What's the deal with "buyer pays transfer fees"?

[bmtm09]

Some used car salesmen would do that. Not all of them. I've known several who were fine people. You're not profiling, are you?

What color was the car?

 

[No_Regerts]

Would a buyer rather pay me 500 cash and be able to charge a transfer to a card, or pay 530? Its a small amount, but allows to distribute some cost.

 

[bmtm09]

at the end of the day....Do you go into Walmart and say I don't want to pay what your asking....No ...you see the price you either agree or dont you either buy or dont.

 

[Cardoff]

To the OP, I hear ya and ive been on both sides of the coin. As a seller I want to get as much adms I can out of what I sell so generally ill just mark up my price with an included transfer fee factored in. the average is around 25 + $10 background fee. As a buyer, shoot I dont wanna pay more than the asking price. I find it fair in most cases to at least split it in half but its really up to whoever

Thank you. I thought I might be the only one to think this way.

 

[Cardoff]

My view of it is that it's up to the buyer to decide where they want to do the transfer. I have included the transfer in my price before, but my requirement then is to meet at my FFL, which folks often don't want to do, and the FFL they choose is sometimes more expensive.

I've sold guns with and without the transfer/BGC included, it doesn't seem to matter how I list them, they sell either way. It's an unfortunate part of the process now. I'd rather complain to the state morons who put this law in place rather than complain about sellers on this forum, just my 2 cents.

I don't mean to complain. Just trying to understand how this became the standard, cuz I didn't get it. I'm starting to see the sellers point of view.

 

[bmtm09]

I don't mean to complain. Just trying to understand how this became the standard, cuz I didn't get it. I'm starting to see the sellers point of view.

I guess simply...why do I want to pay to sell something???

 

[Cardoff]

Call me daft, but I really don't get where you're coming from. Tell me of any shop in Oregon or Washington where you can buy a gun and you do not have to pay a transfer fee.
There's nothing used car salesman-like about it. The seller is being up front. A used car salesman would bury the fee in the cost of the transaction and then charge you the same transaction and transfer fee a second time.
The transfer fee is a service that the FFL charges for enabling you to engage in the sale legally. If you pay it, the money never gets into the seller's hands.

Actually, lots of them. I've had that fee thrown in at shops and shows alike.

 

[Cardoff]

Some used car salesmen would do that. Not all of them. I've known several who were fine people. You're not profiling, are you?

You are so right Sir, I was and shouldn't have. My apologies.

 

[Flopsweat]

You are so right Sir, I was and shouldn't have. My apologies.

I was more having fun than taking offense. Welcome to NWFA and please stick around.

 

[F2CMaDMaXX]

I would also recommend remembering that this isn't registration (although some would technically call it it a form of that) but a back ground check.

It doesn't do anything to transfer, or change the weapons status with any 'owner' - As someone already pointed out, it's a check on the buyer (and fees can vary) if the check fails, they can't sell the gun to them and now they're down whatever the fee was.

I would suggest it's probably never a good idea for the seller to cover the BGC, too much risk of losing money.

 

[Cardoff]

The background check is on the buyer, not the seller. Just like buying at a dealer, I'd expect to pay the background check.

What if the buyer does not pass the background check? I would not want to be a seller who just paid for someone's background check and have them delayed or denied

Also a good point.

 

[Cardoff]

I would also recommend remembering that this isn't registration (although some would technically it it a form of that) but a back ground check.

It doesn't do anything to transfer, or change the weapons status with any 'owner' - As someone already pointed out, it's a check on the buyer (and fees can vary) if the check fails, they can't sell the gun to them and now they're down whatever the fee was.

I would suggest it's probably never a good idea for the seller to cover the BGC, too much risk of losing money.

Another good point. This is really what I was looking for. Another perspective. Thanks all to those who have and will chime in.

 

[Cardoff]

I was more having fun than taking offense. Welcome to NWFA and please stick around.

Thanks and I'm gonna.

 

[Joe13]

Seems like it's been hashed out but I'm also on the 'buyers burden' side.

I factor it into my buying costs like I would at a retail store or tax.

 

[Hun Shooter]

Here's my question: why do so many classifieds say "buyer pays transfer fees"? I'm a simple man so perhaps I just don't understand. However, it seems to me that if the gun is registered in the owners name, it would be their burden to have it removed from their name. Or at least a 50/50 split.

Just looking for some insight as to why that seems to be the standard?

Perhaps because when you sell a gun you don't have to pay a fee

Or because you already paid a fee when you bought the gun, why would you want to pay it again?

 

[Mikej]

The background check is on the buyer, not the seller. Just like buying at a dealer, I'd expect to pay the background check.

What if the buyer does not pass the background check? I would not want to be a seller who just paid for someone's background check and have them delayed or denied

You win @bolus. Most likes of all responses so far !

I guess simply...why do I want to pay to sell something???

^ This ^

 

[Member 5605]

Here's my question: why do so many classifieds say "buyer pays transfer fees"? I'm a simple man so perhaps I just don't understand. However, it seems to me that if the gun is registered in the owners name, it would be their burden to have it removed from their name. Or at least a 50/50 split.

Just looking for some insight as to why that seems to be the standard?

Some people follow rank and file and don't buck the system.

 

[kilimanjaro]

Your not transferring title to another in the manner of a car, you are merely present at the FFL while the buyer's background is checked and clearance to proceed with the purchase is obtained. It's up to the buyer to present himself in good faith and with a clear background, he needs to pay the fee for his compliance with the law.

I've seen a buddy 'rebate' half the cost of the fee, but the buyer still paid for it at the counter. He didn't want to be stuck for it.

 

[mjbskwim]

Sounds like a negotiation tactic to me.

 

[Joe13]

Well, you can buy my gun for $500 and you pay the fees or you can buy it for $535 and I'll pay the fees...

A bit rediulous IMO.

If you don't like it, as someone else said, don't buy it...