The ATF Pistol Brace Rule

[Ben]

It doesn't look like they've dropped yet, but there are supposed to be at least three lawsuits ready to go.

I have a couple of guns I was waffling on SBRing before this rule came up, and was thinking about doing them now, with the waived $200 tax, except it appears the tax is not actually waived:

Although the ATF states a 120-day grace period to register a pistol as an SBR, the ATF only promises not to enforce NFA rules on these devices for 60 days. The ATF will give a tax forbearance for the $200 tax stamp fee. A tax forbearance means that the ATF will not collect the $200 tax fee, although, by the law, you still owe the fee; it just will not be collected. The rule is set up the way it is because the ATF cannot waive a tax.

So ten years from now, the ATF, IRS, or whoever could come after me for whatever, stating that like Al Capone, I'm a tax evader. Seems like this "tax forbearance" itself is lawsuit material.

Anyway, with 120 days and lawsuits incoming, I'm not going to panic now, but rather wait to see what happens in the next few weeks.

[dogmush]

I'm also going to wait and see for a bit.  I admit, I have a couple weapons that I was going to SBR anyway, so a free tax stamp is tempting.

More interestingly to me, is if they drag the whole SBR thing into court.  SBR regulations won't even stand up under the US v. Miller precedent, much less some of the newer cases.  I actually get the feeling that the ATF was going to let this one go, but the POTUS and AG forced them to do something, and the consequences may be pretty bad for gun control.

[cordex]

Pretty much where I am too.  Wait and see for the moment.

No matter how it turns out, I have a feeling in a few years those millions and millions of pistol braces will be essentially gone.

[K Frame]

And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."

[dogmush]

Pretty much where I am too.  Wait and see for the moment.

No matter how it turns out, I have a feeling in a few years those millions and millions of pistol braces will be essentially gone.

I know a bunch of people with a bunch of pistol braces.  Lots of us are waiting to see, but no one I know is planning on getting rid of their braces.  Perhaps if a bunch of folks SBR their pistols we will see them swapped out for stocks, but we'll see.

[cordex]

I know a bunch of people with a bunch of pistol braces.  Lots of us are waiting to see, but no one I know is planning on getting rid of their braces.  Perhaps if a bunch of folks SBR their pistols we will see them swapped out for stocks, but we'll see.

There are three major possibilities.  Only one of which is likely to result in people hanging on to their pistol braces.

1. The new rule is struck down, but SBRs are upheld.  Okay, people keep their braces.
2. The new rule is upheld, and SBRs are upheld.  People either SBR their guns and put a real stock on them, or toss the braces.
3. NFA restriction on SBRs is eliminated entirely.  People put real stocks on their guns and toss the braces.

[dogmush]

And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."

I was actually thinking of you and your comment this morning, as this is proof you were wrong all along.

If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along, the current worst case is they get a free tax stamp, and they have their SBR without spending $200.  There's a real chance that ATF rulemaking will be curtailed from this (EPA v West Virginia precedent), or parts of the NFA will be chipped away (Miller or Bruen precedent, take your pick.)

Not to mention all the years we got to enjoy shooting a small handy AR, or 5.

[MechAg94]

I figured if the rule goes into effect, you need to remove braces and store them somewhere else to avoid any issues.  The legal stuff around this is going to be interesting to watch.


I have considered SBR tax stamp on a couple carbines.  Early on I was hearing some odd stuff about the information you had to submit to register an SBR under this rule.  I wasn't sure if I wanted to take advantage of the "free" tax stamp.  I guess I will learn more about that. 

[dogmush]

There are three major possibilities.  Only one of which is likely to result in people hanging on to their pistol braces.

1. The new rule is struck down, but SBRs are upheld.  Okay, people keep their braces.
2. The new rule is upheld, and SBRs are upheld.  People either SBR their guns and put a real stock on them, or toss the braces.
3. NFA restriction on SBRs is eliminated entirely.  People put real stocks on their guns and toss the braces.

4. Rule is upheld, people don't give a *expletive deleted*ck and keep their braces.

My other though is that the current braces are useful enough that people might not run out and drop $100 to slap a stock on there right away. There's not that much added functionality, really*.  New Pistol Brace sales are probably finished though, you are correct there.


*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it.  My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.

I figured if the rule goes into effect, you need to remove braces and store them somewhere else to avoid any issues.  The legal stuff around this is going to be interesting to watch.


I have considered SBR tax stamp on a couple carbines.  Early on I was hearing some odd stuff about the information you had to submit to register an SBR under this rule.  I wasn't sure if I wanted to take advantage of the "free" tax stamp.  I guess I will learn more about that. 

If it goes into effect as written, you would need to destroy the braces if you take them off.  We'll see what the inevitable requests for injunctions bring.

On the other the only added requirement I was tracking to eForm 1 a pistol was to send in pictures of the rifle's current configuration, and I didn't see that in the new rule, and when I logged in this morning there was a new eForm 1 specifically for tax exempt registrations under this rule.  There is no provision for anything more than a normal form 1, you just skip pay.gov step.

You do need to certify that the firearm is eligible for tax exempt registration under the final rule, so it is supposed to have a brace on it right now.

[MechAg94]

And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."

I avoided SBR stuff until it appeared that it was legal and it was being commonly done.  I think I had an AK pistol and later sold it before I heard about braces.  Later, we saw major firearms manufacturers were selling "pistols" with braces.  The legal fight on this will be interesting to watch. 

[WLJ]

I wonder what % of braces were/are actually used as braces.
I'm asking because that's bound to come up in any court cases.

[Ben]

My other though is that the current braces are useful enough that people might not run out and drop $100 to slap a stock on there right away. There's not that much added functionality, really*.  New Pistol Brace sales are probably finished though, you are correct there.


*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it.  My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.

The SB(3?) braces on a couple of my guns are just about as good as a stock for me and for those guns. The brace on my Canebrake is a piece of crap, and I already have the Sig Minimalist stock sitting in a box to replace that crappy brace when this all turns out however it will turn out.

On the "pinned" comment, I'm interested to see if the brace rule holds, if some smart engineering sorts come out with another workaround. This is just off the cuff, but I was wondering if you could "pin" a can on the end of a barrel? Obviously there are takedown issues for cleaning the can, but I wonder if a pinned mount that you have to attach a can to would count for length? Most cans are at least of a length to cover the 11ish inch barrels out there.

[dogmush]

On the "pinned" comment, I'm interested to see if the brace rule holds, if some smart engineering sorts come out with another workaround. This is just off the cuff, but I was wondering if you could "pin" a can on the end of a barrel? Obviously there are takedown issues for cleaning the can, but I wonder if a pinned mount that you have to attach a can to would count for length? Most cans are at least of a length to cover the 11ish inch barrels out there.

Sure you could.  Some cans are even designed specifically for that.  https://www.griffinarmament.com/spartan-3-direct-thread-silencer/  5.56 cans don't need much, if any, cleaning, but I would be careful with my barrel cleaning patches.

[WLJ]

*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it.  My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.

I had a flash hider pinned and welded onto a Tavor X95 so that I could use the IDF butt plate in place of the American much thicker butt plate. Doing so took an inch off both the total length and LOP. Surprising how just an inch can change the handling but the IDF BP brings the total length below the min 26" so the FH had to pinned to keep it over 26.
25.75" - It's an illegal baby killer.
26" - It's fine.
These laws are flipping stupid, all that just so I could use a different butt plate but at least the gun smith being a friend did it for free.

[MechAg94]

I wonder what % of braces were/are actually used as braces.
I'm asking because that's bound to come up in any court cases.

I have heard that issue brought up before all this.  Some braces came with the velcro strap, but the strap was too short to wrap around the forearm.  I recall a video by someone talking about that.  If you can't actually use it as a brace, you wouldn't have much argument in court. 

[Ben]

Sure you could.  Some cans are even designed specifically for that.  https://www.griffinarmament.com/spartan-3-direct-thread-silencer/  5.56 cans don't need much, if any, cleaning, but I would be careful with my barrel cleaning patches.

I had no idea. My Canebrake and my PWS 111 (11" barrel) are two guns that I always shoot suppressed, and are also the two guns I was looking at SBRing. I'm getting ideas. 

[dogmush]

Related to this:

Of the factors the Revenuers use to decide if you have a baby killing gun are the following:

(2) When a weapon provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, the following factors shall also be considered in determining whether the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder:
(i) whether the weapon has a weight or length consistent with the weight or length of similarly designed rifles;
(ii) whether the weapon has a length of pull measured from the center of the trigger to the center of the shoulder stock or other rearward accessory, component or attachment (including an adjustable or telescoping attachment with the ability to lock into various positions along a buffer tube, receiver extension, or other attachment method) that is consistent with similarly designed rifles;
(iii) whether the weapon is equipped with sights or a scope with eye relief that require the weapon to be fired from the shoulder in order to be used as designed;
(iv) whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward
attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations;
(v) the manufacturer’s direct and indirect marketing and promotional materials indicating the intended use of the weapon; and
(vi) information demonstrating the likely use of the weapon in the general community.

For number vi their training PowerPoint shows a screenshot from YouTube and what looks like an Instagram pic.  The implication being if their are guntubers or models running around shouldering versions of your gun, the "community" has decided it's an SBR, so you're screwed.  That is both clever and evil, considering social media around guns.

[HankB]

And last year I was thinking real hard about getting a CMMG Banshee. BUT . . . thanks to forums like this I heard about what the BATmen were scheming and decided to indefinitely postpone my purchase so I wouldn't get caught in the middle - that kind of feels like a good decision right now.

In a tangentially related topic, I also had the opportunity to handle an HKMP5SD. I liked it about as much as you can like a gun you haven't actually fired, and being in Texas there's a theoretical possibility to legally own one . . . but aside from the Federal paperwork a pre-86 version will probably set me back as much as a new car. A NICE new car. So I don't see one in my gun safe anytime soon.

Now a semi automatic clone . . . expensive but not insanely so. Hmmm . . .

[K Frame]

I was actually thinking of you and your comment this morning, as this is proof you were wrong all along.

If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along, the current worst case is they get a free tax stamp, and they have their SBR without spending $200.  There's a real chance that ATF rulemaking will be curtailed from this (EPA v West Virginia precedent), or parts of the NFA will be chipped away (Miller or Bruen precedent, take your pick.)

Not to mention all the years we got to enjoy shooting a small handy AR, or 5.

IF IF IF IF IF...

For years the whole brace mess has been nothing but IF from the very start.

Even your latest statement is fraught with nothing but IF.

IF ATF rules against braces, and IF ATF doesn't again, in a few years, change the rules once again, then I can keep them IF the courts agree, but IF the courts don't agree, then I can keep it IF ATF doesn't change its ruling once again to make me a felon, and IF ATF does make me a felon and IF ATF prosecutes me, maybe I won't get ass raped in prison IF ATF decides to just fine me.

"If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along..."

And that statement right there, "hypothetical" as it is, puts the absolute bald-faced lie to the entire argument that braces are, we'll braces and not stocks.

I've shot "braced" "pistols." Yeah, it was a "brace," and it was a "pistol."

The whole brace thing smacks of those bullshit "solvent traps."

Yeah, nothing here skirting the law, just some good old boys not wanting to get Hoppes on the floor!


I actually hope that people who decided to go the "brace" route for their "pistols" actually come out ahead on this, because, well Government AFT.

But if people who jumped on this whole bullshit "brace" bandwagon end up getting their heads handed to them on a platter because they thought they could game the system with a snicker, wink, and nod.... well I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who actively goes out looking for trouble and then yelps when they get burned.

[MechAg94]

And last year I was thinking real hard about getting a CMMG Banshee. BUT . . . thanks to forums like this I heard about what the BATmen were scheming and decided to indefinitely postpone my purchase so I wouldn't get caught in the middle - that kind of feels like a good decision right now.

In a tangentially related topic, I also had the opportunity to handle an HKMP5SD. I liked it about as much as you can like a gun you haven't actually fired, and being in Texas there's a theoretical possibility to legally own one . . . but aside from the Federal paperwork a pre-86 version will probably set me back as much as a new car. A NICE new car. So I don't see one in my gun safe anytime soon.

Now a semi automatic clone . . . expensive but not insanely so. Hmmm . . .

PSA has been selling a bunch of the Turkish MKE clones for a pretty good price the last 2 months.  Not sure if they have the model you are looking for.  I have only seen the K model highlighted recently. 

[dogmush]

But if people who jumped on this whole bullshit "brace" bandwagon end up getting their heads handed to them on a platter because they thought they could game the system with a snicker, wink, and nod.... well I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who actively goes out looking for trouble and then yelps when they get burned.

What outcome is getting their heads handed to them?  A free tax stamp? Don't throw me in that briar patch.

And I got to shoot and train with several very functional firearm for damn near a decade, while you....didn't, and poo pooed the whole idea.

The only "if" is if the outcome gets better than free SBR.

[Ben]

The only "if" is if the outcome gets better than free SBR.

That's how I see it. Other than the nebulous "tax waiver", the worst case scenario for me is just SBRing the guns that need to be SBRd. I guess if I lived in a state where I couldn't have NFA stuff like cans I might be more up in arms having to do the forms, but the ATF already knows everything about me via my current NFA items.

Obviously I would prefer the whole SBR debacle to just go away since it's nonsense, just like I don't think I should have to fill anything out when I buy a gun at the gun store.

[MechAg94]

There are a few outfits discounting some upper tier branded braced pistols recently.  Some went out of stock quickly.  Mrgunsngear posted links on his Telegram feed. 

I think it was mostly EuroOptic.com.  Last one was an LWRC ICDI 300 blackout AR with 10.5" barrel. 

[MechAg94]

Not having read the rule yet, I am still in the dark.  I heard a rumor that some "pistols" might still be considered SBR's even with the brace removed.  Have any of you heard that?  It may have been the original version.

[Ben]

There are a few outfits discounting some upper tier branded braced pistols recently.  Some went out of stock quickly.  Mrgunsngear posted links on his Telegram feed. 

I think it was mostly EuroOptic.com.  Last one was an LWRC ICDI 300 blackout AR with 10.5" barrel.

You bringing that up reminded me of something I saw a few weeks ago. We have an Idaho/Utah regional gunseller called Impact Guns. I sometimes use their website to search for guns and prices. When I was on the site a few weeks ago, I saw a bunch of AR pistols of the exact same model with two different clickable photos. One was with a brace and marked "discontinued", the other was of the AR pistol with just the buffer tube, so apparently they are selling many of the AR pistols as "bare" with just the buffer tube, and leaving it to the new owner if they want to put something on the tube.

I wonder if their lawyers told them to do that?