SilencerTalk

Get your Trust fixed ASAP, if not the Trust Trolls will be dancing at the alter of your invalid SBR owing Trust.

This spread like the wildfire i knew it'd be.........

How did you prepare your trust? Willmaker, etc.. or a Lawyer?

How long have you had the trust.. The laws in your state might have changed regarding trust and that might be why its invalid..

Oh I did it will willmaker. I had never seen anything such as a the gun trust lawer's or anything like that. In my state the vast majority of people I have spoken too have no idea a NFA weapon is even legal, let alone how to make a trust for one. I have had it I think about a year and a half, I don't remember off the top of my head. I am having it looked at now by a competent lawyer.

i would be very interested in knowing what part is incorrect.

Oh shit.....................I can see the fire from the Trust Trolls torches from here............

Well for now I feel okay about mine. I can't even use willmaker in Louisiana.

I have reviewed many self created trusts from Willmaker (Quicken) and Legal Zoom.
The most common problems include
1) forgetting to date the document
2) listing yourself as the beneficiary
3) copying a trust online or from a friend and using a trust for a different state other than the one you live in; and
4) forgetting signatures in the witness and notary sections

Many trusts are valid but do not accomplish what the individuals were trying to do when creating them (other than purchase the NFA firearms). A NFA Trust or other type of trust is a very powerful document and can be used to help your and your family deal with unforeseen circumstances such as disability or death.

Although we will all die, we do not know when or who will survive us. What we do know is that a family member or friend will be the person who steps forward to help us deal with these issues. The last thing any of us would want is to have that unsuspecting person deal with a quicken trust which gives them no guidance on what is proper or what they should do to properly deal with the NFA or other firearms in the trust. Most of us reading this board know that there are special issues with silencers and their transfer and even how to identify them.

Lets say you have a SBR sitting next to an AR15. Your unsuspecting relative or friend would probably take more precautions with the AR15 than with a SBR.

Another common problem with Quicken trusts is that they end 5 days after your death. Once the trust ends, the trustee does not exist and there is no one authorized to be in possession of the firearm. Unlike an individual transfer, where there is an exception for a Personal representative, there is no exception for an item inside a trust or corporation

This is only one of the problems with a generic trust.

If you use a generic trust please take the time to properly identify and advise those people in the future (who cannot be identified at this time) with the information they will need to keep themselves and others in your family out of trouble because of an improper transfer, possession of a title II firearm, or early termination of the trust.

Hey Secoastnh, when you actually learn how to read and interpret the law, as well as, figure out how to pick up a phone call and ask questions, instead of making up shit, let me know.

From the newly amended <a href=http://www.atf.gov/press/2009press/042209nfa_handbook-updated.htm">NFA Handbook</a>, Section 9.4.2.2:

"ATF requires that the Form 4 or Form 5 include documentation evidencing the existence of the entity. <u>This documentation would include, without limitation</u>, partnership agreements, articles of incorporation, corporate registration, <b><u>a complete copy of the declaration of trust, schedules or attachments referenced in the trust, etc</b></u>. "

With regards to validity, I never said the BATFE does not look at a trust and determine if it is valid. What I said is that they are not responsible and you CANNOT rely on the BATFE's determinations of validity. I have posted on numerous occasions about trusts that I have seen that the BATFE bounced for being invalid. I have also seen, and as seems to be the case here, that the BATFE has approved invalid trusts, without knowing they were invalid.

joshuap is correct, you must send in a full trust as well as attachments. Many people originally sent in a Certificate of trust as was recommened on many sites in the past. The ATF will no longer accept this and will reject the transfer even if they accepted it in the past. The good news is this does not mean your trust is invalid, it just means you did not send them the correct documents with your application to manufacture or purchase.

ATF appears to do a cursory review of the documents for compliance with state law, but their approval does not mean you have a valid or good trust. Just like their approval of a corporation does not mean it is or will remain valid.

Well this has certainly been an educational thread.

Not quite educational enough for me to bypass a lawyer and setup an NFA trust all by myself though

I'm in the bizarre position of being credit rich but cash poor. Don't ask. I won't tell.

Anyway, I would love to know if this is a case where lawyers DON'T band together to fight the existence of the NFA + GCA. All this complexity seems so unnecessary. It would be better for people to own as individuals without having to get an appointment with some CLEO who has NO OBLIGATION to sign unless the State says so if there are no reasons not to sign.

The prohibited persons list is the same for Title II and Title I firearms.

I'm not quite ready to subscribe to any conspiracy theories. But if the national instant check system (NICS) which was mandated by the Brady Crime Bill (I don't care what the actual name of the bill was) is faulty enough that you can't just 4473 or just pay the darn tax and be done with it on a Title II firearm, what good is it?

The "making" tax is even more insane. You really have to stretch the Interstate Commerce Clause to justify that tax. You want to sell it to an out of state resident? OK. Fine. Charge some sort of tariff or excise tax. But a making tax? Come on!

I've been referred to a lawyer at Prince Law about setting up an NFA trust. I wouldn't consider the expense normally. But I plan to do Form-1 stuff frequently enough that I think it *might* be worth the hassle to setup the trust rather than just get the CLEO signature and fingerprints. Photos are no problem. I can embed those into a PDF file easily.

I would probably utilize some steganography to insult the BATFE while I was at it. But that's another issue.

Anyway, if the price is right and the appropriate level of flexibility is there, I will probably get an NFA trust so I have less dancing to do. I just wish I could have a SOT 2. It would be nice if there was a C&R equivalent for Form-1 people to make their own cans for personal use without having to cough up $200 for each one.

I have done six transfers without providing my trust document to the BATFE. The first was in May of 2008 the last two were approved in January 2009. I provided a Certification of Trustee and an inventory with the first transfer and only the certification of trustee with the subsequent transfers.

Joshuap has claimed that the BAFTE required the submission of the trust document during the time that these transfers were made. Crediting joshuap with being “rightâ€

Here is one of my favorites:

On November 14, 2007 Joshuap wrote

“Another issue, that I plan to write an article on when I get time, is whether the BATFE is violating the law by determining the validity of trusts. By determining a trust's validity, they are practicing law without a license. I have been told that Sandra Snook is in charge of the determination and, to my knowledge, she has never been to law school, nor obtained a Juris Doctorate. Thus, the BATFE could be in REAL deep water doing such...â€

[quote="seacoastnh"]Here is one of my favorites:

On November 14, 2007 Joshuap wrote

“Another issue, that I plan to write an article on when I get time, is whether the BATFE is violating the law by determining the validity of trusts. By determining a trust's validity, they are practicing law without a license. I have been told that Sandra Snook is in charge of the determination and, to my knowledge, she has never been to law school, nor obtained a Juris Doctorate. Thus, the BATFE could be in REAL deep water doing such...â€

Every time a disability claim, Medicaid Claim, a police investigation, or ATF determination is made a government official is practicing law without a license. The UPL statutes in most states are designed to keep individuals from practicing law without a license. They would keep your local gun store from telling you how to use quicken or typing in the information for you but not keep the ATF from reviewing a checklist to determine if the requirements of your state have been complied with.

[quote="Diomed"][quote="seacoastnh"]Here is one of my favorites:

On November 14, 2007 Joshuap wrote

“Another issue, that I plan to write an article on when I get time, is whether the BATFE is violating the law by determining the validity of trusts. By determining a trust's validity, they are practicing law without a license. I have been told that Sandra Snook is in charge of the determination and, to my knowledge, she has never been to law school, nor obtained a Juris Doctorate. Thus, the BATFE could be in REAL deep water doing such...â€

[quote="Diomed"][quote="seacoastnh"]Here is one of my favorites:

On November 14, 2007 Joshuap wrote

“Another issue, that I plan to write an article on when I get time, is whether the BATFE is violating the law by determining the validity of trusts. By determining a trust's validity, they are practicing law without a license. I have been told that Sandra Snook is in charge of the determination and, to my knowledge, she has never been to law school, nor obtained a Juris Doctorate. Thus, the BATFE could be in REAL deep water doing such...â€

Well, lets start with reading the 10th Amendment. The US Gov't only has the powers that are enumerated and all other powers are retained by the state and/or citizens. Trust law is not an enumerated power of the US Gov't. Even if it was federal, the BATFE has not been given a Congressional mandate to determine the validity of trusts. Although Federal employees cannot generally be held liable for state crimes, the exception is where they are acting absent authority, such as where that employee/agency does not have a congressional mandate. Lastly, there is a reason that the US Supreme Court's decision can be overturned by a state's Supreme Court where there is a question of state law. The state is the ultimate authority for interpreting its laws. And there has been case law, I remember one with the FDA, where the Court said that the FDA cannot interpret a state's determination on whether to limit its citizen's access to certain drugs that the FDA had approved. (The state had limited access to a specifically named drug and the FDA was interpreting it to mean that a generic brand was ok). Similarly, the BATFE is interpreting a state's laws. The reason for denying a federal agency the right to determine the validity is that the state, and only the state, should interpret its laws. If it were the other way around, the BATFE could deny all trusts even though they would be upheld by the courts in the state.

I love how when you are proven wrong, then you jump around to other issues and facts. I stated originally that Mr. Howard said that the entire trust had to be submitted and that was also confirmed by Attorney Howell in Florida. Now, because it is actually in writing, your excuse is that it wasn't in writing before? Give me a break. And what about your statement twisting my words about the BATFE determining the validity of trusts?

You say the “BATFE is violating the law.â€

I have seen trust transfers rejected because the certificate of trust was used. I bet that the next time yours will be rejected also. Either way I would appreciate finding out if your next application is rejected or accepted.

I plan to mail the Form 4 tomorrow. I will let you know how it turns out. I will share the Certificate of Trust form with you if you are interested.

Sure, I would like to see it. While most certificates of trust do not name the beneficiaries yours may. It appears that often the reason for rejection of them is that they are unable to determine if the trust is valid without knowing who the beneficiaries will be. I reviewed two trusts today where the person creating the trust named himself as the grantor (settlor), the trustee, and the beneficiary. Obviously this does not make a valid trust and while ATF has approved many like this in the past, I have seen several rejected for this reason.

Both the current beneficiary and remainder beneficiary?

Yes

TheCowboyofKhaos,

Any new news on your trust?

The guntrustlawyers fixed my trust for me. Im sure they could explain it in more technical terms. I haven't had a chance to actually look at it, but I believe they re-wrote it and now it is on its way to me to get notorized. If I had known about them a few years ago I would have had them create my trust in the first place. I am going to re submit my paperwork to the atf and hopefully get my two sbr's that are in limbo approved.

[quote="Diomed"][quote="seacoastnh"]Here is one of my favorites:

On November 14, 2007 Joshuap wrote

“Another issue, that I plan to write an article on when I get time, is whether the BATFE is violating the law by determining the validity of trusts. By determining a trust's validity, they are practicing law without a license. I have been told that Sandra Snook is in charge of the determination and, to my knowledge, she has never been to law school, nor obtained a Juris Doctorate. Thus, the BATFE could be in REAL deep water doing such...â€