Gun store Shooting Locations It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:44 pm



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me Shield NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar




Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
 SAR/Pistol Transfer Application & 4473 
Author Message
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Redmond, Washington
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017
Posts: 523
It's been mentioned to me by another WA state FFl that for pistol & SAR transfers they do not have the buyer complete a 4473. They only complete the Pistol Transfer Application and use that as the record when delivering the pistol to the buyer. Their opinion was that the state is performing state & local background check, doing same thing as 4473 does and so they didn't need to do 4473 or do FBI NICS check as long as they keep the PTA response in their records.

I can see not needing to do NICS check since WA state does it, but aren't FFLs still required to have buyer complete the 4473 and keep it on file along with the PTA response (as opposed to just keeping PTA response)?

_________________
I am a FFL in Redmond. Check out my website at https://www.lucidityprovisions.com to purchase items that I have in stock or for information on processing transfers for online purchases. If there are any items you are looking for feel free to PM me here or use the contact form on my website and I'll see what I can do for you.


Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:43 pm
Profile WWW
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Mount Vernon
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012
Posts: 1547
Real Name: Areyouthreateningme
None of us are lawyers.

BUT do you or your other FFL still collect “use tax” on transfers?


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
Which is the better: a good friend, a good heart, a good eye, a good neighbor, a good wife, or the understanding of consequences? It is none of these. A warm and senitive soul which knows the worth of fellowship and the price of the individual dignity, this is best.


Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:58 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Bow
Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013
Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
WAGuess wrote:
It's been mentioned to me by another WA state FFl that for pistol & SAR transfers they do not have the buyer complete a 4473. They only complete the Pistol Transfer Application and use that as the record when delivering the pistol to the buyer. Their opinion was that the state is performing state & local background check, doing same thing as 4473 does and so they didn't need to do 4473 or do FBI NICS check as long as they keep the PTA response in their records.

I can see not needing to do NICS check since WA state does it, but aren't FFLs still required to have buyer complete the 4473 and keep it on file along with the PTA response (as opposed to just keeping PTA response)?


The exemption doesn't make sense. The 4473 isn't a background check form, really. It's a transaction record. The information on it is USED in a background check, but the form itself isn't one. When you go pick up a suppressor, for example. The background check is long done by the time you go pick it up, but the 4473 is done because you are now taking that suppressor out of the dealer's hands.

Whether or not NICS is used is up to the state. Some states use NICS, some states use their own system. You don't have to use NICS, you just have to use a background check system that meets federal requirements.

You're an FFL. Does this sound right to you? I'm not an FFL, but I've spent enough time in gun shops shooting the shit with employees and owners that it doesn't sound right to me.

_________________
Sinus211 wrote:
Z66 and I still fuck on the regular.

zombie66 wrote:
Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....


Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:03 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar
Site Admin

Location: Renton, WA
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011
Posts: 51917
Real Name: Steve
I’ll just say that I’ve done business with one FFL that does it exactly as you described, he just uses the WA transfer form and no 4473. He told me that his ATF contact told him that this was the correct way to do it.

I know others do it differently.

_________________
Steve

Benefactor Life Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation
Patriot & Life Member, Gun Owners of America
Life Member, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Legal Action Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition
Member, NAGR/NFGR

Please support the organizations that support all of us.

Leave it cleaner than you found it.


Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:09 pm
Profile
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Lake Andes, S. Dakota
Joined: Thu Aug 8, 2013
Posts: 1250
Real Name: Mark
There are state laws and there are federal laws. Personally, I do NOT want to run afoul of either.

Has anyone seen any regulation or guidance from ATF that says a PARTIAL POC state (like WA) removes the requirement for a 4473 form? I have not.

Is the same information gathered on the state application as on a 4473?

How does the alleged word of an ATF IOI stand up in court vs. 27 CFR? Simple answer- it is hearsay and therefore not evidence.

Is this same FFL filling out the Multiple Handgun Purchase form (3310.4) or just blowing off that requirement, as well?

Would you rather have to answer for years of incomplete/ missing 4473 forms or just send the 4473's to the ATF Records Branch in WV and find out you were wrong?

If someone can point to federal guidance, regulation, or a ruling where an FFL in a partial POC state does not need to be filling out 4473 forms, then I welcome the education.

In the end, it is your FFL license/ livelihood/ freedom to lose.

_________________
"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson




Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:24 am
Profile WWW
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Lake Andes, S. Dakota
Joined: Thu Aug 8, 2013
Posts: 1250
Real Name: Mark
wilmermj wrote:
None of us are lawyers.

BUT do you or your other FFL still collect “use tax” on transfers?


WA DOR Letter SN_14 covers this subject, but the tax discussion is an entirely separate issue.

_________________
"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson




Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:52 am
Profile WWW
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Redmond, Washington
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017
Posts: 523
I was somewhat thinking this would be clear-cut that the 4473 was required, interesting to read that it's not fully defined either way. Guess this is what someone warned me about with laws and regulations for FFLs not being written all that well.

My approach is that I'm going to continue with the buyer filling out 4473. With Fastbound's software it's easy enough for person to fill out on their device then I print and they sign and I keep for records.

As for the tax question, that seems like a good other thread. But I do indeed collect tax due on transfers from out of state FFLs, just as RCWs require.

_________________
I am a FFL in Redmond. Check out my website at https://www.lucidityprovisions.com to purchase items that I have in stock or for information on processing transfers for online purchases. If there are any items you are looking for feel free to PM me here or use the contact form on my website and I'll see what I can do for you.


Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:04 pm
Profile WWW
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Pierce County
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2018
Posts: 1980
Real Name: Shane
Not legal advice, but the 4473 itself suggests you don't have to fill it out if you're not doing the check:

Quote:
Purpose of the Form: The information and certification on this form are designed so that a person licensed under 18 U.S.C. 923 may determine if he/she may lawfully sell or deliver a firearm to the person identified in Section B, and to alert the transferee/buyer of certain restrictions on the receipt and possession of firearms.

_________________
Posts not legal advice.


Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:57 pm
Profile
Online
Site Admin
User avatar
Site Admin

Location: Olympia, WA
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 38290
Real Name: Dan
The dealers I have done to have NOT done the 4473, because the Pistol and SAR transfer has the NTN on it, which is the disposition from the LEA running the 4473 on their end.


Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:12 am
Profile WWW
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Pierce County
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018
Posts: 1117
There may be an exception to this buried somewhere in the ATF regulations or the Gun Control Act itself, but I am not going to go dig for it.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Thu Sep 02, 2021 6:53 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Bow
Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013
Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
User 1234 wrote:
There may be an exception to this buried somewhere in the ATF regulations or the Gun Control Act itself, but I am not going to go dig for it.


I wonder.
If the LEA records the info on a 4473 on behalf of the licensee, does that satisfy the law?

_________________
Sinus211 wrote:
Z66 and I still fuck on the regular.

zombie66 wrote:
Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....


Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:29 pm
Profile
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Tacoma, Washington
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014
Posts: 8328
It would be unwise to not have a completed 4473 despite having a completed FTA.

The state’s FTA does not contain the same questions as a 4473 does, which in some cases are required to be answered or information regarding the buyer/transferee to be recorded such as documents supporting their claim of residency. Especially when a service member is stationed here, or other scenarios where supporting documents are required.

An FFL that transfers firearms to someone claiming residency without recording their supporting documents, may find themself in a bind if/when they are audited and more so if the firearms are recovered from a crime scene or search warrant and it is found that the transferring dealer did not fulfill their obligations as a licensee.


BLACK HAMMER ARMS
Type 07 Class 2 NFA Dealer
http://www.blackhammerarms.com
http://www.facebook.com/blackhammerarms
https://www.instagram.com/blackhammerarms
GLOCK Certified Armourer

_________________
BLACK HAMMER ARMS
Buy A Suppressor http://www.silencershop.com/blackhammerarms
Type 7 Class 2 SOT NFA Dealer
1911 Pistolsmithing
Firearm Refinishing
GLOCK Certified Armorer
CMMG Authorized Dealer
NEMO Arms Authorized Dealer
http://www.blackhammerarms.com
http://www.facebook.com/blackhammerarms
https://www.instagram.com/blackhammerarms/


Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:50 pm
Profile WWW
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Pierce County
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018
Posts: 1117
It requires “the licensee” to record the transaction on the 4473. It is highly unlikely that any LE agency is filling out 4473’s. If they did, that does not satisfy the requirement for the licensee to do so himself. The ATF may or may not actually take action on this issue. Or the ATF may ignore its own regulations for awhile and give different guidance informally. If I was a dealer I would be using the 4473. Skipping it based on logic or what the law would have said if a rational person had written it is a risky proposition.


Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:52 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Pierce County
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018
Posts: 1117
https://www.guns.com/news/2021/06/23/bi ... on-dealers


Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:55 pm
Profile
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer
User avatar
Site Supporter / FFL Dealer

Location: Lake Andes, S. Dakota
Joined: Thu Aug 8, 2013
Posts: 1250
Real Name: Mark
dreadi wrote:
It would be unwise to not have a completed 4473 despite having a completed FTA.

The state’s FTA does not contain the same questions as a 4473 does, which in some cases are required to be answered or information regarding the buyer/transferee to be recorded such as documents supporting their claim of residency. Especially when a service member is stationed here, or other scenarios where supporting documents are required.

An FFL that transfers firearms to someone claiming residency without recording their supporting documents, may find themself in a bind if/when they are audited and more so if the firearms are recovered from a crime scene or search warrant and it is found that the transferring dealer did not fulfill their obligations as a licensee.


BLACK HAMMER ARMS
Type 07 Class 2 NFA Dealer
http://www.blackhammerarms.com
http://www.facebook.com/blackhammerarms
https://www.instagram.com/blackhammerarms
GLOCK Certified Armourer


Nicely put- thank you!

_________________
"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson




Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:37 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 15 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
[ Time : 0.561s | 16 Queries | GZIP : Off ]