Interesting for the data
In a comment, HSR47 writes:
Contrary to popular belief, the TOTAL REVENUE for both SOT fees (what FFLs pay to deal with Title II firearms) and ALL transfer and making taxes paid for 2016 was $68,614,000 according to an official report released early in 2017. Thats also extremely high, and was only that high because people with trusts/corps opted to compress their next several years worth of buying into the first ~6 months of 2016.
The same figure for 2015 was $37,879,000.
The same figure for 2014 was $27,515,000.
The same figure for 2013 was $22,476,000.
The same figure for 2012 was $16,442,000.
The same figure for 2011 was $12,582,000.
The same figure for 2010 was $9,309,000.Also, to be clear, thats the ENTIRE revenue for ALL Title II-related paperwork (both annual dealer SOT payments that will largely continue uninterrupted, and ALL tax payments for both transfer and making of ALL types of Title II firearms.
In short, if firearm mufflers were to be transferred from Title II to Title I, and to be regulated like we regulate long guns, the TOTAL IMPACT on NFA branch revenue would be significantly less than $70,000,000. Thats an amount of money that means absolutely nothing to our government.
Further, the idea that revenues would fall is likely fallacious for another reason: Regulating firearm mufflers as long guns would subject them to Pittman-Robertson taxes, at around 10-11%.
As it stands, the entire silencer industry has retail revenues of around $100,000,000-200,000,000; If we were to move them from Title II to Title II, that market would IMMEDIATELY expand to a significant degree. Even if only expanded to $700,000,000, the Pittman-Robertson act taxes would MORE than make up the differences in federal revenues.
TLDR: Once you account for the salaries of BATFE personnel tasked with handling Title II paperwork, the entire NFA process becomes either a financial wash, or an outright loss. It is NOT a moneymaker. Regulating Firearm Mufflers like long guns would instead subject them to a different tax that would require almost zero effort for the government to collect, which in turn would significantly alter the balance and make it a net earner for the government The HPA, even with the refund provision intact, would be revenue neutral for the government within 1-3 years, and would be extremely profitable for the foreseeable future thereafter.
I thought it worth sharing.
August 23rd, 2017 at 7:47 pm
The NFA process was never about revenue, it was about denying people a whole range of useful firearms and accessories.
As for regulating firearms mufflers like long guns, while that is a slight improvement, it is also a logical absurdity. The correct way to regulate them is like magazines, or holsters, or any other accessory.
August 23rd, 2017 at 9:37 pm
@Paul K.,
Correct, just an accessory as I said when HSR47 shared all those gov-wonky details before Unc shared it again. Trying to make sense of gov reg economics? Good luck with that…getting sucked into that rabbit-hole is not only an exercise in futility but is complicit with and extends their unconstitutionality. I made that point too about muffler makers getting in bed with the feds, not to make it easier for you but to ingratiate and perpetuate regulation, like all of the licensing and regulating bodies that Unc and others rail against in all things.
Want the TLDR of the whole fucking thing? Anti-2A ebay doesn’t allow guns but has thousands of rifle barrels averaging about a hundred bucks…because they’re not guns. A suppressor is a just a barrel with baffles. Title I my ass, this ain’t a gun, quit trying to help them regulate it like one. And soon ebay will be full of them. Right.
August 23rd, 2017 at 11:02 pm
@Paul Koning: In a perfect world, there wouldn’t be any kind of government regulation that restricted access to any type of armament.
We do not live in a perfect world. Additionally, we need to be cognizant of the concept of the Overton Window: As it stands today, regulating firearm mufflers as we currently regulate long guns might be within the bounds of our national Overton Window, but deregulating them entirely is likely a bridge too far for many people.
In other words, regulating firearm mufflers as we currently regulate long guns is probably about as much of a liberalization as we are likely going to be able to get for the foreseeable future. It’s not as far as i’d like to go, but it would certainly be a major improvement, and it would also be an improvement that would make future improvements easier.
@JTC: See above. I wasn’t arguing that moving firearm mufflers from Title II to Title I was anywhere near what I’d like to see us accomplish in my lifetime; Instead, what I’ve been saying is that it’s the right step to take today.
Nationally, the Overton Window on the gun issue is very much in our favor, but this does not grant us carte blanche. Instead, we must take babysteps; On each specific facet of federal gun laws, we must reign in our enthusiasm so that we don’t overrun the Overton Window, and so turn public opinion against us.
There’s a reason that the Democrats failed to pass anything federally in the wake of Sandy Hook: They ignored the Overton Window, shot for the moon, and the public backlash prevented their bills from moving.
We must therefore be mindful of the Overton Window: We can either take tiny bites when the time is right, and make slow but steady progress rolling back the oppressive federal gun control laws we currently live under; or we can shoot for the moon, and get nowhere.
August 24th, 2017 at 1:20 am
Or we can shoot for the moon and get to Mars.
Sorry, but the Overton Window got remodeled by Trump and the hidden Preference Cascade in 10/16 and demolished by them in 11/16, to the everlasting sorrow of those who kept within it.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/298417-the-overton-window-and-how-trump-won-the-nomination
There might actually be an OW app for autos as we discussed earlier; incremental pressure there would be less likely to scare the white folks and trigger (heh) a backlash, the whole cautionary point of the metaphor.
But baffled barrels or extensions are proven safety accessories; voluntarily accepting a classification as a firearm sure smacks of “common sense” regulation, and it would kill the change to accessory status that is within our grasp right now, no moonshot -and no vested-interest trade group involvement- required.
Then it will be time to push that window on other anti-Constitutional restrictions, before we miss the Trump Window for blastoff. Mars here we come.
August 24th, 2017 at 11:05 am
Mars? Shoot for Pluto, or to catch up to Voyager. Then when you hit only the Moon your opponents can claim a victory and be happy.
A-10 Warthogs, M1-A Abrams tanks and Aegis cruisers for everyone, I say!