<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Are SBRs About to Be Less Expensive Than Standard Rifles Thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2025 11:16:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53524</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2025 11:16:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53524</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53406&quot;&gt;.40 cal Booger&lt;/a&gt;.

OK, after looking into it more I found some stuff which does seem to indicate the federal excise tax could (possibly) go away because of the $0. But its a shaky loop hole &#039;interpretation&#039; thing that can be easily closed by a court.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53406">.40 cal Booger</a>.</p>
<p>OK, after looking into it more I found some stuff which does seem to indicate the federal excise tax could (possibly) go away because of the $0. But its a shaky loop hole &#8216;interpretation&#8217; thing that can be easily closed by a court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53431</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 22:16:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53431</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Trump Admin Ends Taxpayer Subsidies For Illegal Aliens.

https://thefederalist.com/2025/07/10/trump-admin-ends-taxpayer-subsidies-for-illegal-aliens/]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trump Admin Ends Taxpayer Subsidies For Illegal Aliens.</p>
<p><a href="https://thefederalist.com/2025/07/10/trump-admin-ends-taxpayer-subsidies-for-illegal-aliens/" rel="nofollow ugc">https://thefederalist.com/2025/07/10/trump-admin-ends-taxpayer-subsidies-for-illegal-aliens/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53428</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 22:02:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53428</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[BREAKING: More Problems For SIG - Homeland Security Switches From SIG P320 To GLOCK Immediately.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPs9LEVSU2U]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BREAKING: More Problems For SIG &#8211; Homeland Security Switches From SIG P320 To GLOCK Immediately.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPs9LEVSU2U" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPs9LEVSU2U</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53426</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 21:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53426</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53424&quot;&gt;.40 cal Booger&lt;/a&gt;.

Lefties Losing It.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-kEcQm4QJ0]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53424">.40 cal Booger</a>.</p>
<p>Lefties Losing It.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-kEcQm4QJ0" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-kEcQm4QJ0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53424</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 21:35:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53424</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[SUPERCUT RECAP: Violent Leftists [and other Leftist] Absolutely LOSING THEIR MINDS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXwi5GAb_wo]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SUPERCUT RECAP: Violent Leftists [and other Leftist] Absolutely LOSING THEIR MINDS.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXwi5GAb_wo" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXwi5GAb_wo</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: .40 cal Booger		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53406</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[.40 cal Booger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 19:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53406</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;In this case, the relevant tax is the Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET). Pursuant to the Section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code, a manufacturer, producer, or importer is required to pay a 10% tax on the sale of all pistols or revolvers, and an 11% tax on all other firearms and ammo. However, this tax does not apply to any short barreled firearms if the NFA transfer tax specified in Section 5811 has been paid.

Fortunately, with the passage of the BBB, the tax under Section 5811 will soon be set to $0 (January 1, 2026). As a result, short barreled rifles (and shotguns) will not be subject to the Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax levied on rifle manufacturers, nor will they be subject to the $200 transfer tax previously levied on purchasers.&quot;

hmmmm,,,, a levied tax rate of 0$ is still a levied tax rate even if its $0. It does not mean the tax has been paid and just means it isn&#039;t paid or collected because its $0. Any tax amount set, $0 or anything greater, is still a &#039;levy&#039; by congress.

26 U.S.C. § 5811 - U.S. Code - uses the term &#039;levied&#039; as in &#039;levied tax rate&#039; context. The BBB did not do away with that term &#039;levied&#039;

In other words, there is still a LEVIED TAX RATE and its $0. They did not say in the BBB there would be NO LEVIED TAX RATE, they still say &#039;LEVIED&#039;. 

so...26 U.S.C. § 4181 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 26. Internal Revenue Code § 4181 still applies on 1 Jan 2026 because 26 U.S.C. § 5811 would still say &#039;levied&#039;, or in other words there is still a LEVIED TAX RATE even if it is $0 - thus imposition of federal excise tax still applies as long as there is a LEVIED TAX RATE and 4181 makes no distinction.  

For this to go away it would take the lawsuits being successful or congress to amend the law to say a &#039;NO LEVIED TAX RATE&#039; thing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In this case, the relevant tax is the Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET). Pursuant to the Section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code, a manufacturer, producer, or importer is required to pay a 10% tax on the sale of all pistols or revolvers, and an 11% tax on all other firearms and ammo. However, this tax does not apply to any short barreled firearms if the NFA transfer tax specified in Section 5811 has been paid.</p>
<p>Fortunately, with the passage of the BBB, the tax under Section 5811 will soon be set to $0 (January 1, 2026). As a result, short barreled rifles (and shotguns) will not be subject to the Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax levied on rifle manufacturers, nor will they be subject to the $200 transfer tax previously levied on purchasers.&#8221;</p>
<p>hmmmm,,,, a levied tax rate of 0$ is still a levied tax rate even if its $0. It does not mean the tax has been paid and just means it isn&#8217;t paid or collected because its $0. Any tax amount set, $0 or anything greater, is still a &#8216;levy&#8217; by congress.</p>
<p>26 U.S.C. § 5811 &#8211; U.S. Code &#8211; uses the term &#8216;levied&#8217; as in &#8216;levied tax rate&#8217; context. The BBB did not do away with that term &#8216;levied&#8217;</p>
<p>In other words, there is still a LEVIED TAX RATE and its $0. They did not say in the BBB there would be NO LEVIED TAX RATE, they still say &#8216;LEVIED&#8217;. </p>
<p>so&#8230;26 U.S.C. § 4181 &#8211; U.S. Code &#8211; Unannotated Title 26. Internal Revenue Code § 4181 still applies on 1 Jan 2026 because 26 U.S.C. § 5811 would still say &#8216;levied&#8217;, or in other words there is still a LEVIED TAX RATE even if it is $0 &#8211; thus imposition of federal excise tax still applies as long as there is a LEVIED TAX RATE and 4181 makes no distinction.  </p>
<p>For this to go away it would take the lawsuits being successful or congress to amend the law to say a &#8216;NO LEVIED TAX RATE&#8217; thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: jwm		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/nfa/are-sbrs-about-to-be-less-expensive-than-standard-rifles-thanks-to-the-one-big-beautiful-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-53403</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jwm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 19:16:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=26145#comment-53403</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I know that I vowed not to buy any more gunz.  I&#039;ve given away quite a few.

But whatever that is in the photo stirs a certain desire in me.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know that I vowed not to buy any more gunz.  I&#8217;ve given away quite a few.</p>
<p>But whatever that is in the photo stirs a certain desire in me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
