The Short Answer: Suppressors and other NFA items remain regulated under the National Firearms Act. While the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) eliminated the $200 transfer tax, registration and compliance requirements continue. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed briefs in federal court supporting the constitutionality of these provisions, signaling that changes will not occur through executive action alone.
What the One Big Beautiful Bill Act Changed
Signed into law on July 4, 2025, the OBBBA eliminated the $200 excise tax on several categories of firearms, including suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs), and firearms classified as “Any Other Weapon” (AOW).
Key changes under the law:
- Transfer tax for suppressors and silencers reduced to $0
- SBRs and SBSs now transfer without tax
- AOW category firearms included in the $0 tax structure
This adjustment removed a financial barrier that had existed since 1934, when the $200 tax was
first imposed. However, registration requirements—including Form 4 submissions, fingerprinting,
and ATF approval—remain in place.
Here is what changed under the new federal law:
- The transfer tax and tax stamp requirement dropped from $200 to $0 for firearm suppressors and silencers
- Short-barreled rifles (SBRs) and short-barrel rifles are now $0 to transfer
- Short-barreled shotguns face no transfer tax
- AOW category firearms are included in the $0 tax structure
This is a significant policy change welcomed by many in the firearms community. The $200 tax stamp, originally set in 1934, would be worth nearly $5,000 in today’s dollars. Removing this financial barrier opens access to these firearms for many law-abiding citizens who previously could not justify the cost.
However, the registration and transfer requirements under the National Firearms Act technically remain in place. Gun owners must still submit Form 4s, provide fingerprints, and register these items with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
What Could Happen to Registration When the Tax is Eliminated
The letter cites a 1937 Supreme Court decision, Sonzinsky v. United States, in which the Court upheld the National Firearms Act’s registration provisions as constitutional. At the time, the Court reasoned that registration requirements were “supportable as in aid” of Congress’s taxing power under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
Rep. Clyde and his cosigners suggest that the elimination of the $200 excise tax raises new constitutional questions:
- Registration historically functioned to track tax payments on each firearm by serial number
- The ATF’s tax stamp reflected both the serial number and the amount paid
- Criminal provisions under the NFA were tied to failure to pay or register tax payment
- With no tax to collect, they suggest the original constitutional basis for registration may no longer apply
The letter emphasizes that taxation and registration were “inseparably linked.” From this perspective, continuing registration requirements without the corresponding tax could be seen as inconsistent with the original framework. During the reconciliation process, this interpretation was discussed in relation to the Byrd Rule and Senate parliamentarian debates, with supporters maintaining that Congressional intent was to remove both the tax and the associated regulatory requirements on NFA items.
What the Letter Asks the DOJ to Do
Rep. Clyde’s letter is a formal request backed by more than 30 Republican House members who supported and participated in drafting Section 70436 of the OBBBA.
The letter makes several direct asks:
- Adopt the position that transfer and registration requirements cannot stand without the corresponding excise tax
- Advance this interpretation in all ongoing litigation challenging NFA provisions
- Defend Congressional intent, as the drafters of this legislation have stated it
The letter framed this as an opportunity for the Trump administration to support the Second Amendment. Rep. Clyde’s office issued a press release emphasizing that the drafters’ intent was clear: eliminating the tax should eliminate the registration burden.
How DOJ Responded: Defending NFA Requirements
The Lawsuit
Following the passage of the OBBBA, the Silencer Shop Foundation and other plaintiffs filed suit against the ATF. The case, Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, is a constitutional challenge to the remaining NFA requirements for suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, and AOWs. Plaintiffs suggest that because Congress eliminated the taxes for these items, the remaining requirements for each firearm in these categories are no longer supported by any constitutional power. The case focuses specifically on short-barreled firearm regulations and whether they can survive without the underlying tax.
DOJ’s Constitutional Arguments
The DOJ filed a brief defending the law’s constitutionality. The Department suggests that the remaining NFA requirements are still supported under three sources of congressional authority:
- Taxing Power: The transfer tax on individuals is gone, but the Special Occupational Tax on businesses that manufacture, distribute, or deal in NFA firearms remains intact, including those dealing in short-barrel rifle sales. DOJ suggests the regulatory framework supports enforcement of these business taxes.
- Commerce Clause: The NFA regulates manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and purchasers as they participate in an interstate firearms market.
- Necessary and Proper Clause: The regulated activities substantially affect interstate commerce, giving Congress authority to maintain the requirements.
DOJ’s Second Amendment Position
DOJ also pushed back on Second Amendment claims. The Department suggests the Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment does not protect short-barreled shotguns, a holding that applies equally to SBRs and at least some AOWs. The same logic extends to items like the machine gun and destructive device categories, which remain fully regulated.
The Fifth Circuit has already held that NFA regulations on suppressors are presumptively lawful. In short, the government believes these specific items fall outside constitutional protection. DOJ added, however, that the analysis would be different if similar restrictions applied to ordinary pistols and rifles.
What Comes Next for Suppressors and Other NFA Items?
When the OBBBA passed, there was optimism that removing the tax would lead to removing registration. The Hearing Protection Act, which would have reclassified the firearm silencer as a standard firearm accessory rather than an NFA item, never passed Congress despite years of effort. Many hoped the OBBBA and a favorable DOJ interpretation could achieve similar results through a different path.
Organizations like the American Suppressor Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, National Rifle Association, and Second Amendment Foundation have long advocated for easing restrictions. Their argument centers on hearing protection and safety. Suppressors reduce muzzle blast and protect hearing for shooters and bystanders. Treating them as heavily regulated items has always seemed subject to ongoing policy debate to law-abiding gun owners who simply want to protect their ears.
But DOJ has taken a different position, which shapes the current outlook. The situation now is:
- Executive Action: Closed. DOJ has taken its position defending registration.
- Courts: Now the main avenue. The case is in the Northern District of Texas (Fifth Circuit). Plaintiffs have a solid textual argument, but DOJ has backup constitutional theories and favorable precedent. Outcomes are not guaranteed.
- Congress: Would require new legislation. Background check and paperwork requirements remain in effect until lawmakers act, and the political will for another NFA-related bill is uncertain.
In short, while the elimination of the transfer tax marked a significant shift in federal firearms policy, broader changes to NFA registration requirements are unlikely to occur in the near term without additional action by Congress or the courts.
Stay Compliant with FastBound: Simplifying Your FFL Operations
As NFA regulations continue to evolve, maintaining accurate records becomes more important than ever. Whether registration requirements change or stay in place, FFLs need reliable systems to navigate regulatory uncertainty with confidence.
FastBound Provides:
- Fully ATF-compliant Electronic A&D Bound Book
- Electronic 4473 with built-in validation
- Audit Trail tracking for every edit, user, and entry
- Automatic daily backups and secure cloud storage
- Legal defense through FFLGuard is included with all paid plans
- Unlimited users and bound books at no extra cost
Start a free trial today and see how FastBound can support your FFL operations.
Ready to See How FastBound Can Streamline Your Compliance Efforts?
Join thousands of FFLs who trust FastBound to keep them protected and compliant.
Try for Free!