Proposed Rule2026-08922

Firearms Transactions and Straw Purchases

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
May 6, 2026

Issuing agencies

Justice DepartmentAlcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau

Abstract

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives ("ATF") proposes amending Department of Justice ("Department") regulations to provide clarity for conduct prohibited by federal law commonly referred to as a straw purchase.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24448-24453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08922]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

27 CFR Part 478

[Docket No. ATF-2026-0013; ATF No. 2025R-41P]
RIN 1140-AA78


Firearms Transactions and Straw Purchases

AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 
Department of Justice.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 
(``ATF'') proposes amending Department of Justice (``Department'') 
regulations to provide clarity for conduct prohibited by federal law 
commonly referred to as a straw purchase.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing, and must be submitted on 
or before (or, if mailed, must be postmarked on or before) August 4, 
2026. Commenters should be aware that the federal e-rulemaking portal 
comment system will not accept comments after midnight Eastern Time on 
the last day of the comment period.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1140-AA78, by 
either of the following methods--
    <bullet> Federal e-rulemaking portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Mail: ATF Rulemaking Comments; Mail Stop 6N-518, Office of 
Regulatory Affairs; Enforcement Programs and Services; Bureau of 
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; 99 New York Ave. NE, 
Washington, DC 20226; ATTN: RIN 1140-AA78.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
number (RIN 1140-AA78) for this notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM'' 
or ``proposed rule''). ATF may post all properly completed comments it 
receives from either of the methods described above, without change to 
the federal e-rulemaking portal, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This 
includes any personally identifying information (``PII'') or business 
proprietary information (``PROPIN'') submitted in the body of the 
comment or as part of a related attachment they want posted. Commenters 
who submit through the federal e-rulemaking portal and do not want any 
of their PII posted on the internet should omit it from the body of 
their comment and any uploaded attachments that they want posted. If 
online commenters wish to submit PII with their comment, they should 
place it in a separate attachment and mark it at the top with the 
marking ``CUI/PRVCY.'' Commenters who submit through mail should 
likewise omit their PII or PROPIN from the body of the comment and 
provide any such information on the cover sheet only, marking it at the 
top as ``CUI/PRVCY'' for PII, or as ``CUI/PROPIN'' for PROPIN. For 
detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information 
on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. In accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule may be found at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Commenters must submit comments by using one of 
the methods described above, not by emailing the address set forth in 
the following paragraph.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Regulatory Affairs, by email 
at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83ccd1c2c3e2f7e5ade4ecf5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4bba6b5b4958092da939b82">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>, by mail at Office of Regulatory Affairs; Enforcement 
Programs and Services; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and 
Explosives; 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20226, or by telephone 
at 202-648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Attorney General is responsible for enforcing the Gun Control 
Act of 1968 (``GCA''), as amended. This responsibility includes the 
authority to promulgate regulations necessary to enforce the provisions 
of the GCA.\1\ See 18 U.S.C. 926(a). Congress and the Attorney General 
have delegated the

[[Page 24449]]

responsibility for administering and enforcing the GCA to the Director 
of ATF (``Director''), subject to the direction of the Attorney General 
and the Deputy Attorney General. See 28 U.S.C. 599A(b)(1); 28 CFR 
0.130(a)(1)-(2); Treas. Order No. 221(2)(a), (d), 37 FR 11696-97 (June 
10, 1972).\2\ Accordingly, the Department and ATF have promulgated 
regulations to implement the GCA in 27 CFR part 478.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Some GCA provisions still refer to the ``Secretary of the 
Treasury.'' However, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 
107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, transferred the functions of ATF from the 
Department of the Treasury to the Department of Justice, under the 
general authority of the Attorney General. 26 U.S.C. 7801(a)(2); 28 
U.S.C. 599A(c)(1). Thus, for ease of reference, this proposed rule 
refers to the Attorney General where relevant.
    \2\ In Attorney General Order Number 6353-2025, the Attorney 
General delegated authority to the Director to issue regulations 
relating to matters within ATF's jurisdiction, including under the 
National Firearms Act, GCA, and Title XI of the Organized Crime 
Control Act. ATF's jurisdiction also includes those portions of sec. 
38 of the Arms Export Control Act pertaining to permanently 
importing defense articles and services and the Contraband Cigarette 
Trafficking Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The GCA, 18 U.S.C. 921-934, is a comprehensive federal firearms 
regulatory scheme. For example, section 922 prohibits certain firearm 
transactions and makes certain individuals ineligible to possess or 
receive a firearm; section 923 sets forth the licensing requirements 
for certain individuals and organizations engaged in the firearms 
business and their legal obligations during a firearm transfer to an 
unlicensed person; and section 924 sets forth the penalties for 
substantive statutory violations.
    When an individual seeks to acquire a firearm from a federal 
firearms licensee (``FFL''), the parties must comply with a series of 
statutory and regulatory requirements, to include identification 
verification requirements. This allows FFLs to verify that the person 
receiving the firearm at the point of purchase/transfer (i.e., the 
immediate transferee) may lawfully possess the firearm. Additionally, 
properly identifying the immediate transferee of the firearm in the 
FFL's records is a critical step in aiding law enforcement with tracing 
a firearm used in violent crime. A straw purchase case arises when the 
immediate transferee provides false information on the ATF Form 5300.9, 
Firearms Transaction Record (``Form 4473'') that is material to the 
lawfulness of the firearm transfer, or the immediate transferee 
purchases a firearm with intent to convey the firearm to a prohibited 
person, a person who intends to commit a felony, federal crime of 
terrorism, or a drug trafficking crime, or a person who intends to 
transfer the firearm to a prohibited person. Commonly, the true 
purchaser/ultimate recipient of the firearm is ineligible to lawfully 
purchase a firearm; or, for any other reason does not want to undergo a 
background check, complete the required Form 4473, and be documented as 
the purchaser. The use of a straw purchaser effectively hides the 
identity of the true purchaser/ultimate recipient of the firearm and 
circumvents the regulatory requirements for a firearm transfer by 
forgoing background checks and impeding the ability of law enforcement 
to trace guns involved in the commission of a crime to the true 
purchaser/ultimate recipient.
    Traditionally, federal law did not define the term ``straw 
purchase'' in statute or regulation. The legal doctrine concerning 
straw purchase currently involves three federal provisions: 18 U.S.C. 
922(a)(6), 924(a)(1)(A), and 932. Prior to the enactment of the 
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (``BSCA'') in 2022, sections 922(a)(6) 
and 924(a)(1)(A) encompassed the criminal conduct of providing false 
information to an FFL as part of a straw purchase. Criminal conduct 
under these sections is commonly known as ``lying and buying'' because 
section 922(a)(6) criminalizes a person, in connection with the 
acquisition or attempted acquisition of a firearm or ammunition from an 
FFL, knowingly making any false or fictitious statement or exhibiting 
false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, which is intended 
or likely to deceive the FFL with respect to any fact material to the 
lawfulness of the sale or other disposition under the provisions of 18 
U.S.C. chapter 44.
    Similarly, section 924(a)(1)(A) makes it unlawful to knowingly make 
any false statement or representation with respect to the information 
required to be kept in the records of an FFL. Both statutory provisions 
criminalize ``straw purchasing'' by focusing on the false statement or 
representation by the immediate transferee to the FFL. Commonly, a 
false statement by the immediate transferee on the Form 4473 that they 
are the actual buyer when buying the firearm for someone else is the 
basis for criminal prosecution because the immediate transferee causes 
the FFL to record the incorrect transferee in the acquisition and 
disposition record that the FFL is required to maintain.
    The straw-purchase doctrine that grew around these criminal 
provisions had an ambiguity concerning materiality. Initially, ATF 
maintained a narrower interpretation of straw purchasing because it 
viewed it as occurring only when a person purchased a firearm on behalf 
of the actual purchaser who was a prohibited person. This is the 
``narrower'' understanding of a straw purchase. In other words, ATF did 
not deem purchasing a firearm on behalf of an eligible buyer to be a 
materially false statement to the transaction. See ATF Industry 
Circular 79-10 (Aug. 7, 1979), reprinted in (Your Guide To) Federal 
Firearms Regulation 78, <a href="https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/your-guide-firearms-regulation-1978">https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/your-guide-firearms-regulation-1978</a> [<a href="https://perma.cc/VDF9-3LSM">https://perma.cc/VDF9-3LSM</a>]. This position changed in 1994 when ATF adopted a broader 
understanding of the term straw purchase. There is case law to support 
the position that 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6) can be charged where the actual 
purchaser participating in the straw purchase is qualified to purchase 
a firearm and a false statement is made concerning the true purchaser 
of the firearm. This false statement is ``material to the lawfulness of 
the sale.'' See United States v. Ortiz-Loya, 777 F.2d 973, 979 (5th 
Cir. 1985); see also United States v. Carter, 60 F.3d 825 (4th Cir. 
1995).
    Congress codified the narrower understanding of the straw purchase 
doctrine, i.e., a purchase for a prohibited person or person falling 
into other categories identified by Congress, when it passed BSCA in 
2022. In BSCA, Congress added 18 U.S.C. 932, which prohibits any person 
from knowingly purchasing, or conspiring to purchase, any firearm in or 
otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce for, on behalf of, 
or at the request or demand of another person knowing or having 
reasonable cause to believe such other person is prohibited from 
possessing firearms; intends to use or carry the firearm in furtherance 
of a felony, a federal crime of terrorism or a drug trafficking crime; 
or intends to sell or give the firearm to any person who is prohibited 
or a person who intends to use or carry the firearm in furtherance of a 
felony, a federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking crime. 
Notably, unlike sections 924(a)(1)(A) and 922(a)(6), this section 
applies to any purchase or disposition of a firearm, not just transfers 
from FFLs.
    As mentioned above, it was in 1994 when ATF concluded that 
purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person qualified as a 
materially false statement even if the other person (the actual 
purchaser or ultimate recipient) was not prohibited from possessing a 
firearm under federal law. In reaching this conclusion, ATF noted that 
these types of purchases inhibited the ability to trace firearms and 
resulted in the failure to complete a background check mandated by the 
Brady Act on the actual purchaser or recipient of the firearm.
    In 2014, the Supreme Court agreed with the broader understanding of 
straw purchase. In Abramski v. United States, 573 U.S. 169 (2014), the 
Supreme Court

[[Page 24450]]

held that a transferee's false statement to an FFL dealer that he was 
the actual purchaser on a Form 4473 was a violation of 18 U.S.C. 
922(a)(6) and 924(a)(1)(A) regardless of whether the true purchaser and 
ultimate recipient could legally possess the firearm. Like ATF, the 
Court noted that these statements inhibited background checks and 
firearm tracing. Following Abramski, a straw purchase under sections 
922(a)(6) and 924(a)(1)(A) hinges on false statements by the individual 
involved in the firearms transaction to the FFL regardless of whether 
the true purchaser and ultimate recipient of the firearm is prohibited 
from receiving a firearm under federal law.
    In accordance with the broader understanding of straw purchasing, 
versions of the Form 4473 issued after 1994 have required the 
transferee to certify that he is the ``actual transferee/buyer'' of the 
firearm. The Form 4473 has included instructions, which have evolved 
over time, as to when a person is the ``actual transferee/buyer.'' As 
of this drafting, the current Form 4473 (revised Aug. 2023) advises 
that a person is an actual transferee/buyer if he/she is purchasing or 
acquiring a firearm for him/herself (e.g., redeeming the firearm from 
pawn, retrieving it from consignment, firearm raffle winner) or if 
purchasing the firearm as a bona fide gift for a third party. The Form 
4473 also advises that a ``gift is not bona fide if another person 
offered or gave the person completing this form money, service(s), or 
item(s) of value to acquire the firearm for him/her, or if the other 
person is prohibited by law from receiving or possessing the firearm.'' 
The Form 4473 (revised Aug. 2023) continues with examples of when a 
person is not considered the ``actual transferee/buyer'' of the 
firearm. Specifically,

    Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith 
(who may or may not be prohibited). Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the 
money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER 
OF THE FIREARM.'' However, if ``Mr. Brown buys the firearm with his 
own money to give to Mr. Black as a gift (with no service or 
tangible thing of value provided by Mr. Black), Mr. Brown is the 
actual transferee/buyer of the firearm.''

    ATF has always understood the broader straw purchase doctrine to 
exclude certain firearm acquisitions on behalf of another. Most 
notably, a straw purchase does not occur when a person purchases a 
firearm as a bona fide gift for another as the gift giver (i.e., the 
actual purchaser) receives nothing of value for the firearm from the 
gift recipient. If, however, a person receives money or other value 
from the intended recipient, then the purchase is not a gift, and the 
intended recipient is the true purchaser.
    Additionally, ATF has long understood the straw-purchase doctrine 
to exclude instances where parents purchase firearms on behalf of their 
minor children. See Firearms Regulation Guide (1978) at 82 (``A parent 
or guardian may purchase firearms and ammunition for a juvenile. GCA 
age restrictions are intended only to prevent juveniles from acting 
without their parents' or guardians' knowledge.'')]; see also Firearms 
Regulation Guide (1988-89) at 84 (advising the same). In this scenario, 
the parent purchases the firearm and takes responsibility for the 
weapon. The age restrictions in the GCA were designed to stop the 
unsupervised acquisition of firearms by minors; the GCA was not 
intended to prevent lawful possession or use by a minor. See S. Rep. 
No. 90-1097, at 79 (1968) (explaining that under the GCA ``a minor or 
juvenile would not be restricted from owning or learning the proper 
usage of the firearm,'' as any firearm ``which his parent or guardian 
desired him to have could be obtained for the minor or juvenile by the 
parent or guardian.''). There are additional scenarios that are not 
considered straw purchases, including pawn redemption or consignment 
and storage pick-up. The instructions on the current Form 4473 provide: 
``For purposes of this form, a person is the actual transferee/buyer if 
he/she is . . . acquiring the firearm for him/herself. (e.g., redeeming 
the firearm from pawn, retrieving it from consignment, firearm raffle 
winner.).'' Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record (Revised Aug. 2023), 
<a href="https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download">https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download</a> [<a href="https://perma.cc/H2R2-G6PR">https://perma.cc/H2R2-G6PR</a>].
    ATF has also permitted the retrieval of firearms left for repair 
for another person provided the person receiving the firearm is not 
prohibited. The Form 4473 (revised Aug. 2023) under Question 21.a. 
currently provides that, ``[i]f you are only picking up a repaired 
firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer 21.a.,'' 
which asks whether the individual is the actual transferee/buyer of the 
firearm listed on the form. Although the individual acquiring the 
firearm from the FFL is not the actual transferee or ultimate 
recipient, ATF does not consider a straw purchase to have occurred in 
these kinds of limited scenarios.
    ATF has recently received inquiries regarding the gift of firearms 
or the purchase of firearms as marital property. This has led to some 
confusion among FFLs whether a purchase may be completed using money 
from a spouse or with a spouse present. ATF also continues to receive 
questions seeking clarification regarding who the actual transferee or 
purchaser of a firearm is for transactions involving redemptions from 
pawn, gunsmith repairs, consignment, storage, and bona fide gifts. In 
light of the need for more clarity to distinguish between the illegal 
conduct that constitutes a straw purchase and other behavior that does 
not come within ATF's historical understanding of a straw purchase, 
this rule proposes to add 27 CFR 478.105 to clarify the legal 
distinctions between unlawful straw purchases and lawful third-party 
transfers.

II. Proposed Rule

    The rule proposes to create a new section in part 478 that would 
restate the law of straw purchasing. Paragraph (a) of the new section 
would make clear that a buyer of a firearm may not obtain a firearm 
from an FFL by being a straw purchaser and an FFL may not sell a 
firearm to a person who he knows or has reasonable cause to believe is 
a straw purchaser.
    The remainder of the new section would describe who a ``straw 
purchaser'' is to explain two types of straw purchases. The new section 
would clearly demarcate two types of straw purchasing: (1) straw 
purchasing by making a material misstatement, which is elaborated by 
paragraphs (b)-(d), and (2) straw purchasing by purchasing for a 
prohibited person, which is elaborated by paragraph (e).
    Paragraphs (b) and (c) would explain the longstanding 
interpretation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6) as applied to straw purchasing, 
consistent with federal case law and the broader understanding of straw 
purchase (i.e., purchasing on behalf of another person even if that 
person is not a prohibited person under the GCA). Particularly, 
paragraph (c) would delineate categories of lawful transactions that do 
not constitute straw purchases under paragraph (b), such as bona fide 
gifts, parental purchases for a ``minor child'' (which would be defined 
in paragraph (d)), purchases among spouses, and redemption or repair of 
firearms by their lawful owners. Importantly, these exceptions cover 
only straw purchases by material misstatement.
    Paragraph (e) would address a different kind of straw purchasing: 
the purchase of a firearm for a prohibited

[[Page 24451]]

person. Congress codified this kind of straw purchasing as a criminal 
offense in 18 U.S.C. 932. This regulation reiterates and clarifies 
those prohibited transactions. Paragraph (e) would clarify that the 
exceptions listed in paragraph (c) to straw purchases by material 
misstatements do not apply to the prohibition against making straw 
purchases for a prohibited person. This clarification is important 
especially in cases of spousal transfers. A common straw purchase 
transaction involves one spouse purchasing on behalf of a prohibited 
spouse. This rule would make clear that such conduct is prohibited. On 
the other hand, among two spouses who may lawfully possess firearms and 
live at the same address, it does not matter which spouse fills out the 
form or hands over the money. Both the firearm and the funds used to 
pay for it will likely be martial property. For tracing purposes, the 
form will identify the name of a responsible adult who acquired the 
firearm and the correct address where that person lives. The exceptions 
to straw purchasing for spouses and for minor children under age 21 
reflect that ATF will not micromanage family affairs. ATF retains an 
interest in such transactions only when a member of the family is 
prohibited by law from possessing a firearm.
    As discussed above, the GCA is a comprehensive federal firearms 
regulatory scheme that was enacted to reduce violent crime by 
preventing felons and other prohibited persons from acquiring firearms. 
It ensures that the federal government can trace firearms involved in a 
crime to locate the perpetrator(s) through accurate records of FFLs 
showing the actual purchasers of the firearms and provide crime gun 
intelligence to locate and disrupt firearm trafficking networks using 
multiple sale reports with accurate purchaser information. ATF uses the 
crime gun intelligence model because it focuses on generating 
actionable intelligence related to connecting, identifying, and 
disrupting firearms violence through evidence-based methods using 
forensics and law enforcement investigations.\3\ These objectives are 
enforced through a combination of background checks, identification 
verification, and accurate record-keeping by FFLs, all of which depend 
on truthful identification of the actual transferee or purchaser. Straw 
purchasing undermines the statutory objectives of the GCA by subverting 
this regulatory framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See <a href="http://ATF.gov">ATF.gov</a>, Crime Gun Intelligence, <a href="https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/infographics/crime-gun-intelligence">https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/infographics/crime-gun-intelligence</a> [<a href="https://perma.cc/NSB6-HFJ9">https://perma.cc/NSB6-HFJ9</a>].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While such conduct must remain clearly unlawful, not all third-
party acquisitions are improper. As described above, longstanding ATF 
guidance has acknowledged that individuals may purchase firearms as 
bona fide gifts for others, provided no compensation is received and 
the recipient is not otherwise prohibited. Federal law does not bar 
private transfers or gifts between unlicensed persons residing in the 
same state as long as neither party is a prohibited person and such 
transfer does not violate any state or federal laws. Federal law does 
not bar private transfers or gifts between unlicensed persons residing 
in different states as long as the transfer is facilitated by an FFL in 
each of the respective states. As the Supreme Court emphasized in FDA 
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 133 (2000), 
statutory interpretation must be guided by common sense.
    Accordingly, ATF believes that by articulating these distinctions 
in regulation, the proposed Sec.  478.105 will enhance industry 
compliance, assist law enforcement, and reduce confusion regarding the 
legality of common firearm transfers. It would also ensure consistent 
terminology and reinforce the GCA's goals without impeding lawful 
conduct.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Review

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) directs 
agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory 
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory 
approaches that maximize net benefits.
    Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) 
emphasizes the importance of agencies quantifying both costs and 
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting public 
flexibility.
    This proposed rule would amend 27 CFR part 478 to provide clarity 
to both FFLs and non-licensees regarding conduct that has been 
recognized by the courts and ATF as rising to the level of a straw 
purchase, which is prohibited by federal law.
    The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has determined that 
this proposed rule would not be a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it did not review this rule. 
This proposed rulemaking provides qualitative benefits to the firearms 
industry and firearms purchasers by providing clarity on the scope of 
what constitutes unlawful straw purchasing. However, ATF does not have 
sufficient information to calculate quantifiable savings and thus 
requests more information from the public regarding the economic 
effects this rulemaking may have on the public and the regulated 
industries.

B. Executive Order 14192

    Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation) 
requires an agency, unless prohibited by law, to identify at least ten 
existing regulations to be repealed or revised when the agency publicly 
proposes for notice-and-comment or otherwise promulgates a new 
regulation that qualifies as an Executive Order 14192 regulatory action 
(defined in OMB Memorandum M-25-20 as a final significant regulatory 
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 that imposes total 
costs greater than zero). In furtherance of this requirement, section 
3(c) of Executive Order 14192 requires that any new incremental costs 
associated with such new regulations must, to the extent permitted by 
law, also be offset by eliminating existing costs associated with at 
least ten prior regulations. However, this proposed rule would not be 
an Executive Order 14192 regulatory action because it is not a 
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 and 
it would not impose total costs greater than zero.

C. Executive Order 14294

    Executive Order 14294 (Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal 
Regulations) requires agencies promulgating regulations with criminal 
regulatory offenses potentially subject to criminal enforcement to 
explicitly describe the conduct subject to criminal enforcement, the 
authorizing statutes, and the mens rea standard applicable to each 
element of those offenses. This proposed rule would not create a 
criminal regulatory offense and is thus exempt from Executive Order 
14294 requirements.

D. Executive Order 13132

    This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, the relationship between the federal government and the states, 
or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of 
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), the Director has determined that 
this proposed rule would not impose substantial direct compliance costs 
on state and local governments, preempt state law, or

[[Page 24452]]

meaningfully implicate federalism. It thus does not warrant preparing a 
federalism summary impact statement.

E. Executive Order 12988

    This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 
Reform).

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, 
agencies are required to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of 
any proposed rule subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements 
unless the agency head certifies, including a statement of the factual 
basis, that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities 
include certain small businesses, small not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Director certifies, after consideration, that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because it would simply provide clarity on the 
scope of what constitutes unlawful straw purchasing based on existing 
case law and long-standing agency guidance. This proposed rule will not 
impose any additional costs.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule does not include a federal mandate that might 
result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year, and it would not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. Therefore, ATF has determined that no actions are 
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''), 44 U.S.C. 
3501-3521, agencies are required to submit to OMB, for review and 
approval, any information collection requirements a rule creates or any 
impacts it has on existing information collections. An information 
collection includes any reporting, record-keeping, monitoring, posting, 
labeling, or other similar actions an agency requires of the public. 
See 5 CFR 1320.3(c). This proposed rule would not create any new 
information collection requirements or impact any existing ones covered 
by the PRA.

I. Congressional Review Act

    This proposed rule would not be a major rule as defined by the 
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.

IV. Public Participation

A. Comments Sought

    ATF requests comments on the proposed rule from all interested 
persons. ATF specifically requests comments on the clarity of this 
proposed rule and how it may be made easier to understand. ATF also 
requests comments on the costs or benefits of the proposed rule and on 
the appropriate methodology and data for calculating those costs and 
benefits.
    All comments must reference this document's RIN 1140-AA78 and, if 
handwritten, must be legible. If submitting by mail, you must also 
include your complete first and last name and contact information. If 
submitting a comment through the federal e-rulemaking portal, as 
described in section IV.C of this preamble, you should carefully review 
and follow the website's instructions on submitting comments. Whether 
you submit comments online or by mail, ATF will post them online. If 
submitting online as an individual, any information you provide in the 
online fields for city, state, zip code, and phone will not be publicly 
viewable when ATF publishes the comment on <a href="https://regulations.gov">https://regulations.gov</a>. 
However, if you include such personally identifying information 
(``PII'') in the body of your online comment, it may be posted and 
viewable online. Similarly, if you submit a written comment with PII in 
the body of the comment, it may be posted and viewable online. 
Therefore, all commenters should review section IV.B of this preamble, 
``Confidentiality,'' regarding how to submit PII if you do not want it 
published online. ATF may not consider, or respond to, comments that do 
not meet these requirements or comments containing excessive profanity. 
ATF will retain comments containing excessive profanity as part of this 
rulemaking's administrative record, but will not publish such documents 
on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. ATF will treat all comments as 
originals and will not acknowledge receipt of comments. In addition, if 
ATF cannot read your comment due to handwriting or technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, ATF may not be 
able to consider your comment.
    ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received 
on or before the closing date.

B. Confidentiality

    ATF will make all comments meeting the requirements of this 
section, whether submitted electronically or on paper, and except as 
provided below, available for public viewing on the internet through 
the federal e-rulemaking portal, and subject to the Freedom of 
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Commenters who submit by mail and who 
do not want their name or other PII posted on the internet should 
submit their comments with a separate cover sheet containing their PII. 
The separate cover sheet should be marked with ``CUI/PRVCY'' at the top 
to identify it as protected PII under the Privacy Act. Both the cover 
sheet and comment must reference RIN 1140-AA78. For comments submitted 
by mail, information contained on the cover sheet will not appear when 
posted on the internet, but any PII that appears within the body of a 
comment will not be redacted by ATF and may appear on the internet. 
Similarly, commenters who submit through the federal e-rulemaking 
portal and who do not want any of their PII posted on the internet 
should omit such PII from the body of their comment and any uploaded 
attachments. However, PII entered into the online fields designated for 
name, email, and other contact information will not be posted or 
viewable online.
    A commenter may submit to ATF information identified as proprietary 
or confidential business information by mail. To request that ATF 
handle this information as controlled unclassified information 
(``CUI''), the commenter must place any portion of a comment that is 
proprietary or confidential business information under law or 
regulation on pages separate from the balance of the comment, with each 
page prominently marked ``CUI/PROPIN'' at the top of the page.
    ATF will not make proprietary or confidential business information 
submitted in compliance with these instructions available when 
disclosing the comments that it receives, but will disclose that the 
commenter provided proprietary or confidential business information 
that ATF is holding in a separate file to which the public does not 
have access. If ATF receives a request to examine or copy this 
information, it will treat it as any other request under the Freedom of 
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). In addition, ATF will disclose such 
proprietary or confidential business

[[Page 24453]]

information to the extent required by other legal process.

C. Submitting Comments

    Submit comments using either of the two methods described below 
(but do not submit the same comment multiple times or by more than one 
method). Hand-delivered comments will not be accepted.
    <bullet> Federal e-rulemaking portal: ATF recommends that you 
submit your comments to ATF via the federal e-rulemaking portal at 
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and follow the instructions. Comments will 
be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large 
volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment 
may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment 
tracking number that is provided after you have successfully uploaded 
your comment.
    <bullet> Mail: Send written comments to the address listed in the 
ADDRESSES section of this document. Written comments must appear in 
minimum 12-point font size, include the commenter's first and last name 
and full mailing address, and may be of any length. See also section 
IV.B of this preamble, ``Confidentiality.''

D. Request for Hearing

    Any interested person who desires an opportunity to comment orally 
at a public hearing should submit his or her request, in writing, to 
the Director within the 90-day comment period. The Director, however, 
reserves the right to determine, in light of all circumstances, whether 
a public hearing is necessary.

Disclosure

    Copies of this proposed rule and the comments received in response 
to it are available through the federal e-rulemaking portal, at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> (search for RIN 1140-AA78).

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 478

    Administrative practice and procedure, Arms and munitions, Exports, 
Freight, Imports, Intergovernmental relations, Law enforcement 
officers, Military personnel, Penalties, Reporting and record-keeping 
requirements, Research, Seizures and forfeitures, Transportation.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, ATF proposes to amend 27 
CFR part 478 as follows:

PART 478--COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION

0
1. The authority citation for 27 CFR part 478 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 18 U.S.C. 847, 921-931; 44 U.S.C. 
3504(h).

0
2. Add Sec.  478.105 to subpart F to read as follows:


Sec.  478.105  Straw purchases prohibited.

    (a) Prohibited conduct.
    (1) A person may not obtain a firearm from a person licensed under 
this part by being a straw purchaser of a firearm.
    (2) A licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector may not 
sell or deliver a firearm knowing or having reasonable cause to believe 
that the person to whom the licensee transfers the weapon is a straw 
purchaser.
    (3) A ``straw purchaser'' within the meaning of this section 
includes:
    (i) Any person engaged in a straw purchase by making a material 
false statement, as described in paragraph (b) of this section; and
    (ii) Any person engaged in a straw purchase by purchasing for a 
prohibited person described in paragraph (e) of this section.
    (b) Straw purchases by making a material false statement. A straw 
purchase occurs when a person provides material false or fictitious 
information to a licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector 
that the person is the actual purchaser of the firearm when, in fact, 
the person is acquiring the firearm on behalf of another person.
    (c) Exclusions. A straw purchase by material false statement, as 
described in paragraph (b), does not include any of the following 
activities:
    (1) Purchasing a firearm as a bona fide gift for a third party. A 
transaction does not involve a bona fide gift if the purchaser accepts 
money, services, or any other consideration of value in exchange for 
acquiring the firearm.
    (2) Purchasing a firearm by a parent or guardian for his or her 
minor child;
    (3) Acquiring or receiving a firearm by a spouse when the other 
spouse has paid for the firearm, provided that both spouses live at the 
same address;
    (4) Redeeming a firearm from pawn or consignment by the lawful 
owner;
    (5) Retrieving a repaired firearm by an individual for a third 
party;
    (6) Collecting a firearm as the winner of a raffle or other award;
    (7) Collecting a firearm that was a bona fide gift from another; or
    (8) Transferring a firearm in accordance with a lawful inheritance 
or bequest.
    (d) Minor child. For purposes of the exception in paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section, a ``minor'' is a person under the age of 21. Paragraph 
(c)(2) of this section shall not be construed to authorize a juvenile, 
as defined in 18 U.S.C. 922(x)(5), to possess a handgun when prohibited 
by law.
    (e) Straw purchases by purchasing for a prohibited person.
    (1) A straw purchase occurs when a person knowingly purchases, or 
conspires to purchase, any firearm on behalf of, or at the request or 
demand of any other person, knowing or having reasonable cause to 
believe that such other person:
    (i) Is prohibited from receiving a firearm under 18 U.S.C. 922(d); 
or
    (ii) Intends to use, carry, possess, or sell, or otherwise dispose 
of a firearm in furtherance of a felony, a federal crime of terrorism, 
or a drug trafficking crime; or
    (iii) Intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm to 
another person described in paragraphs (i) or (ii).
    (2) The exceptions listed in paragraph (c) of this section to straw 
purchasing by a material false statement do not apply to a straw 
purchase by a prohibited person.

Robert Cekada,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2026-08922 Filed 5-5-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on May 6, 2026.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.