Free Shipping:

All orders from Silencer Shop ship free!

Form 23 and Form 4 Drafts Have Been Published for Review

Form 23 DraftFor everybody who is tracking the implementation progress of ATF 41F/41P, the new forms have been published for review.

Take Time to Look Over the Form 4 and Form 23 Drafts

Before linking to the new Form 4 and Form 23 drafts, we want to be clear that these are NOT final versions – and should NOT be used until approved by the ATF & NFA Branch.

Here is a link to the new Form 4 (5320.4) draft.

Here is a link to the new Form 23 (5320.23) draft.

ATF 41F Form Review Process is Underway

We’ve been studying these forms closely since the review process started, and have already submitted our first comment on the Form 4 draft.  We’re also working on an official comment for the Form 23 draft, and may still submit a second Form 4 comment.

As you read through the forms, please take time to bring up any issues you may find since the industry will probably be using these forms for years to come.

If you don’t want to submit an official comment on your own, feel free to comment on this post and we’ll bring any issues to the attention of the ATF during the review process.

If you do want to submit your own comment, you can send it directly to nfaombcomments@atf.gov so they can be addressed.  As with the initial ATF 41P comment period, be sure to keep the comments courteous and to the point since we’re all facing the current July 13th deadline and need to keep this process moving.

Conclusion

Although ATF 41F is definitely going to add extra requirements and overhead to the NFA registration process, the ATF seems willing to work with industry members to make the transition as smooth as possible.

Stay tuned over the next few months and we’ll keep you updated as these forms are fine-tuned before the July 13th deadline.

42 Responses to “Form 23 and Form 4 Drafts Have Been Published for Review”

  1. David von Rinteln says:

    Form 4 –

    Item 12 – Information for the Chief Law Enforcement Officer, refers to items 14.a-14.j, except 14i. 14.j, 14.k, and 14.i do not appear on the Form 4. Is the statement or the form items 14a-h correct?

    Item 13 – The word Silencer is missing from the listed NFA categories. is this intended?

    Item 19, will more than one name be permitted on each line?

    Definitions 1.d. – Is which law is a trust a person defined? In what English Dictionary is a trust defined as a person?

    Form 23

    Item 5 – Information for the Chief Law Enforcement Officer, refers to items 6.a-6.j, except 6.i. 6.j, 6.k, and 6.i do not appear on the Form 23. Is the statement or the form items 6.a-h correct?

    Item 6 – refers to answering question 7 and 8, if applicable. Under what circumstances could 7 or 8 not be applicable? Suggest removing , if applicable from statement.

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      Very good catches. I would say the only thing is on Item 6 that they remove 7 if applicable because there are instances when 8 would not be applicable. We will pass this information along.

  2. Scott Long says:

    Looks like they should skip the Form 4473 when the NFA item is pickup since all the same information in on the new Form 4.

    Technically, if they are doing a background check, why do you need to answer Questions 14, 16 and 17. The background check should provide those answers.

    Same for Questions 6-8 on the From 23.

  3. Thom Kelly says:

    Minors under 18 listed on trust, how is that going to work? Trust was designed to have items passed down in case of death.

  4. Kevin Rodriguez says:

    I can’t believe we are now putting peoples credit card information on the form 4.

  5. Armando G. says:

    According to question 12 on the Form 4, you now have to have a necessity for those firearms listed?

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      Just a rewording of the question on the current forms. Basically it is asking why you are applying for one.

    • Thomas says:

      ALL LAWFUL PURPOSES, as an answer to “why do you intend to make?” a firearm is a long way from them asking you to attest to a “reasonable necessity,” in my eyes.

  6. TP says:

    Since it looks like fingerprints of all NFA trustees will need to submit fingerprints each purchase, how are online transactions supposed to take place under the new rules. Can we buy a fingerprint kit and do it ourselves at home?

  7. Thomas says:

    Form 4, Item 13 – Necessity Statement, “(Transferee) has a reasonable necessity to possess…”

    Does this language BOTHER anyone else??

  8. Joe R. says:

    Definitely can the photo on the Form 23, you have to show gov’t issued photo i.d. to the government’s representative in the transaction (the FFL). Don’t need any defacto gun registries.

  9. Casey P says:

    Sure would be nice if it was slimmed down to being only two pages for the “real” information like the current Form 4 – then at least the credit card information isn’t part of the final stamped form. Outside of that, doesn’t appear much has changed except a little re-wording and listing of “responsible persons.” And, as others have said, if we’re filling out a separate Form 23 now, why the heck does all of that need to be on the Form 4 AND repeated again on the 4473? So much for the Paperwork Reduction Act…

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      The credit card info isn’t part of the approved form. The credit card info is on page 3 and the first and second page are the approved form with the tax stamp.

  10. Tyler says:

    I don’t have any comment about the forms themselves but I do have a comment about this new 41F BS. I don’t know where or how I could make a formal comment on it to the ATF directly or if it’s too late.

    These guys are doing double and triple redundancy. It seems to me to be a total lack of regard for common sense from their angle and ours. If I have a concealed carry permit in Texas then I have already gone through one level of background check that is at minimum as good if not better than what the ATF can or could do.

    I don’t mind doing or submitting to a background check, but I do not like the idea of having to submit to one multiple times for each purchase. I did one for my CHL, I guess now I will have to do another for the ATF, and then I will have to do yet another upon picking up the suppressor.

    I will skip using a trust. I only did it that way before because it was easier. That’s no problem. I will buy cans as an individual no problem, and I will submit to a background check, but it seems to me that they should work more closely with states (like Texas) that already have a formal process in place to check and monitor backgrounds.

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      Unfortunately the time for comments closed years ago. The ASA and NRA are working on this issue so the best thing that we can do at this point is through our weight behind them.

    • Adam Wagner says:

      Redundant? I had to have my fingerprints done for my chl and then again for my chl instructor license! Same agency! And again for the military, and again for my FFL, and once for the NASD when I was a securitis broker. But Texas DPS needing them twice really took the cake. But it still takes 6-8 weeks everytime for ATF to approve a transfer from our distributor Silencer Shop to us, an FFL. It doesn’t have to make any sense apparently. I’ve also heard that you’ll have to submit new prints for each silencer. Buy five a year? Five sets of prints…just in case they changed I guess.

  11. LS says:

    With the added paperwork, will Silencer Shop still be able to help us navigate through the paperwork?
    What will it truly add for people that are buying a new suppressor after the date it effective?

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      We will still handle all of the paperwork for the customer. Once we get some clarification from the ATF then we will update everyone. Stay tuned for more information.

  12. Greg says:

    They could streamline the Form 4 by not having the spot for the photo and transferee questions (14-17) for use by individuals. Just have individuals and trusts fill out the Form 23(s) since that info doesn’t really need to be part of the final approved stamp just like the credit card info doesn’t.

  13. Chris says:

    Doing a quick look at the ATF website. https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/forms-library?search_api_aggregation_1=&search_api_aggregation_2=&og_group_ref=All&page=1 If you lookup form 5320.4 it appears they are pushing it as active.

    Any updates? I don’t have time to call NFA branch today and verify. I already thought this was active and was sent my M16 paperwork on this form from that dealer. Hope I don’t have to adjust. I have not had time to do a line by line compare but this appears to be the form listed as draft above.

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      If you look at the date on the bottom of the form from the list you sent is shows the date that the form 4 was revised. I did not see the proposed form on that site.

  14. Team Mongoose says:

    The new requirements are bogus to say the least. I’m just going to keep submitting my items like crazy up until the deadline. I’m done after that unless the HPA actually passes. I wonder how many will just say forget it after the deadline. Just another way for the liberal agenda to choke down the industry.

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      I see your point. However if you let them stop you then they accomplished what they were after. In essence you gave them the victory.

      • Mark says:

        Agreed….

      • Team Mongoose says:

        I have too much of an addiction to all things NFA to ever stop so they won’t get a victory from me. In reality, I laughed when I read the new rulings. My first thought was the only thing this accomplishes is making everyone’s wife aware of how much their husbands are spending on NFA items.

  15. HFTech says:

    What Disturbs me is the Requirement to Provide a Copy to the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in their Jurisdiction. Why do they get to create their Own Registry of NFA Firearms in their Jurisdiction? That seams Illegal as it is a Legal Tax Return, and in being so, makes it Illegal to disseminate? Damn Shame if you ask me, and that should be Removed in it’s Entirety.
    Thanks. HFTech

    • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

      Agreed, we will have to see what happens on this. However I think that most CLEO’s will just disregard it.

  16. Mark says:

    Does fingerprinting have to be done by LE? Can a dealer fingerprint their customers?

    • Greg says:

      The fingerprints have to be acceptable in quality (i.e. meeting FBI standards). I’ve talked to the local Chief Deputy Sheriff about this recently and he told me that none of the LE agencies in the county do “rolled” prints anymore, so folks have to go to one of the private companies. I believe it was MorpoTrust that I called here and they will scan the prints then print the FBI cards, so it is only available in some locations that have to printing capability. Rolling prints is becoming a lost art, so one would think that eventually the ATF would get with it and go digital…

  17. Thomas says:

    Definition 1 n. Adjudicated mental defective: it allows a “lawful authority” to declare you mental defective for having a condition or disease preventing you from managing your affairs adequately in that authority’s opinion.
    As in, the VA didn’t like that you didn’t pay your bill in a timely manner, assigns a person to collect payment and reports you as having a condition that prevents you from managing your affairs. No due process. Of course, since you will also fail the background check for not paying your bill, I guess that doesn’t matter?

    It should matter because if the courts disallow it in the NICS, it would still be here, and likely treated as a separate item by the administration/ATF.

  18. Chris Koehler says:

    The step numbering that they have within the draft form 4 instruction 2.d(3) is clearly wrong where they indicate that a non-individual entity should not fill out streets 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19. I believe it should be 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17.

    • Chris Koehler says:

      Does the transferree necessity statement item 13 need to be filled out for non-individual entities? I know not for suppressor, but for the other categories? If so, who signs? Any trustee? Also for a non-individual entity, does someone need to sign on the bottom of page two certification below step 17? It’s not clear our addressed within the instructions.

      • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

        Several issues have been addressed in the revised forms. However they are not published yet. Once they are things should be clear.

        • Adam Wagner says:

          Any update?? If we ordered a form 4 today it wouldn’t be here by the time we need it July 14. How in the hell can we function if they don’t make the required forms available? Just two weeks until the requirement and I haven’t seen that there is an official, final form yet. Am I just the last to know? Seems like anyone with an SOT, especially anyone who renewed already, would have gotten some official mail by now.

          • jeremy@silencershop.com says:

            The official forms will be out next week hopefully. They are waiting till the last minute. Today is the last day to order and beat 41F.

Leave a Reply