A federal judge's decision that the National Firearms Act (NFA) no longer applies to suppressors and other items whose taxes were reduced to $0 in July 2025 could open a path to end a 40-year-old ban on new civilian machine gun sales.
In the 66-page opinion, United States District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas, a Trump appointee, said that because taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and other items had been reduced to $0 by legislation signed by President Donald Trump in July 2025, the registration and paperwork imposed by the NFA exceeded Congress' authority under the taxation power. Republican Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert introduced H.R. 8921 on May 20, which would remove the $200 transfer tax on machine guns and "destructive devices," potentially leading to the demise of registration requirements for machine guns and possibly the Hughes Amendment as well. (RELATED: Piece Of Red Tape That's Tied Up Gun Owners For Decades Finally Gets Cut In Court)
"I believe that if they got rid of the tax, under the logic of this ruling, let's assume this ruling is upheld, if they got rid of the machine gun tax, then the machine gun ban would go away, essentially," Second Amendment Foundation Director of Legal Research and Education Konstadinos Moros told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
🚨BREAKING🚨
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) August 5, 2026
In GOA's case, a federal court just stuck down NFA registration for:
❌Suppressors
❌Short-Barreled Rifles
❌Short-Barreled Shotguns
GOA & our allies in Congress eliminated the tax.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 is now UNCONSTITUTIONAL as applied.
The Hughes Amendment, which was attached to the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act on a voice vote through what many pro-Second Amendment groups viewed as legislative trickery, prohibited civilian ownership of machine guns made after May 19, 1986. Some pro-Second Amendment activists questioned if reducing the taxes to $0 could kill the much-disliked provision.
"One of the tricks of budget reconciliation is you're kind of limited in what you're allowed to do," Gun Owners of America Director of Federal Affairs Aidan Johnston said. "And you are not allowed to touch the criminal code, and in the criminal code, that's where the machine gun ban is. We were only allowed to touch the tax code, which is the National Firearms Act of 1934."
Pro-Second Amendment attorneys reached for comment by the DCNF expressed similar skepticism about whether reducing the tax could take out the Hughes Amendment.
"Since it's not just a tax law, it wouldn't be vulnerable to the same arguments that the SBR registration requirement is.," C.D. Michel, senior partner at Michel and Associates, told the DCNF.
"Reducing the tax on machine guns to $0 under the NFA would have no effect on the Hughes Amendment, 18 USC 922(o), which bans transfer or possession of a MG made on or after May 19, 1986," Second Amendment scholar Stephen Halbrook said. "The NFA is a separate law that is part of the Internal Revenue Code that imposes registration and taxation requirements. If there is no tax, the NFA requirements would be subject to challenge, but that would have no effect on 922(o)."
The Senate parliamentarian struck language that removed suppressors, short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns from coverage by the National Firearms Act. The elimination of those taxes led to a number of lawsuits from pro-Second Amendment groups seeking to have courts strike down the registration requirement for items covered under the NFA, including the one in which the ruling was handed down Wednesday.
Source link
