NFA eFile Stamps

| March 18, 2014 | 4 Comments

When I read about the ATF’s desire in 2013 to change how NFA applications by Trusts were handled (I have one) I decided to add a few last-minute firearms to my trust. The ATF wanted to change the rules by the end of 2013, but there was enough outcry that they pushed a decision back to as late as June of this year (2014).

I had previously mailed in my check and my Form 1 paperwork to the ATF, and the wait time was 8 months and 10 months.

I heard the ATF was trying out an electronic file system, and rumors were that they were being processed faster than the snail mail versions.

On November 10, 2013 I submitted two Form 1s, one for an AR pistol and one for a Zastava PAP M92-PV AK47 pistol.

Both Form 1s were approved on March 17, 2014. That’s 4 months and seven days (128 days).¬†The ATF has had some problems with their eFile system, so I don’t know if my paperwork would have been processed any faster if the system was working the whole time.

I think the eFile system was definitely worth it from a time perspective. If we could have suppressors here I’d be willing to try it again to see if it would take more or less time.

Meanwhile, some of my friends are on months 10 and more for their paper-submitted stamps.

Get in while you can, everyone.



Next stop, seeing how much of a pain in the ass it will be to put a Galil folding stock on the M92.

About the Author:

Short Barrel Shepherd Short Barrel Shepherd is a regular guy and works to make Web sites and mobile apps easier for people to use. He spends his free time attending fight-focused firearm, knife, and combatives training, motorcycling, writing, and playing games. His daily carry is a Glock 19 pistol and an AR15 .300 Blackout pistol in a backpack.
Filed in: News Tags: , , ,

4 Comments on "NFA eFile Stamps"

Trackback | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Good to hear. My last suppressor took 11 months (via snail mail). I also have a trust and heard of the proposed changes and decided to get another one before any changes happen or not. I E-filed for the first time and I’m interested to see how long it takes. It was submitted on Feb. 9.

  2. Charles says:

    I read the posting and wonder what the reason you are filing ATF documents on the AR (and AK) pistols? Mine were built on raw receivers that 4473d as “multi-receiver” which allows me to assemble whatever I desire (so long as I don’t fudge the NFA rules).
    So, again, what’s up with filing this Form”?” again?

    I have been contemplating setting up a trust so that passing on my NFA gun (.45 cal Spitfire) to my son, and making it painless to allow my brother and my son to use the machine gun without me present, but I really need to await the closing on my home purchase (any day now).

    The trust that I have discussed with GunTrustLawyer is expected to become owner of the machine gun,-some- suppressors, and likely become a depository of my -not inconsequential- gun collection.
    I’m just trying to decide whether I need to get in an all-fired hurry to get this set up before any possible rule changes occur (June 2014).
    Setting up a properly documented gun trust in not an inexpensive proposition if it’s intent is to include estate protection, and then I have the added expense of transferring my existing permitted NFA firearm (and the possibility of another? one (( my Brother’s -in process- destructive device)) ).
    It’s all just sort of hard to swallow the -thousands- of dollars outlay in such a VERY short time frame….

    • Short Barrel Shepherd Short Barrel Shepherd says:

      Hi there! I filed the Form 1s to convert them into short barreled rifles. I used an AK pistol as a donor for my first AK SBR project, because changing a barrel on an AK is a major pain in the ass compared to attaching a stock to an AK pistol.

      I put the paperwork in on the AR so I would have at least one NFA registered lower for an SBR. The rest of my AR builds will be pistols from here on out.

      You’re dead on about the NFA trust stuff being expensive. When I got mine done, GunTrustLawyer only had the $600 option. Apparently there’s a less expensive option now as well as the “fully loaded” $600 option. The part that was hardest for me to swallow is that the trust and stamps are all product-less expenses. It’s not like I “got” anything from spending that money.

      Also, very cool that you own a Spitfire. Good luck on the home closing!

      • Charles says:

        After rereading the blog post I got a better idea behind the filings.
        So far as GunTrustLawyer costs are concerned, I find myself steering toward the “Expert”? option ($2000 or so) which allows for all sorts of protection for the firearm collection.
        Then I have the transfer costs too.
        It doesn’t ever seem to end – the hand over fist shelling out of moneys by the hundreds, geez.

        The Spitfire was an incredible acquisition early last year.
        I could fill you in on specifics, but you might not believe some of the particulars.

        Since I caught the AR bug last fall I’ve found myself assembling seven (so far) in a host of different calibers (5.56/.223, .22 LR, 9mm, .300 AAC, 5.45×39) and profiles. Only the last four have been brought to existence as pistols.
        So I guess that I really should get the trust assembled so as to provide for long-term (amongst other variety) of protection.
        At least Ohio doesn’t seem to be following the woe-full path the New York state and Connecticut have resorted to.

Post a Comment