Dems Want 1000% Tax On Standard Mags, "Assault" Weapons etc

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,424
    Montgomery County
    For the second time, a group of D congress creatures are proposing a 1000% excise tax on guns with "a 10 round or greater fixed magazine" or "other features" ... and on standard capacity mags over 10 rounds. So, my '73 Winchesters definitely have a >10 fixed magazine, as do my Henry 22s, etc. Anway, gotta keep that Bloomberg cash flowing ahead of the next election, of course.

     

    BradMacc82

    Ultimate Member
    Industry Partner
    Aug 17, 2011
    26,177
    Plot twist, amend it to where the D's have to pay it from their own funds.
     

    cantstop

    Pentultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 10, 2012
    8,215
    MD
    I would do that for conditional carry anywhere in the US. No state restrictions on firearm purchases. And of course, no duty on oversize mags like the normal 100 rd AR mag.
     

    TheOriginalMexicanBob

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 2, 2017
    33,122
    Sun City West, AZ
    While they can pound sand it's probably more of a publicity stunt to show their fascist bona fides to their supporters and donors. They have to keep their faces in the news with elections coming next year.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,424
    Montgomery County
    They couldn’t get it passed when they controlled the house.

    Giant nothingburger
    Of course. It's a talking point so they can keep up the ability to tell their fundraiser attendees that they're trying Common Sense things to Make Everyone Safe, and the GOP wants people to die, especially children, especially Trans BIPOC children and their LGBTQ grandmothers.
     

    BradMacc82

    Ultimate Member
    Industry Partner
    Aug 17, 2011
    26,177
    Which brings up a valid question... what candy would you assign to each gun?
    At $550, the 43x MOS is what we have them stickered at, so it seemed fitting... ($549 if we're going to be specific)
     

    budman93

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 1, 2013
    5,284
    Frederick County
    I would do that for conditional carry anywhere in the US. No state restrictions on firearm purchases. And of course, no duty on oversize mags like the normal 100 rd AR mag.
    Really? you think that would be a good deal at 1000%? That would prevent most people from buying anything at all. A cheap handgun would cost over five thousand dollars.
     

    Chauchat

    Active Member
    Jan 16, 2014
    118
    In the free States
    For the second time, a group of D congress creatures are proposing a 1000% excise tax on guns with "a 10 round or greater fixed magazine" or "other features" ... and on standard capacity mags over 10 rounds. So, my '73 Winchesters definitely have a >10 fixed magazine, as do my Henry 22s, etc. Anway, gotta keep that Bloomberg cash flowing ahead of the next election, of course.

    Here it is Aug 18th and the text of 5135 has not been put up at https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5135/text. You just have to hand it to other fellow citizen who work for the Congress. Darn slackers. Anyway, I checked and this Beyer character is a piece of work. His district is right across the river from the D. C. I found his first bill from the 117th Congress and found a couple of other things not highlighted in recent news accounts.

    Here is the previous insanity. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8051/text?s=2&r=37 Chances are the current bill will be an identical rehash

    So what did I find? Well the text reads thusly.

    (a) In General.—Section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended—
    (1) by striking “There is hereby” and inserting the following:

    “(a) In General.—There is hereby”, and
    (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    “(b) Additional Tax On Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Devices And Semiautomatic Assault Weapons.—
    “(1) IN GENERAL.—In addition to the tax imposed by subsection (a), there is hereby imposed upon the sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any of the following articles a tax equivalent to 1,000 percent of the price for which so sold:
    “(A) Large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
    “(B) Semiautomatic assault weapons.

    Marvellous. BUT WAIT! There is more. They/He/It have to define not words but LEGAL TERMS. And the legal terms for this discussion is (b)(1)(B) Semiautomatic assault weapons. So it is blah blah blah of the normal Democrat wet dream going from "i" down to "x". I will focus on "ix".

    “(3) SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON.—For purposes of this subsection—

    “(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following:

    “(ix) Any combination of parts from which a firearm described in clauses (i) through (viii) can be assembled.

    Being the über-pessimist, regarding lawyers, politicians, and rabid goat f*****g dogs, I would guess triggers, hammers, strikers, bolt carrier groups, bolts, barrels, sights, springs, screws would fall into this handy little line.

    A trigger group from Bud's is twenty-eight bucks so that would be 28 plus 280 tax equals 308 bucks. Yippee!

    I wish I could be there when they come up with these ideas so I can know what kind of spray paint they have been huffing.
     
    Last edited:

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,603
    Messages
    7,288,054
    Members
    33,487
    Latest member
    Mikeymike88

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom