Life expectancy and resale value on Suppressor

[Vaultman]

I been wanting to get into the suppressor world for some time. I have decided to just do it.
In getting through it, I got to thinking, I do not know of anyone that has bought one used.

Is there resale value on these?
I doubt they would, but also wondered if they wear out with age / use, like a barrel?

People talk about putting them in their will or trust. Is it something that I buy and never get rid of because the resale value is so low?

 

[WeiserBucks]

Resale is a huge pain in the butt and kills resale value. You're essentially married to it for life, you could probably wear one out if you were dedicated to abusing it but not likely.

 

[hereinaz]

You can sell them, but given the cost of a tax stamp, its not common. It would transfer from the seller to your dealer on a Form 3 when you buy it, then the dealer gives the suppressor to the buyer when the stamp comes in. There are four used suppressors listed for sale on Sniper's Hide right now.

Use a trust. That means that if you have a buddy who wants to take the suppressor out, you can loan it to him by adding him as a successor Trustee to the trust. And, when you die, it just continues to whoever the next trustor is. There used to be other benefits to using a trust, but changes eliminated those "loopholes".

You won't shoot enough to wear out a suppressor.

 

[hereinaz]

Forgot to add. Yes, buy one sooner than later.

Do your research, you'll make a good choice. Don't put price too high on your list. Or, buy an inexpensive one first, shoot it, then decide what you really want. You won't want just one suppressor...

 

[Vaultman]

Forgot to add. Yes, buy one sooner than later.

Do your research, you'll make a good choice. Don't put price too high on your list. Or, buy an inexpensive one first, shoot it, then decide what you really want. You won't want just one suppressor...

Thanks...
I am going to get one for a 22 LR first (pistol). Shoot that a lot, then will probably get a 30 cal one for hunting. If I decide I want another it will likely be for my ar. That is why we are starting small.

One bummer I see is, even with a trust, I cannot let my son use it while we are hunting separately, if he is under 18. Kinda sucks...

 

[wesfromky]

You can sell them, but given the cost of a tax stamp, its not common. It would transfer from the seller to your dealer on a Form 3 when you buy it, then the dealer gives the suppressor to the buyer when the stamp comes in. There are four used suppressors listed for sale on Sniper's Hide right now.

Use a trust. That means that if you have a buddy who wants to take the suppressor out, you can loan it to him by adding him as a successor Trustee to the trust. And, when you die, it just continues to whoever the next trustor is. There used to be other benefits to using a trust, but changes eliminated those "loopholes".

You won't shoot enough to wear out a suppressor.

Maybe you have different trusts then I do, but I believe the term to add someone is "responsible person." Just keep in mind that if you want to add anything else to that trust, they will have to submit prints and background checks for each new item. If you add 4 people, then they all have to go through the approval process. If you use a single shot trust, you only have one item per trust, and can add additional responsible parties to it once approved. They would not need to have a background check for new items, since those items would be in a different trust.

In state sales isn't too bad - paper form 4, and if you have added the person to the trust, they can take possession right away. Out of state is more complicated, and probably not worth it.

 

[hereinaz]

Maybe you have different trusts then I do, but I believe the term to add someone is "responsible person." Just keep in mind that if you want to add anything else to that trust, they will have to submit prints and background checks for each new item. If you add 4 people, then they all have to go through the approval process. If you use a single shot trust, you only have one item per trust, and can add additional responsible parties to it once approved. They would not need to have a background check for new items, since those items would be in a different trust.

In state sales isn't too bad - paper form 4, and if you have added the person to the trust, they can take possession right away. Out of state is more complicated, and probably not worth it.

I don't know anything about your document using the term "responsible person", and won't guess.

"Responsible person" is the ATF term uses for the person who is on the form to buy the tax stamp for an entity other than a person. It is everyone at the time of the application who has legal authority for the entity such as the LLC, partnership, trust, etc. It is the broad NFA category.

Responsible Person. In the case of a legal entity, including any trust, partnership, association, company (to include any Limited Liability Company (LLC)), corporation, or Licensed Entity that does not pay the Special (Occupational) Tax, any individual who possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority to direct the management and policies of the trust or entity to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of, the trust or legal entity.​

The legal control of a Trust, by definition, is held by the Trustee, and the NFA trusts I have seen use Trustees/co-Trustees as the "individual who possesses" power/authority. My trust does make clear that only the Trustee is the responsible person so the ATF doesn't make beneficiaries get fingerprinted, etc.

The Single Shot Trust seems a little like a gimmick trust made cheap, so you have to buy one every time. It might be the way you want to go, but that's nothing I would have recommended to most my clients when I wrote trusts. I can see why some might use it.

As a lawyer, here is my disclaimer that nothing above is legal advice, it is for general educational purposes. If you want legal advice, you must get your own lawyer to give it.

 

[hereinaz]

When I apply for a new suppressor, I am the only Trustee on the Trust so I am the only one who has to be fingerprinted and get FBI check. I only add a responsible person for the duration of the time they will have it. You can add and remove co-Trustees if the Trust is set up right and always retain control. Just fill out blanks and date and sign appropriately.

See disclaimer above.

 

[wesfromky]

I don't know anything about your document using the term "responsible person", and won't guess.

"Responsible person" is the ATF term uses for the person who is on the form to buy the tax stamp for an entity other than a person. It is everyone at the time of the application who has legal authority for the entity such as the LLC, partnership, trust, etc. It is the broad NFA category.

Responsible Person. In the case of a legal entity, including any trust, partnership, association, company (to include any Limited Liability Company (LLC)), corporation, or Licensed Entity that does not pay the Special (Occupational) Tax, any individual who possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority to direct the management and policies of the trust or entity to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of, the trust or legal entity.​

The legal control of a Trust, by definition, is held by the Trustee, and the NFA trusts I have seen use Trustees/co-Trustees as the "individual who possesses" power/authority. My trust does make clear that only the Trustee is the responsible person so the ATF doesn't make beneficiaries get fingerprinted, etc.

The Single Shot Trust seems a little like a gimmick trust made cheap, so you have to buy one every time. It might be the way you want to go, but that's nothing I would have recommended to most my clients when I wrote trusts. I can see why some might use it.

As a lawyer, here is my disclaimer that nothing above is legal advice, it is for general educational purposes. If you want legal advice, you must get your own lawyer to give it.

IANAL and all that, so I just go by what silencershop says. I chose the single shot trusts for the flexibility of allowing some people access to some of my NFA items, but not all. Plus, the ability to buy new NFA items without having to either remove them, or submit their fingerprints, etc. And, as a hedge against maybe selling at some point, because it would allow the person to take possession right away while waiting for their stamp to clear with just some amendments to that specific trust. I agree that I am probably an edge case though, as I don't have kids or a spouse and value flexibility over saving some money and doing additional paperwork.

All this shit is way too complicated for no reason, but to the ATF, that is a feature, not a bug.

What is a Responsible person on a Gun Trust?

Learn how to get the most out of your NFA items by utilizing a gun trust and assigning responsible persons. NFA trusts do not need to be complicated. Learn everything you need to know here.

www.silencershop.com

 

[hereinaz]

IANAL and all that, so I just go by what silencershop says. I chose the single shot trusts for the flexibility of allowing some people access to some of my NFA items, but not all. Plus, the ability to buy new NFA items without having to either remove them, or submit their fingerprints, etc. And, as a hedge against maybe selling at some point, because it would allow the person to take possession right away while waiting for their stamp to clear with just some amendments to that specific trust. I agree that I am probably an edge case though, as I don't have kids or a spouse and value flexibility over saving some money and doing additional paperwork.

All this shit is way too complicated for no reason, but to the ATF, that is a feature, not a bug.

What is a Responsible person on a Gun Trust?

Learn how to get the most out of your NFA items by utilizing a gun trust and assigning responsible persons. NFA trusts do not need to be complicated. Learn everything you need to know here.

www.silencershop.com

ATF… nuff said. Govt plus.

Yeah, the idea of the single shot makes more sense for situations like that. If you plan to sell and they are in the same state, that works for possession.

But, talk with your lawyer about the drawbacks and liabilities of such an arrangement…

I have different solutions for the same situation. Co-trustees on my trust are only ever highly trusted and well known individuals. They can also be limited to authority over one item. And, they don’t get the combination to my safe. Strangers, no way I will let them into anything more than an arm’s length transaction. That’s my decision.

Legal disclaimer still applies.

 

[HandgunHTR]

One bummer I see is, even with a trust, I cannot let my son use it while we are hunting separately, if he is under 18. Kinda sucks...

My understanding after talking to a family member who is FBI and a friend of his who is ATF, as long as you are on the same property and are leaving from and coming back to the same place each day, he can still use it. If he is on another property or he is going to a family members house and you stay in a tent (completely fabricated scenario), then he wouldn’t be able to.

 

[Mike D Texas]

You can sell them, but given the cost of a tax stamp, its not common. It would transfer from the seller to your dealer on a Form 3 when you buy it, then the dealer gives the suppressor to the buyer when the stamp comes in. There are four used suppressors listed for sale on Sniper's Hide right now.

Use a trust. That means that if you have a buddy who wants to take the suppressor out, you can loan it to him by adding him as a successor Trustee to the trust. And, when you die, it just continues to whoever the next trustor is. There used to be other benefits to using a trust, but changes eliminated those "loopholes".

You won't shoot enough to wear out a suppressor.

If you are in the same state (at least a free one) there is no need for dealer involvement.

You are the transferor on the F4 and the recipient is the transferee.

You just can’t let them take possession until the transfer via F4 is approved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[hereinaz]

Educational purposes, stating the law, not giving legal advice: Federal law is that NFA items are legal only when in the control of a "responsible person". One element of control is physical proximity. If the responsible person is not present, another person can illegally have possession/control when the item is not locked away (leads to constructive possession) or the person is actively using it.

Who is Allowed to Use My Suppressor? A Detailed Guide

It is essential to be aware of who can and cannot use your silencers, and other NFA items, to ensure you’re not violating any gun laws while enjoying your NFA weapons. Check out this detailed guide to be up-to-date on regulations.

www.silencershop.com

Law enforcement agents are not good sources of the law. They could misunderstand enforcement and charging policy vs. what the law actually says. Any person taking exclusive control of an NFA item for purposes of using it without the responsible person present is by definition committing a crime, as is the responsible person if they allow it. When it comes to personal use, I am aware of nothing in statutes or regulations permitting someone other than a responsible person to have exclusive control of NFA items outside the presence of the responsible person.

I would suspect that the whole, "be on the same property" is so that the kid doesn't get busted for speeding and then caught with firearms. The "crime" stays hidden and on private property where the possibility of law enforcement is minimal.

A what if hypothetical:

What if you allow a responsible but an unauthorized person to have possession, the person accidentally shoots someone with the suppressed rifle from your property, emergency responders are called, the victim gets nasty, politics get involved, and the prosecuting authority wants to make an example of "illegally possessed scary things?"

If you are OK with risking the above, that is one thing. But, if you wouldn't risk your family and fortune, even if the risk is very, very, very small, you'd want to know. Of course, loaning anyone a firearm carries with it the possibility of getting sued for "negligent entrustment."

I hate to be "that guy" but knowledge is power. It just might change someone's mind...

Legal disclaimer applies. Get your own lawyer for your situation and your own protection. This is not legal advice. At best, the above is information that you can discuss with your own lawyer.

 

[fwafwow]

Educational purposes, stating the law, not giving legal advice: Federal law is that NFA items are legal only when in the control of a "responsible person". One element of control is physical proximity. If the responsible person is not present, another person can illegally have possession/control when the item is not locked away (leads to constructive possession) or the person is actively using it.

Who is Allowed to Use My Suppressor? A Detailed Guide

It is essential to be aware of who can and cannot use your silencers, and other NFA items, to ensure you’re not violating any gun laws while enjoying your NFA weapons. Check out this detailed guide to be up-to-date on regulations.

www.silencershop.com

Law enforcement agents are not good sources of the law. They could misunderstand enforcement and charging policy vs. what the law actually says. Any person taking exclusive control of an NFA item for purposes of using it without the responsible person present is by definition committing a crime, as is the responsible person if they allow it. When it comes to personal use, I am aware of nothing in statutes or regulations permitting someone other than a responsible person to have exclusive control of NFA items outside the presence of the responsible person.

I would suspect that the whole, "be on the same property" is so that the kid doesn't get busted for speeding and then caught with firearms. The "crime" stays hidden and on private property where the possibility of law enforcement is minimal.

A what if hypothetical:

What if you allow a responsible but an unauthorized person to have possession, the person accidentally shoots someone with the suppressed rifle from your property, emergency responders are called, the victim gets nasty, politics get involved, and the prosecuting authority wants to make an example of "illegally possessed scary things?"

If you are OK with risking the above, that is one thing. But, if you wouldn't risk your family and fortune, even if the risk is very, very, very small, you'd want to know. Of course, loaning anyone a firearm carries with it the possibility of getting sued for "negligent entrustment."

I hate to be "that guy" but knowledge is power. It just might change someone's mind...

Legal disclaimer applies. Get your own lawyer for your situation and your own protection. This is not legal advice. At best, the above is information that you can discuss with your own lawyer.

Well said, especially that people should know the rules, even if they choose to take a risk. I’m a recovering attorney, and I have drafted very complicated trusts, but I still chose to hire an attorney to create - and more importantly, advise me on the operation of same. But I’m paranoid.

 

[hereinaz]

Well said, especially that people should know the rules, even if they choose to take a risk. I’m a recovering attorney, and I have drafted very complicated trusts, but I still chose to hire an attorney to create - and more importantly, advise me on the operation of same. But I’m paranoid.

Paranoia is the hallmark of a good attorney, lol, gotta spot the potential problems. Clients get to choose their risk tolerance, but a smart one wants to know the risks.

I tried to get out but got sucked back into it, lol. Person who represents themselves has a fool for a client. No truer words.

 

[wind gypsy]

Been thinking about this topic today as I considered if my girls would have to hunt non-suppressed without me before being legal adults. It just seems like most suppressor owners would be in trouble if someone in a position of authority wanted to **** them over in relation to how they control said suppressors. I’ve just never heard about such a thing being an issue.

 

[hereinaz]

Been thinking about this topic today as I considered if my girls would have to hunt non-suppressed without me before being legal adults. It just seems like most suppressor owners would be in trouble if someone in a position of authority wanted to **** them over in relation to how they control said suppressors. I’ve just never heard about such a thing being an issue.

They can roll up a citizen for anything. I have read analysis where there are legitimately dozens of laws each of us are breaking every day.

I haven’t heard either. Feds aren’t out there checking stamps. I have never been stopped about a suppressor at a range or anything. Barely seen game wardens.

I just like to set the record straight.

Sucks laws are what they are.

I was a trust attorney. Now a criminal law attorney. I love quiet guns and 2A. I have a unique perspective on this issue…

 

[Nine Banger]

I bought a used one once and regret it. No problems. In hindsight I don't remember why I chose used over new.

For the amount of trouble it is to get a suppressor, why bother with risk?

In addition to wear/tear and unknown round count there may be baffle strikes from subsonic reloading experiments or on the other end there could be issues from over-pressure adventures.

 

[Vaultman]

Been thinking about this topic today as I considered if my girls would have to hunt non-suppressed without me before being legal adults. It just seems like most suppressor owners would be in trouble if someone in a position of authority wanted to **** them over in relation to how they control said suppressors. I’ve just never heard about such a thing being an issue.

Seems crazy right... you can let a youth cary a firearm to hunt. That is the deadly part. But you cannot let them cary a suppressor to assist that deadly item in not damaging their ears as bad for the rest of their life.

 

[hereinaz]

Seems crazy right... you can let a youth cary a firearm to hunt. That is the deadly part. But you cannot let them cary a suppressor to assist that deadly item in not damaging their ears as bad for the rest of their life.

Preach it! Amen! It’s so incredibly dumb.

Happy Thanksgiving! And, thank goodness for the Second Amendment or we would be screwed.