https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-...-gun-control-office/

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was passed by Congress to reduce gun violence, including by expanding the background checks that keep guns out of the hands of criminals. This proposed rule implements Congress’s mandate to expand the definition of who must obtain a license and conduct a background check before selling firearms.

The ATF’s rule will redefine language so that there is not simply a category of Americans buying and selling guns from and to one another — as they have done since 1791 — and a category of Federal Firearms Licensed holders (FFLs) selling guns at retail.

Rather, every seller will have to prove he is not trying to make a profit, or he will be required to ensure the purchaser undergoes a background check before taking possession of the firearm.


this made my head hurt trying to understand

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-...er-firearms/download

quote:

This proposed rule implements Congress’s mandate…

Since when does congress change laws by mandate? Granted, the sum total of my knowledge of these things comes from School House Rock, but I thought a bill had to be introduced, voted on, and not vetoed before it could become a law.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-...-gun-control-office/

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was passed by Congress to reduce gun violence, including by expanding [B]the background checks that keep guns out of the hands of criminals{/B].

Which background checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
Which background checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

quote:

Rather, every seller will have to prove he is not trying to make a profit, or he will be required to ensure the purchaser undergoes a background check before taking possession of the firearm.

Wouldn't it be up to the prosecutors to prove you were rather you having to prove your innocence?

What if I am not trying to make a profit yet do?

Right to jail.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
What if I am not trying to make a profit yet do?

More like what does making a profit have to do with anything? I thought the idea of background checks was to keep the guns away from bad guys.

The safer community act is Kinda like the inflation reduction act. In name only….

Admittedly I’ve only read half of the ATF link, but I haven’t come across anything that would require background checks where they weren’t previously required.

Most of what I read seems to be formal codification of existing case law.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
Which background checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

^^^
Background checks do stop firearm purchases. I see this fairly regularly.

If this were to stick, I'd define profit by my cost basis (total purchase price plus all accessories) + cost to operate (all ammo, targets, range fees, etc). If I get that amount, it will be a LOT more than the pre-tax purchase price, but will not be a profit. Isn't that how capital gains are calculated on the sale of a house? Sale price minus realtor fees, closing costs and cost basis?

I don't understand this "profit" thing. The buyer, or the seller? What are the criteria? How would such a thing be determined? How would it be proven? It sounds unenforceable.

As with a lot of 'laws' that politicians propose and sometimes pass... it is totally silly but it allows them to stand up before the voters and claim they did something.

We had a guy here in S.C. ... who would submit a 'gun friendly' bill and then when it came before the committee he was on he's intentionally kill it.

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 also had a provision to have transactions over $600 flagged with a 1099-k. That 1099-k will be sent to the taxpayer and the IRS. There is a huge distinction between how basis can be used whether it is hobby or business related. The hobbyist can deduct the cost of goods sold, but not to exceed the income from the sale. If I bought a gun for $1000 and sold it for $600, I would be exempt from taxes on this transaction but the $400 loss is gone. If in the same year, I bought a gun for $600 and sold it for $1000 I would be responsible to claim a $400 gain, even though I broke even on the two transactions. If I claimed both transactions were investment related, I would owe no taxes on the two transactions however it could possibly open you up to ATF background check liability. There is also the question of whether you can claim a gun an investment if you use it while engaged in your hobby of shooting. This 1099-k tax requirement pertains to all $600 transactions for goods or services on third party platforms. This is why they needed 87k new IRS agents and why there is a massive push for electronic payments away from cash. It is unclear whether this reporting will extend to facilitators or just payment processors.

To me, this is why they have this ambiguous language around “profit”. Once you start down the road of claiming firearms as investment sales to better reflect your true cost basis, I don’t think it’s a hard stretch for the ATF to start their customary jackboot practices.

It you read the ATF link in the first post, you’ll find “profit” has been part of the “engaged in the business of” in determining who is a dealer and thus needs an FFL since the GCA of 1968.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
It you read the ATF link in the first post, you’ll find “profit” has been part of the “engaged in the business of” in determining who is a dealer and thus needs an FFL since the GCA of 1968.

The devil is in the details. Under GCA '68, a person who earned their livelihood from buying and selling firearms was required to be a federally licensed dealer. However, the recent proposal redefines a "dealer" as anyone who simply devotes time and attention to selling any number of firearms to predominantly earn a profit. This distinction, combined with the broad language of the entire 108 page proposal, has the potential to subject most private sales to FFL requirements.

quote:

Originally posted by BB61:


^^^
Background checks do stop firearm purchases. I see this fairly regularly.

How many of those are hardened criminals looking for a gun to commit crimes with? How many denied background checks are in error or the buyer stupidly but without criminal intentions didn't know he couldn't purchase?

Almost every gun used in crime was obtained illegally, either via theft or straw purchase. To put it another way, eliminating all background checks would have a negligible effect on the availability of guns for criminals.

quote:

Originally posted by hjs157:
…has the potential to subject most private sales to FFL requirements.

But it doesn’t and the 108 pages don’t say that either.

If your predominant reason for buying a firearm is to later sell it for pecuniary gain, then you need an FFL. Pecuniary means relating to or consisting of money; I had to look it up.

I’ve never purchased a firearm thinking I’d sell it later for a profit.

Here’s why I buy them:

1. They serve a particular purpose in filling a perceived need.
Hunting; target shooting; self, family, home defense.

2. They are neat.
This applies to any firearm arm I’ve purchased that I looked at and thought “Wow, that’s really cool, I need one of those.”

3. To give to my kids when they are old enough because #1 and/or #2 above.

I suspect most people here, those that aren’t dealers, buy them for similar reasons.

I can sell any and all of my firearms and be confident that I’m not a dealer and not required to have an FFL.

If you really want to worry about something, read up on what it takes to be automatically considered a dealer and thus required to have an FFL regardless profit. Most are just goofy, like if you sell a firearm with the serial number removed, you are automatically a dealer and required to have an FFL. But there’s one, terrorism, that caught my eye given the ease with which the government bandies that term about.

So how is “profit” value determined? By face value of dollars involved? OK, so can inflation tables be used! If I bought a firearm in 1975 for $300 and sold in Sept, 2023 for $1000.00 then can I claim a loss?

According to inflation table by coin media group, 300.00 in 1975 is now equal to 1712.00 in purchasing power due to 471% inflation.

That means I lost 712.00 in value. Therefore I had a loss of 712.00 on the sale. I would have to sell my 1975 purchase for 1712.00 for the the sale to break even.