At the end of a year that had everything, there was still time for late drama to put the industry on high alert. Dec. 18, ATF published a Proposed Rule Guidance in the Federal Register to classify firearms with stabilizing braces. Titled “Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with Stabilizing Braces,” the Notice invited public comment from Dec. 18 through Jan. 1, 2021.
The summary of the Notice outlined ATF’s effort to publish “the objective factors it considers when evaluating firearms with an attached stabilizing brace to determine whether they are considered firearms under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and/or the Gun Control Act (GCA).” It also previewed ATF’s and the Department of Justice’s plan “to subsequently implement a separate process for current possessors of stabilizer-equipped firearms to choose to register such firearms in compliance with the NFA, including an expedited application process and the retroactive exemption of such firearms from the collection of NFA taxes.”
The timing of this announcement and the short 14-day window allowing for comments were roundly criticized by industry members — lead by SB Tactical, the originator of the pistol stabilizing brace.
The company was quick to issue a statement that read, in part: “Our hope was ATF would finally take transparent action to provide clear criteria for brace-equipped pistols, that would give manufacturers and consumers a way to see if products met ATF’s shifting expectations. Instead, the document is a thinly veiled blueprint for the largest firearm registration — and ultimately, potential confiscation — scheme in U.S. history.
“The factors identified by the ATF for its possible use in classification include type, caliber, weight and length, how the gun is marketed, length of pull, sights and scopes, peripheral accessories mounted and rear surface area of the brace, among others. While the factors listed are arbitrary and open-ended, the truly onerous part of the proposal is no definitions of the factors are provided.”
Despite being published during a traditionally quiet time of the year, industry members and the public made their voices heard — to the tune of more than 70,000 public comments. Just days after publishing the notice, ATF announced its withdrawal Dec. 23, closing with, “The withdrawal of the guidance does not change any law, regulation, or other legally binding requirement.”
Reacting to this withdrawal, NSSF issued the following statement: “NSSF has long requested the ATF to publish objective criteria by which firearm manufacturers can readily produce firearms equipped with arm braces in compliance with the law. To date, the criteria is subjective and open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis. The guidance proposed by the ATF last week did little, unfortunately, to clear the ambiguity that exists with subjective criteria.”
While the industry can appreciate this quick about-face, it serves as a warning sign of things to come in 2021 — especially with a new administration and an emboldened, Democrat-controlled Congress. Stay vigilant!
