ATF straw-purchase proposal faces August 4 comment deadline

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is accepting public comments through Tuesday, August 4, on a proposed federal rule intended to clarify when a firearm transaction is an illegal straw purchase.

The proposal was published in the Federal Register on May 6 under RIN 1140-AA78 and docket ATF-2026-0013. It is a notice of proposed rulemaking, not a final regulation, and it would not immediately change what buyers, sellers or families may do. ATF is seeking comments on the proposal’s clarity, costs, benefits and supporting data before deciding whether to issue a final rule.

What ATF wants to clarify

The proposal would add 27 CFR 478.105 and describe two categories of straw purchasing. The first would involve a material false statement to a federally licensed firearms dealer, including falsely claiming to be the actual buyer when acquiring a firearm on behalf of someone else. The second would involve knowingly purchasing for a person prohibited from possessing a firearm, or for someone who intends to use the firearm for specified criminal conduct.

ATF says accurate identification of the immediate transferee supports background-check compliance, firearm tracing and investigations into trafficking networks. The agency describes the proposal as a clarification of conduct already addressed by federal law and case law, rather than an immediate expansion of federal requirements.

Transactions the proposal generally would recognize

The proposed framework would distinguish an unlawful material misstatement from several third-party transactions that can be lawful under federal law.

A bona fide gift generally would qualify when the giver uses their own money, receives no money, services or other thing of value in return, and the recipient is not prohibited from possessing firearms. The proposal also addresses purchases by a parent or guardian for a minor child. For this proposed exception, ATF would define a minor as a person under 21, while stating that the provision would not authorize handgun possession prohibited by federal law.

The proposal would also cover certain transactions between spouses who may lawfully possess firearms and live at the same address. Other listed situations include redemption of a firearm from pawn or consignment by its lawful owner, pickup of a repaired firearm for another person, raffle or award collection, receipt of a bona fide gift, and certain lawful inheritances.

The important boundary

The proposed exceptions apply only to the material-misstatement category. They would not protect a purchase made for a person prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm, including within a marriage. The proposal also covers purchases for someone known or reasonably believed to intend a felony, federal crime of terrorism or drug-trafficking crime, or to transfer the firearm to a person involved in that conduct.

That means the proposal would not treat every purchase involving another person as illegal, but it would draw a firm line around misrepresented transactions and purchases for prohibited persons. State and local laws may impose additional requirements beyond the federal framework described in the proposal.

How to comment by August 4

Written comments must be submitted by August 4, 2026. The Federal Register notice says the electronic submission portal will not accept comments after midnight Eastern Time on the deadline date. Comments may be submitted through the federal e-rulemaking portal or by mail, and they should identify RIN 1140-AA78.

The notice warns that ATF may post properly completed comments online, including personal or proprietary information included in the comment body or attachments intended for publication. Commenters should review the notice’s privacy instructions and avoid placing information in the public portion of a submission that they do not want disclosed.

The legal context

The proposal follows longstanding disputes over how federal firearm-purchase forms apply when one person is involved in acquiring a firearm for another. In Abramski v. United States, decided in 2014, the Supreme Court held that a person who falsely claimed to be the actual purchaser on Form 4473 could violate federal law even when the intended recipient was legally allowed to possess the firearm.

ATF’s notice does not make the proposed rule effective immediately. The agency must review public comments and decide whether to issue a final rule. Until then, anyone considering a firearm transfer should follow applicable federal and state requirements rather than relying on the proposal as though it were current law.

Sources

• Federal Register proposed rule, FR Doc. 2026-08922
• ATF rulemaking notice, RIN 1140-AA78
• Abramski v. United States