They are, fundamentally, a taxation agency.

I know staggering sums of alcohol taxes are collected, but does that actually cover their budget?

If they do not produce revenue, it might be an excellent argument for having them disbanded.

Do we really want law enforcement agencies to pay their own way by their enforcement efforts? E.g., the Podunk Police Department must generate enough revenue by writing tickets on the travelers through their one-stoplight town (like mine) to pay for the department?

There is a lot to criticize about the ATF’s policies and actions of some of its employees, but the fundamental reason they do things that gun owners don’t like is because of the laws on the books. If the ATF were disbanded the laws would still exist and would simply become the responsibility of another Federal agency, i.e., the FBI, to enforce. Would that be an improvement? If so, how?

That’s my point. They are not a law enforcement agency.

They’re just another tax agency/regulator.

They are the same as the FDA/USDA/OSHA etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
That’s my point. They are not a law enforcement agency.

They’re just another tax agency/regulator.

They are the same as the FDA/USDA/OSHA etc.

Uhhh, you might want to rethink that. Perhaps you should ask the Widow of Bryan Malinowski...The ATF showed up at their home for a pre-dawn raid and imposed the Death Penalty!

https://arktimes.com/arkansas-...g-in-a-pre-dawn-raid

Widow of Bryan Malinowski sues ATF over husband’s fatal shooting in a pre-dawn raid

The widow of a Little Rock man who was shot after he opened fire on federal agents during a pre-dawn raid last March is suing the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Maer Malinowski, the widow of Little Rock airport executive and hobbyist gun salesman Bryan Malinowski, is bringing a wrongful death suit in which she contends federal agents serving a search warrant at her West Little Rock home on the morning of March 19, 2024, were reckless and needlessly aggressive. Along with the ATF itself and the U.S. government, the lawsuit names 10 federal agents and task force officers as individual defendants.

In a complaint filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas in Little Rock, plaintiff Maer Malinowski takes issue with agents’ failure to knock, announce their presence and then wait before entering. Breaking the door down before daylight resulted in “an entirely predictable, needless and tragic outcome,” the complaint states.

Bryan Malinowski, who was 53 at the time of his death, was not aware he was the subject of a federal investigation into illegal firearms sales, the complaint says, and thought the people breaking into his home shortly after 6 a.m. that day were intruders...

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
That’s my point. They are not a law enforcement agency.

They’re just another tax agency/regulator.

They are the same as the FDA/USDA/OSHA etc.

The ATF is a federal law enforcement agency. I would classify them as both a law enforcement and regulatory agency. They do produce incoming revenue, but in no way enough to cover the funds of the agency.

I would sort of compare it to when I worked for the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC). HHSC is a massive agency that covers a lot but a part of what they do is provide public assistance in giving food stamps (SNAP), Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Women Infant Children (WIC) to low income families who qualified. Obviously there is a TON of fraud around these programs. HHSC OIG regulated the programs by doing inspections for compliance by doctors and vendors and enforcement of fraud by prosecuting recipients of the benefits. We recovered millions and millions of dollars every year, yet it was not enough to fund the agency. It just recovered Texas tax payer dollars and prosecuted people who abused the programs.

To the OP I can’t answer.
As to the Malinowski incident, I’m curious why the ATF didn’t just stop the man on his way to work. I’m sure there could any number of reasons, but I’d sure like to know.

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
To the OP I can’t answer.
As to the Malinowski incident, I’m curious why the ATF didn’t just stop the man on his way to work. I’m sure there could any number of reasons, but I’d sure like to know.

Last arrest/search warrant I did with the FBI, they were not allowed to execute the warrant until there is proof the homeowner was awake such as lights being turned on. I am sure there are exceptions.

Our case was funny and I wish I had it on video. This was back in the 90’s. We got to the house at 4am and waited to see proof they were awake. At about 7am, the lights turned on and one of the main very overweight male suspects exited the house wearing only a speedo to go retrieve the newspaper from the front lawn. He was rushed by FBI agents and local LE at gunpoint to be cuffed in his front yard in only a speedo as neighbors passed by on their way to work looking. Man, I wish I had it on video!

re the ATF, they were broken up a good many years ago, some sent to DOJ, some still ATF, some ?? and example is the IOI's are DOJ,

semantics, sure,


meanwhile excise taxes

https://taxpolicycenter.org/br...-money-do-they-raise

ATF, IRS and the like are revenue enforcement agencies. They don't generate revenue themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
To the OP I can’t answer.
As to the Malinowski incident, I’m curious why the ATF didn’t just stop the man on his way to work. I’m sure there could any number of reasons, but I’d sure like to know.

These are often tough decisions. I personally do not like trying to intercept people in public. The threat to the public is higher and the ability for the people serving the warrant to control the outcome is often less. The "why didn't they do _______?" argument is one that assumes that the person would have complied in that setting.

My point is, the ATF shouldn’t be a law enforcement agency.

They’re supposed to collect taxes and review paperwork on regulated industries.

Same as the EPA/FDA/USDA/etc.

Nothing in their description, indicates “law enforcement.”

If the attitude gets corrected, gun dealers, class 3 collectors etc go from “potential villain” to “customer”.

Making legitimate people deal with an agency which considers them villains, is idiotic.

quote:

My point is, the ATF shouldn’t be a law enforcement agency.

Yeah, put them back in the Treasury Department where they belong.

Federal tax money goes to the US Treasury Department. Agency's budgets are funded by Congress from tax money, but they don't keep the funds they collect.

Some state/local agencies are receipt funded, that said they can't spend the money they collect without legislative appropriation.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
That’s my point. They are not a law enforcement agency.

They’re just another tax agency/regulator.

They are the same as the FDA/USDA/OSHA etc.

The first line on the ATF website: ATF is a law enforcement agency in the United States’ Department of Justice...

They are absolutely an LE agency. Who would take over the responsibly of enforcing the federal gun laws? Would you add that duty to the FBI and simply transfer the entire ATF staff to them? Local and state agencies could not handle the duties and nor should they be able to enforce federal laws.

Im not exactly sure where you are coming from with dismantling them other than the perceived intrusion on gun ownership.

quote:

Originally posted by lyman:
re the ATF, they were broken up a good many years ago, some sent to DOJ, some still ATF, some ??

They've been moved around quite a bit.

What would become the ATF was initially created in 1886 as a subunit of the precursor to the IRS and part of the Treasury Department.

It then became a standalone agency under the Treasury Department in 1927.

In 1930, it was transferred to the Justice Department, initially as a standalone agency.

Then in 1933 it was subordinated to the FBI under the Justice Department.

A few months later in 1933, it was transferred back to Treasury, as a subdivision of the precursor to the IRS again. It remained under the modern IRS when that was created in the 1950s.

It then became an independent agency under the Treasury Department again in 1972, separate from the IRS.

Then the Homeland Security Act in 2002 split the ATF, transferring the bulk of the ATF and its law enforcement and firearms regulatory functions back to the Justice Department. (And adding Explosives making BATFE.) Meanwhile most of their former functions regarding alcohol, tobacco, and firearms taxes and alcohol and tobacco regulation remained under the Treasury Department as part of the Tax and Trade Bureau.

I recall reading somewhere a few years ago that they run at a loss - several billion a year if I recall

Given the billions of excise taxes on alcohol they collect, then it’s an even better argument to shut them down.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I recall reading somewhere a few years ago that they run at a loss - several billion a year if I recall

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
Given the billions of excise taxes on alcohol they collect, then it’s an even better argument to shut them down.

I have no idea where that idea of the ATF running a multi-billion dollar deficit was dreamed up. The ATF's annual budget last year was about $1.8 billion.

There were $9.5 billion in alcohol excise taxes collected that same year. If we add in tobacco excise taxes, that's another $9.7 billion. Firearms/ammunition excise taxes? That's another $940 million.

For a total of $20.14 billion in A/T/F excise tax revenue in 2024. The BATFE budget of $1.8 billion is just 8.93% of that total.


But that's a flawed comparison anyway... Because again, as I pointed out in my earlier post, ATF doesn't handle alcohol excise taxes. Or tobacco excise taxes. Or firearm/ammunition excise taxes.

That is all handled by the Treasury Department's Tax and Trade Bureau. The ATF used to, but haven't since 2003, when the ATF and their law enforcement functions were transferred to the Department of Justice.

So no, you can't look at incoming A/T/F taxes and say "the ATF isn't bringing in enough money to cover their budget", not only because the basic A/T/F tax in vs. BATFE budget out numbers clearly prove otherwise, but especially because the ATF doesn't collect those taxes. Two different agencies, under two separate cabinet-level departments.

So your basic premise is fundamentally defective, in more than one way.


Besides, even if you could make that kind of direct in vs. out comparison (like you could have with the pre-2003 ATF), the tax revenue they would generate doesn't go directly back to them. It goes back to the US Treasury to be allocated across the federal budget as needed.

And the fact is that no law enforcement agency in the country is 100% self-funded by their own revenue generation. They're all funded by taxes and revenue being allocated to their budget by the city/county/state/fed (and often supplemented further by state/federal grants).

Nor would you want them to be. Imagine a local police department that had to fund it's own budget 100% solely though generating their own revenue. It'd end up being the world's worst speed trap!

Law enforcement is a public service, not a business. Similarly, nobody talks about shutting down the fire department/street department/etc. just because the don't generate revenue and make a profit. They're funded by a portion of that government's other revenue from taxes and other sources.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RogueJSK,