Quick question...Wash to Oregon transfers.

[wired]

You certainly can but a non licensee (C&R is a licensee for c&r )cant do it at the post office. You can do it by UPS but their regs say you have to ship overnight ($$$$).

Only way to ship a handgun usps is through a dealer who has to enter it into his bound books and send it to a licensed dealer who then has to run it through his bound books.

 

[uberguy]

Im not dodging anything. You are just ignoring federal dealer requirements. State law is only a small part of what a dealer has to contend with. If a dealer takes in a gun for transfer he has to enter it in to his bound books. If the purchaser/transferee/tradee cannot pass the BGC/4473 requirements the dealer has to run a 4473 to return it to the original owner. The state doesnt say that. If the original owner fails the BGC the dealer cannot return it to him. A person who is not legally entitled to own a gun does not retain ownership per se and does certainly not get possession back from the dealer lest the dealer lose his federal license. I see what you're saying but a prohibited person cannot own a firearm so "ownership" isnt quite correct for terminology. Perhaps the original owner can find another transferee to complete the transaction but it will not get returned to the original owner legally.

I'm not ignoring anything.

You said and I quote:
"Just like any other dealer purchased pistol. You are not buying from the person. You are "buying" from the dealer that handles the transaction."
AND
"The problem here is that if you are going from out of individual to a dealer in his state ( for shipping purposes ) who then sends it to a dealer in the receivers state it is no longer a private party transfer. It is a dealer to dealer transfer and the receiver ends up paying tax. "

Which was proven untrue.
You've contributed to more confusion on this than help to the OP.

I said in my first reply in this thread:And FFLs don't get to keep it, under the circumstances of a prospective buyer failing a BG check but the seller is not a prohibited person."
Yet you persist in falsely claiming I said otherwise. I did not.

 

[The Heretic]

You certainly can but a non licensee (C&R is a licensee for c&r )cant do it at the post office. You can do it by UPS but their regs say you have to ship overnight ($$$$).

Only way to ship a handgun usps is through a dealer who has to enter it into his bound books and send it to a licensed dealer who then has to run it through his bound books.

Yes, for handguns, long guns can be shipped via USPS. I have done it.

 

[The Heretic]

just to provide a reference for the whole thread:

May a licensee sell a firearm to a nonlicensee who is a resident of another State? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

May a licensee transfer a firearm to a nonlicensed individual who does not appear in person at the licensed premises? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

 

[wired]

Which was proven untrue.

And exactly how was that proven untrue? Because your dealer didnt charge you tax? Mine does and trust me we had a lot of heated words while on the phone with the state guy. I even had the guy in Oregon send me a "bill of trade" but since he had sent it from his dealer the state said it was a out of state dealer to dealer transfer and not a trade because it originated at a dealer. Your mileage may vary but do not go under the assumption that you can get a dealer to send anything and not get hammered with Washington state sales tax if you arent doing it face to face.

 

[wired]

Yes, for handguns, long guns can be shipped via USPS. I have done it.

As have I with pistols and long guns . Keep in mind many dealers are schmucks and will not do private party transfers from non licensees no matter what supporting documentation you send them. I would do it that way every time but the UPS fees are outrageous. I sold a handgun to a guy ( his dealer ) in Florida about 9 months ago. Cost me $103 to ship it. If I had gone through my dealer it would have cost me $30 to cover his fees but the actual shipping cost would have been $12.65.

If I had shipped it by my dealer and there were issues the process works like this

1. I give it to my dealer who then enters it into his bound books .
2. He requests a copy of the receiving dealer's FFL
3. He gets a copy of the FFL from the receiving dealer.
4. He enters the disposition change into his bound books.
5. He files the dealers FFL
6. He mails the gun to the receiving licensee with a copy of his FFL
7. The receiving licensee enters the gun into his bound books
8. The buyer/trader then fills out a 4473
9. IF he passes the BGC the dealer then changes disposition in his bound books and transfers the gun to the buyer, files the 4473 and any requisite state paperwork
10. If he doesnt pass the BGC the dealer contacts my dealer since thats who actually sent it to him . My dealer then authorizes a COD return. The other dealer then changes disposition in his bound books returning the gun to the originating dealer.
11. Lets say that 30 years ago I beat my lying, cheating , stealing ex wife to a bloody pulp. Sure, she deserved it and I should have probably just let her walk away but the paperwork just made it through the system. Suddenly I'm a prohibited person. ( hypothetical of course )
12. My dealer calls me up and I go down there to pick my gun up. I expect to pay the return shipping costs . I do.
13. He enters the gun into his bound books from the other dealer.
14. Before he can return it to me I have to fill out a 4473 because thats what federal law says has to happen.
15. Lo and behold I fail the BGC. The dealer cannot return it to me.

What now?

 

[The Heretic]

Agreed. Personally I would just as soon pay the FFL to handle it for me, but that is my preference, not the law and I am trying to let people know what they can do, not guess what they want or should do.

The only time I personally shipped a gun to anybody it was to an FFL who bought a $3K rifle from me and he told me how to do it, and I was cheap at the time so I did it thru USPS.

 

[wired]

Oh, and if I call my buddy up and tell him to come on down and transfer this thing so I can get it back I, the dealer and he are now complicit in a straw man purchase.

 

[uberguy]

And exactly how was that proven untrue? Because your dealer didnt charge you tax? Mine does and trust me we had a lot of heated words while on the phone with the state guy. I even had the guy in Oregon send me a "bill of trade" but since he had sent it from his dealer the state said it was a out of state dealer to dealer transfer and not a trade because it originated at a dealer.

Read the official policy from the WA State Dept. of Revenue I provided earlier, with the excerpt stating policy regarding firearms taxes. The DOR are the authoritative reference in WA. State.

It says "Must a licensed dealer facilitating the transfer of a firearm between unlicensed persons collect sales tax or use tax from the transferee?
No. An in-state firearms dealer is not required to collect sales tax or use tax when a firearm is transferred between unlicensed parties."

Which is proof what you claimed is wrong.

Taxes are collected by an FFL on gun transfers only when they or another licensed dealer are the legal seller. Not on private (unlicensed) persons (parties).

It's not 'my dealer' it's state law and DOR policy.
Man you don't know when to quit.

 

[wired]

A transfer from an out of state ffl holder is NOT a transfer from an unlicensed party. If your dealer receives a gun from someone elses dealer in another state he is receiving it from a licensee NOT a private party. Thats what goes into his books. The person sending it through his dealers gets no mention.

I know of two dealers in Washington that went out of business for not charging sales tax on transfers for years. One ended up with a $40,000 tax bill once the auditing was done. That $10 he charged for transfers didnt do it. While everything you are stating is true for in state private party transfers once you get into interstate deals with each party using an ffl holder its not as cut and dry.

 

[uberguy]

No, that's wrong.
A bill of sale from the other private party serves as evidence it's a private party transaction. Nothing more is required. Interpret the law as you wish. Under your (mistaken) reading an in-state transfer would be taxable just the same. It's not.

There is nothing that states a legal party transfer MUST BE IN PERSON. Show us a credible source, if you assert this to be the law. So far, you shared nothing except an opinion.

 

[wired]

It doesnt have to be in person but if it is sent through a dealer that is the party doing the transfer. In typical Washington state legal malfeasance when they wrote the law they didnt take some possible exceptions to the face to face transfer thing. After an hour long session with the state tax guy at my dealers shop I understand. You don't and as a lay person there is no downside for you if you get it wrong.. I tried the receipt trick. That didnt work. Hopefully it never bites your dealer in the @ss.

If I can ever get my wife convinced to sell this taj mahal and move out of city limits where I can get my 02/07 back I will charge sales tax on dealer to dealer transfers. I will also not return a gun to anyone that fails a BGC. They can sue if they want.

 

[uberguy]

I've done this with multiple WA. FFL shops.
I said the use-tax applies to the buyer, it's just not a requirement the FFL collect it. I have, in order to avoid this debate on occasion asked private sellers from GunBroker to ship it directly to one of my local FFLs vs. FFL to FFL, because some don't apply the law correctly.
Under your scenario, even a trade, assume for simplicity even value trade between unlicensed traders would require full fair market value tax assessed and charged by an FFL. It's not.
The seller's FFL is not selling the gun, they are transferring it.

 

[wired]

Use tax applies to the buyer? That is so wrong its not even funny. Only time it applies is if you buy something out of state. You are supposed to pay sales tax on it. If a dealer transfers something to you that is the same as a sale and the dealers is required to collect sales tax and can be audited and heavily fined if he does not. Exception being private transfers as outlined in the RCW. On face to face transfers at a dealer or even when a person sends a gun to a dealer directly thats one thing. Dealer to dealer is another and that is not addressed directly in the state law.

 

[DirectDrive]

I know of two dealers in Washington that went out of business for not charging sales tax on transfers for years.

I know of two of these clowns as well.
Do stupid things, win stupid prizes.

 

[nextgenar]

And all this is exactly why I won't attempt to buy or sell anything out of state, it's enough of a royal pain in the rear with the background bs to buy and sell privately in state. And so I guess the Demoncraps that drafted these stupid laws accomplished what they wanted to do, they made it so convoluted and distorted to do any kind of buying and selling that people like me just give up buying and selling privately.

 

[The Heretic]

And all this is exactly why I won't attempt to buy or sell anything out of state, it's enough of a royal pain in the rear with the background bs to buy and sell privately in state. And so I guess the Demoncraps that drafted these stupid laws accomplished what they wanted to do, they made it so convoluted and distorted to do any kind of buying and selling that people like me just give up buying and selling privately.

I've had no problems buying from people in Vancouver. I once went to Vancouver to buy a rifle and of course the guy with the revolver had to come here. It went as well as any other purchase, except for the traffic going thru Portland.

 

[DirectDrive]

If I'm a n00b reading this thread, I wouldn't know whether to ***k, fight or hold the light concerning cross-state handgun transfers.

So in another effort to KISS, I just called my FFL on the WA sales tax issue for private handgun transfers from out of state to a WA buyer.
The answer...
If the out of state private seller includes a copy of valid ID like a DL, then the WA FFL does not collect sales tax.

Conspiracy theorists, your turn....

BTW, may also require an invoice, with S/N from the private party.

I would file this under "Dealer Quirks" because my dealer does not require it.

 

[uberguy]

When a firearm is sent to an in-state FFL, with a properly written bill of sale from a private party, DOL has nothing to indicate it was anything except a private party sale. Period.

Unless the receiving FFL mistakenly records it as a dealer sale, when it truthfully was not. If FFLs are being harassed by the DOR on this, they should consider a class action suite.

Under your scenario, when a seller provides a firearm to a shipper, they have 'transferred' it to UPS/FEDX (unlicensed) requiring a BGC. Doesn't work that way. The seller's FFL is not doing a background check, they are simply shipping the gun. The receiving FFL are doing the legal transfer, between private parties, not the shipping FFL.

This whole thing could be fixed if NICS were made available to private sellers to run background checks. Gun owners should demand this, wherever 'universal background checks' are enacted.

 

[uberguy]

I would file this under "Dealer Quirks" because my dealer does not require it.

Dealers are quirky, on private transfers. One I've dealt with charges less for an in-person private transfer and more for an out-of-state private transfer. I simply avoid them. Quirks...