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

[Doctor_M]

So what is now a $20 magazine will cost $220
What is now a low end $300 semiauto shotgun or rifle will cost $3,300
and what is now a $2,000 high-ish end semiauto rifle will cost $22,000. So an decent AR will cost you the same as a low-end car.

Sure... bring it b!t@h!!!

 

[Chauchat]

It's worst than that. How about this little gem.

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

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

“(iv) A semiautomatic pistol that—

“(I) has the capacity to use a magazine that is not a fixed magazine, and

“(II) has any of the following:

“(aa) A threaded barrel.


Know of anyone that has a threaded barrel on their Glock, SIG, M1911, Beretta and more? So this means you will have to pay big bucks for what is a basically a nothing-burger today.

 

[JPG]

What happened to you can't tax a right?

Rights and Privileges, by Fred Foldvary, Ph.D. | Progress.org

The Supreme Court ruled that rights may not be taxed. Therefore the right to engage in labor should not be taxed.

www.progress.org

 

[DaemonAssassin]

What happened to you can't tax a right?

Rights and Privileges, by Fred Foldvary, Ph.D. | Progress.org

The Supreme Court ruled that rights may not be taxed. Therefore the right to engage in labor should not be taxed.

www.progress.org

NFA 1934?

 

[Occam]

What happened to you can't tax a right?

Rights and Privileges, by Fred Foldvary, Ph.D. | Progress.org

The Supreme Court ruled that rights may not be taxed. Therefore the right to engage in labor should not be taxed.

www.progress.org

They're not taxing the right, they're proposing to tax equipment, see? They will argue that, for example, you have the 1A-protected right to free speech, but you can't use that to avoid paying sales tax on the computer you use to write comments, the internet service you use to connect to where the comments are hosted, the electricity that's used to power that server farm, etc. No tax on your free speech. No tax on your freedom to assemble, but if you want to do it in a public venue that gets regular use by large groups, you get to pay a fee for taking it over. Or a fee (and taxes!) to rent a conference room, and so on.

They have no trouble pretending they're protecting your right to action, but that there's nothing wrong with an excise tax on specific products like lawnmowers, foreign booze, guns, tires, and such. They'll even pretend they're not doing this to impact gun owners or anything bad like that. It's completely disingenuous of course, but it will never get media coverage that examines it for what it really is.

 

[slsc98]

…

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.

Pretty positive they are huffing whatever is in the ink our tax dollars are printed with …!

 

[6-Pack]

My response to almost every new gun law in one word: Bruen

 

[Occam]

My response to almost every new gun law in one word: Bruen

Which, alas, doesn't do squat on new matters. You have to litigate the new issue while citing Bruen, and then have it chased through multiple layers/appeals before a place like MD (which is deliberately flouting the commonly understood implications of Bruen) will change anything. And even then, just on the particular matter at hand. Tomorrow? They do it again, which a tiny change or two.

 

[rbird7282]

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.

How sad


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chauchat]

Occam

You are a bit mistaken about the nature of the tax that was in 117th HR5081 and presumably in 118th HR5135. They are manufacturer's taxes. A manufacturer (a legal term) has a congressional license to manufacture (again a legal term) certain arms. If they declare they are selling them for 500 bucks the proposed bill would sock a thousand percent tax on the item before it even leaves the door. Of course no company ever pays a tax. The tax is passed to the next person down the line until last person ultimately pays the tax and that means the citizen. Us.

The thing is we would have to pay a sales tax on top of the tax Beyer and the other #%^$&#^&%^ want to impose.

Title 26-INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle D-Miscellaneous Excise Taxes
CHAPTER 32-MANUFACTURERS EXCISE TAXES
Subchapter D-Recreational Equipment
PART III-FIREARMS

As for the NFA of '34. It is a tax paid with a stamp on the transfer and is not rolled into the price of a silencer. In that case no matter what the price of the silencer by the manufacturer whether 500 bucks or 2000 bucks you are paying a fixed amount ($200.00) on the item.

 

[Occam]

Occam

You are a bit mistaken about the nature of the tax that was in 117th HR5081 and presumably in 118th HR5135. They are manufacturer's taxes. A manufacturer (a legal term) has a congressional license to manufacture (again a legal term) certain arms. If they declare they are selling them for 500 bucks the proposed bill would sock a thousand percent tax on the item before it even leaves the door. Of course no company ever pays a tax. The tax is passed to the next person down the line until last person ultimately pays the tax and that means the citizen. Us.

The thing is we would have to pay a sales tax on top of the tax Beyer and the other #%^$&#^&%^ want to impose.

Title 26-INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle D-Miscellaneous Excise Taxes
CHAPTER 32-MANUFACTURERS EXCISE TAXES
Subchapter D-Recreational Equipment
PART III-FIREARMS

As for the NFA of '34. It is a tax paid with a stamp on the transfer and is not rolled into the price of a silencer. In that case no matter what the price of the silencer by the manufacturer whether 500 bucks or 2000 bucks you are paying a fixed amount ($200.00) on the item.

I always appreciate detail and clarity. But my point, made with a rhetorically broad brush, is that the lefties will always find a way to explain how the punitive, constitution-abusing administrative and legislative things they do really aren't so bad, are they. Just common sense taxation! Too many people fall for it.

 

[Chauchat]

I always appreciate detail and clarity. But my point, made with a rhetorically broad brush, is that the lefties will always find a way to explain how the punitive, constitution-abusing administrative and legislative things they do really aren't so bad, are they. Just common sense taxation! Too many people fall for i

Your point is well made. Thank you.

 

[Afrikeber]

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.

I have an xtra couple cans of spray paint in the garage they can huff until they drop.

 

[noshitthereiwas]

Unreal. They'll never acknowledge the real issues behind gun violence. Just look at that riot that happened recently in NYC.....blame everyone but the participants.

 

[Tungsten]

I can't wait to enact a 1000% tax on commies to speak.

 

[Chauchat]

Finally! After nineteen days the text of HR 5135 is up and I was correct. It is the exact same bill as 117th HR 8051. And that means this pile of rat excrement is going nowhere.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5135/text

 

[cantstop]

If I could buy a true fully automatic assault weapon for the $430 they sell to the military I'd have no issues paying $100 tax for the mags.