satellite launch services and equipment to China. The violations were in the 90's and it was investigated in the early 00's. Enforcement was lax, it made the news. So DDTC started getting off their duff. And it was shooting fish in a barrel with quad .50's. ITT was violating the hell out of the law by handing out night vision stuff with no export licenses. LockMart got nailed for 2003-2004 hellfire missile shipments to UAE in 2008. Northrop Grumman got nailed for inertial nav violations shortly after.

Basically, NO ONE was following the law. At all. LOTS of folks were violating the hell out of export regs. Anywhere DDTC looks, violations a'plenty. So they've been claiming they're getting serious for the last decade and not being Mr Nice Guy anymore. In fairness, they have been warning folks that the law will now be enforced. For the past decade.

Trust me, I know it's stupid. Most of ITAR is stupid. Things considered high tech in 1976 are not high tech now. And even including that, ITAR has a LOT of really stupid aspects. Think of ITAR as quantum physics. It makes no sense in terms of rational terms. You have to be half cracked to understand it, and you sound VERY cracked when you try to explain it.

[freakazoid]

This article talks about it, http://modernrifleman.net/2016/07/26/new-itar-guidance-to-squeeze-small-gunsmiths/

[Firethorn]

Just talked to my dad last night.  His favorite gunsmith just got hit with that he needs to pay the $2k annual fee.

Because he repairs old guns and has to produce parts to replace broken bits that aren't made anymore.

He's a mom&pop shop.  A $2k fee will break him.  $2k makes sense for companies like Colt.

[MechAg94]

Did he just see the news or did someone actually try to contact him to pay the fee?

Tom Gresham was telling everyone on his show to hold off and be patient, that NSSF was looking into it.

[Firethorn]

Did he just see the news or did someone actually try to contact him to pay the fee?

It's very much hearsay(IE I heard the story from my dad, as told by the gunsmith), but he got a letter, supposedly from homeland security.

Should I tell dad to warn the guy that it might be a scam?