Legal question. Can I sell my own built semi MG-42?

[hakentt]

I had fun with my MG-42 built from parts kit, semi auto. Now if I want to sell it, can I sell it like this or I have to demil the semi receiver that I made to sell it again as parts kit? I heard that you can build your own gun for yourself but you cannot sell it, is this true? Am in Arizona.

[hakentt]

I had fun with my MG-42 built from parts kit, semi auto. Now if I want to sell it, can I sell it like this or I have to demil the semi receiver that I made to sell it again as parts kit? I heard that you can build your own gun for yourself but you cannot sell it, is this true? Am in Arizona.

I searched this forum and got mixed results, some say you can and some say you can't and ATF letter is confusing to me:

Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal
Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the
firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also,
the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully
transferred in the future.

[Michael J]

From what i gather: You may not build a semi with the intent to sell. But you can sell your semi, if you must.
Just make sure you have a serial # on it, and whatever other appropriate information you would normally find on a gun. That way you can transfer it properly, just like you would any other bought firearm.

[bolex]

You can sell it check out the BATF web site for information. That said if you do sell it you can/will have some liability if someone gets hurt using it. This can be from a malfunction or even misuse by a person using it.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/building_a_firearm.pdf

[bolex]

Another BATF site:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#a6

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

The answer is IMPLIED TO BE NO. You cannot sell it if you constructed it yourself. I ran that question across the local St. Paul, MN BATFE office regarding a MP-44 that was constructed as a semi-auto by a person not possessing a gunmakers license, and without submitting plans of the design to BATFE for approval. The answer I got was NO, I could not take possession of that weapon. Now, consistency and knowledge varies with BATFE personnel, and there is not STRONG LANGUAGE defining what "intent to sell" means, so if you sell it, you TAKE YOUR CHANCES as to whether the BATFE would object in the future.

[Michael J]

If you can try to prove that you did not build your firearm for the sole purpose of selling, go for it. It would look awful suspicious if you just finished building it a few months prior. BUT if you've owned it for a few years maybe, then that seems like enough proof that it was not built for the sole intent of selling.

Unless... it was secretly your business plan to hold onto it for a couple years, in hopes of an economic meltdown you foresaw in your crystal ball, and that you foresaw firearm values increasing, so in order to profit, you held onto it rather than immediately selling .

Of course, if that was a BATFE persons reasoning, they are the ones who are in need of help... Go with your gut, if you believe you have enough reasoning to battle an accusation against your "intent", then by all means go with it. You could try volunteering for a polygraph, as to determine your "intent", but not sure if those things work 100% of the time.

[rocco1911]

How much ya want for it I'm in AZ also so no FFL involvment

[Bil]

Problem solved! ---bil

[Dan@AngolaArmory]

Per BATFE, you need to mark it with your name, serial #, town and state. This comes up all the time on the 1919 board and no, I don't have a link to the reg, but I assure you its gospel. I am required, in my job, to mark imported firearms in this manner.
Dan

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

But Dan, BATFE told me that I could not accept a homebuilt MP-44 because the builder "did not pay the excise tax". I believe that's their way of saying he was not a manufacturer. Should I chock this up to "just the inconsistency of the BATFE" again or what?

[Dan@AngolaArmory]

Yes, that is correct, you have misinformation. If the builder is not engaged in the business (not 07 license holder) he may transfer a firearm lawfully, as above. It is a one off thing only, any more requires a license.

[rocco1911]

This has been gone over several times on another site lots of info here. http://www.prexis.com/sten/homebuilder/ ... pic=1826.0

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

Thanks Dan!

[drooling idiot]

But Dan, BATFE told me that I could not accept a homebuilt MP-44 because the builder "did not pay the excise tax". I believe that's their way of saying he was not a manufacturer. Should I chock this up to "just the inconsistency of the BATFE" again or what?

BATFE doesn't even collect the tax on small commercial bulders that produce less than 50 guns a year. I believe it was 50 rifles but not 100% sure, the law passed a few years ago to save everybody some hassle.

[H_Waffenfabrik]

But Dan, BATFE told me that I could not accept a homebuilt MP-44 because the builder "did not pay the excise tax". I believe that's their way of saying he was not a manufacturer. Should I chock this up to "just the inconsistency of the BATFE" again or what?

There ya go ~ pay a TAX and you're good to go.........I knew it was really all about the $$$$$ (sarcasm).

[rocco1911]

Yea but then if ya think about it if it really was all about the Tax Money they would open up the regestry & let us make the F/A guns again & they would get a boat load of Tax money Oh well its nice to dream aint it

[rocco1911]

I wonder if he ever sold the gun of if he held onto it