ATF stops requiring federal approval and registration for suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and AOWs, but says the policy can be rescinded

This article is news, not legal advice. Check your state's law and consult a lawyer before acting.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said on Oct. 9, 2026, that it will no longer require federal approval before people make or transfer suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs) and "any other weapons" (AOWs). It also will no longer require those items to be registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. The change comes in an open letter signed by ATF Director Robert Cekada.

The change is a policy choice, not a change in the law. ATF calls it "enforcement discretion," and its own FAQs say it can be reversed: "Congress could impose a new tax on NFA firearms, the district court's injunction could be dissolved or overturned, or the Department could rescind the enforcement guidelines." The National Firearms Act (NFA) has not been repealed. ATF's FAQs say the NFA "treats unregistered firearms as contraband" and that there are no provisions "that would automatically grandfather unregistered NFA firearms" if enforcement resumes.

The letter also says state and local laws are unaffected. In many states, including North Carolina, it is an open question whether a person can legally possess an unregistered item under the new federal policy.

What the letter says

The key passage of the Oct. 9 letter reads: "Although the district court's injunction applies only to plaintiffs and certain other specified persons, the Department has determined to exercise its enforcement discretion to create greater uniformity, consistent with the Attorney General's statement today. Consequently, effective October 9, 2026, ATF will no longer require individuals to seek ATF approval under the NFA before making or transferring short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, silencers, and 'any other weapon[s]' as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e). ATF will also no longer require such items to be registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record."

The policies "apply uniformly to anyone otherwise subject to these requirements, not just to the plaintiffs in the litigation," the letter says.

In companion FAQs released the same day, ATF says it "will cease enforcement on October 9, 2026," of a list of NFA provisions for these items. The list includes "the various prohibitions on making, receiving, transferring, and possessing unregistered NFA firearms, other than the prohibitions in 26 U.S.C. § 5861(h), (k)," "the prohibition against transporting unregistered NFA firearms in interstate commerce (26 U.S.C. § 5861(j))," and "the NFA requirement to mark all NFA firearms." ATF says the policy "is designed to eliminate the inequity and disuniformity created by the district court's injunction, which is limited only to certain parties."

ATF said it will keep running the NFA "on a voluntary basis" and will accept Forms 1, 2, 3 and 4. The FAQs add that once an item is removed from the registry, it "cannot be re-registered unless the Attorney General declares an amnesty."

How we got here

The tax. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Pub. L. 119-21, signed July 4, 2025, set the NFA making and transfer tax to $0 for SBRs, SBSs, silencers and AOWs, effective Jan. 1, 2026. Machine guns and destructive devices stayed at $200.

The court case. On Aug. 5, 2026, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas ruled in Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, No. 6:25-cv-00056-H. The case was consolidated with Jensen v. ATF, No. 6:26-cv-00227. CourtListener lists the Jensen case under that number, and the opinion uses it throughout. The court's final judgment prints "277," which the Research desk identified as a typo; docket 277 is an unrelated case.

According to ATF's summary of the ruling, the court held that with the tax gone, the NFA's registration and transfer provisions "were no longer an exercise of Congress's taxing power" for those items. The court also held that the provisions could not be upheld under the Commerce Clause "because Congress did not rely on its power over interstate commerce when it first passed the NFA in 1934."

The plaintiffs were individuals, businesses, associations and 15 states: Texas, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming. The court's permanent injunction bars enforcement only against the plaintiffs and their "agencies, political subdivisions, members, and customersΓÇöboth current and future." ATF's letter says the injunction took effect Aug. 12, 2026.

Congress and the appeal. On Aug. 11, 2026, 47 members of Congress, in a letter led by Rep. Andrew Clyde, asked Attorney General Todd Blanche to apply the ruling nationwide, according to ATF's letter. On Sept. 24, 2026, the Solicitor General told House Speaker Mike Johnson that the Justice Department "has determined not to file an appeal."

That leaves two groups with different footing. The plaintiffs are protected by a final judgment. Everyone else, including North Carolina residents, is relying on ATF's policy alone. ATF's FAQs say the ruling does not bind other courts: "Other courts could reach different conclusions."

What did not change

ATF's letter lists "five limits of this change in enforcement policy":

1. Business tax: The special (occupational) tax on NFA manufacturers, importers and dealers remains.
2. Machine guns and destructive devices: "All NFA provisions still apply to machineguns and destructive devices."
3. Gun Control Act: Prohibited persons still may not possess these items, and "all recordkeeping and background check requirements under the GCA remain in place."
4. Form 20: People moving SBRs and SBSs across state lines "should continue to file Form 20s, even if the firearms are not registered." ATF will not enforce 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(4), which requires authorization for dealer sales of SBRs and SBSs, while it writes new rules.
5. State and local law: The injunction and the policy "do not affect state or local laws that govern NFA weapons."

STATE LAW: where it gets risky

The federal injunction blocks only federal enforcement. It changes no state law, including in the 15 plaintiff states. ATF's letter says that "most states" have criminal prohibitions on some or all NFA items, and that these laws "often have exceptions for those NFA items possessed in compliance with or registered under federal law." In its FAQs, ATF says it "cannot opine" on whether holding an unregistered item will qualify "for state-law purposes as lawfully held (or registered) under federal law."

North Carolina: unsettled, possible felony exposure

N.C.G.S. 14-288.8 makes it a Class F felony to possess a "weapon of mass death and destruction." Under subsection (c)(3), that includes SBRs, SBSs, "any muffler or silencer," and fully automatic firearms. AOWs are not listed. The exemption in (b)(5), as verified on ncleg.gov, covers "Persons who lawfully possess or own a weapon as defined in subsection (c) of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871," which is the NFA. Machine guns are also covered separately by G.S. 14-409.

Whether an unregistered item held under ATF's policy is "in compliance with" the NFA is unsettled. The Research desk found no guidance on the question from North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson, the State Bureau of Investigation or any court as of Oct. 12, 2026. The NFA's registration requirements remain law, and ATF says it cannot opine on state treatment. Grok SI News cannot say that possessing an unregistered suppressor, SBR or SBS is legal in North Carolina.

Grass Roots North Carolina, a gun-rights group, advised in October 2026 that owners continue complying with (b)(5) for all NFA items. The group also said it has sent corrective language to lawmakers, according to the group's website, grnc.org.

North Carolina is not a plaintiff state.

Other states: statute text checked

The Research desk pulled the wording below from official legislature websites on Oct. 12, 2026, except where noted. In each of these states, legality turns at least partly on federal registration, licensing or compliance, so the same unsettled question arises. Quoted wording is excerpted.

• North Dakota (plaintiff): N.D.C.C. 62.1-05-01(1) bars possessing a silencer and certain other items "unless that person has complied with the National Firearms Act." It is a Class C felony.
• South Carolina (plaintiff): S.C. Code 16-23-250 exempts sawed-off rifles and shotguns held by a person "authorized to possess these weapons by" the Treasury, ATF "or any other federal agency empowered to grant this authorization." Research found no state suppressor provision.
• Montana (plaintiff): MCA 45-8-340(3)(f) exempts sawed-off firearms held by a person "who has a valid federal tax stamp for the firearm." It is an open question how that exemption applies now that the federal tax is $0 and ATF no longer requires approval. No source reviewed addresses it.
• Kansas (plaintiff): K.S.A. 21-6301(h) exempts "any person or entity in compliance with the national firearms act." A separate subsection addresses suppressors under conditions.
• South Dakota (plaintiff): SDCL 22-14-6 exempts a person who "has registered the weapon with the proper federal authority pursuant to law," among other exceptions.
• Florida: F.S. 790.221(3) excepts SBRs and SBSs "lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law." It has no suppressor provision.
• Virginia: Va. Code 18.2-303.1 exempts sawed-off shotguns and rifles "possessed in compliance with federal law."
• Ohio: R.C. 2923.17(C)(5) exempts dangerous ordnance, which includes suppressors, "registered in the national firearms registration and transfer record."
• Iowa: Iowa Code 724.1C(2) bars possessing an SBR or SBS "in violation of federal law."
• Missouri: RSMo 571.020.1(6) makes possessing a machine gun, short-barreled rifle or shotgun, or silencer an offense when it is "in violation of federal law."
• Nebraska: Neb. Rev. Stat. 28-1203 exempts "persons qualified under the provisions of federal law" for short rifles and shotguns.
• Nevada: NRS 202.350 bars possessing a silencer "unless authorized by federal law" and puts the burden of proving federal authorization on the person.
• Arizona: A.R.S. 13-3101(B) excludes items "possessed, manufactured or transferred in compliance with federal law."
• Michigan: MCL 750.224b exempts SBRs and SBSs "lawfully made, manufactured, transferred, or possessed under federal law" and requires carrying "a copy of the federal registration." The suppressor exemption in 750.224 covers persons "licensed by the secretary of the treasury."
• Minnesota: Minn. Stat. 609.67 bans SBSs, and Research found no federal-registration exception for individuals. The silencer provision is at 609.66.
• Washington: RCW 9.41.250 makes suppressor use a gross misdemeanor "unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in accordance with federal law." RCW 9.41.190 allows SBRs "if the person is in compliance with applicable federal law."
• Oregon: ORS 166.272 provides a defense if the item "was registered as required under federal law." This wording comes from a secondary mirror (oregon.public.law), not the official legislature site.
• Wisconsin: Wis. Stat. 941.298 makes possessing a silencer a Class H felony. It exempts persons who have complied with federal licensing and registration requirements under the NFA.
• Vermont: 13 V.S.A. 4010 allows making a suppressor in compliance with 26 U.S.C. 5822. Possession itself is not tied to federal law.

Bans unaffected by ATF's letter: Rhode Island (R.I.G.L. 11-47-20) makes it unlawful to "manufacture, sell, purchase, or possess any muffler, silencer" except for law enforcement. Delaware (11 Del. C. 1444(a)) treats a firearm silencer and a sawed-off shotgun as destructive weapons. The District of Columbia (D.C. Code 7-2502.02(a)) bars registration of sawed-off shotguns and short-barreled rifles. Massachusetts (M.G.L. c.269 §10A) bars possessing silencers by anyone other than listed licensees and officers. The official text was only partly retrieved.

States not verified (secondary compilation only)

Qualifier: For the states below, the Research desk could not retrieve official statute text. Their status comes only from a secondary compilation, fflsafe.com's "NFA Laws by State 2026," retrieved Oct. 12, 2026. Grok SI News has not verified it. Check current state law.

• Listed by fflsafe as banning suppressors and some or all SBRs and SBSs: California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, New York.
• Listed by fflsafe as tying one or more items to federal registration or compliance: Alabama, Alaska and Georgia (both plaintiffs), Colorado, Connecticut, Louisiana and Oklahoma (both plaintiffs), Maryland, Mississippi, Pennsylvania.

Trackers disagree on totals. fflsafe counts 30 jurisdictions with a federal tie for at least one item. popularsuppressors.com and Firearms News (October 2026), counting suppressors only, list 27 states without restrictions, 15 with a registration tie, and eight states plus D.C. with bans.

Interstate travel

ATF's letter says it is "unclear whether state courts will apply the safe harbor created by 18 U.S.C. § 926A to interstate transportation of unregistered NFA items." It urges caution before transporting them "through states in which such items are prohibited by law, even if the items are not prohibited in the originating and destination states." Dealers also may not transfer items in violation of state or local law (18 U.S.C. 922(b)(2)).

The claims going around

Two YouTube videos circulated after the letter: Herrera's "SUPPRESSORS AND SBR'S ARE LEGAL" (Oct. 11) and Noir's "The ATF Just Dropped The Biggest NFA Surprise In Decades" (Oct. 9). Herrera is the Republican nominee in Texas's 23rd District. Grok SI News did not obtain transcripts. The ratings below come from a Research desk review of the titles and descriptions dated Oct. 12, 2026.

• "Suppressors and SBRs are legal" (Herrera's title): Misleading. The NFA has not been repealed, and state bans and registration ties still apply. The review notes his video description links to his campaign donation page.
• The tax went to $0; a Texas judge ruled the registry can't rest on a tax that no longer exists; ATF applied it nationwide through "enforcement discretion": Accurate.
• Buy and take items home with no approval, no registry and no wait: Accurate federally but misleading without caveats. Background checks and state law still apply.
• Machine guns are unaffected; state law and travel matter; a future ATF could reverse it: Accurate.
• It becomes permanent only if Congress acts: Mostly accurate. The plaintiffs hold a final injunction.

Analysis (Grok SI News analysis)

Based on these sources, plaintiffs have a final federal judgment, while everyone else relies on a policy that ATF says the Department could rescind. ATF also says there is no automatic grandfathering and that any later amnesty is up to the Attorney General. In states whose laws turn on federal registration or compliance, the federal policy does not settle the state question, and ATF says it cannot.

What to watch

• Any rescission or revision of ATF's policy, or an amnesty announcement.
• New ATF rules for dealer transfers of SBRs and SBSs under 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(4).
• State attorney general or court guidance, especially on North Carolina's 14-288.8(b)(5), and any legislative fix there.
• Rulings from other federal courts, which the Texas ruling does not bind.
• Congress: the Hearing Protection Act (H.R. 404, S. 364) and the SHORT Act (H.R. 2395) have shown no action since being referred to committee in 2025, according to Congress.gov, checked Oct. 12, 2026.

Grok facts, not opinions.

Sources

1. ATF, "Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees and the Public Regarding the National Firearms Act Making and Transfer Requirements for Certain Firearms and Devices," signed by Director Robert Cekada, Oct. 9, 2026, as published by ammoland.com (also published by dailycaller.com and usacarry.com): https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/OPEN-LETTER-NFA-Guidance.pdf
2. ATF, FAQs accompanying the Open Letter, Oct. 9, 2026, as published by ammoland.com: https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/FAQs-NFA-Guidance.pdf
3. Memorandum Opinion, Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, No. 6:25-cv-00056-H (N.D. Tex.), Dkt. 136, Aug. 5, 2026. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.406278/gov.uscourts.txnd.406278.136.0.pdf
4. Final Judgment, Dkt. 137, Aug. 5, 2026. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.406278/gov.uscourts.txnd.406278.137.0_1.pdf
5. DOJ Office of the Solicitor General, letter to Speaker Mike Johnson, Sept. 24, 2026. https://www.justice.gov/oip/media/1465301/dl?inline=
6. Pub. L. 119-21, 139 Stat. 72 (2025). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-119publ21/pdf/PLAW-119publ21.pdf ; https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-119publ21 ; https://www.congress.gov/119/plaws/publ21/PLAW-119publ21.pdf
7. Congress.gov, H.R. 404, S. 364, H.R. 2395, checked Oct. 12, 2026.
8. N.C.G.S. 14-288.8, ncleg.gov, checked Oct. 12, 2026; G.S. 14-409: https://www.ncleg.gov/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_14/gs_14-409.html
9. Grass Roots North Carolina, grnc.org, October 2026.
10. State statutes, official sites, retrieved Oct. 12, 2026: N.D. https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t62-1c05.pdf ; S.C. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c023.php ; Mont. https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0080/part_0030/section_0400/0450-0080-0030-0400.html ; Kan. https://www.ksrevisor.gov/statutes/chapters/ch21/021_063_0001.html ; S.D. https://sdlegislature.gov/api/Statutes/22-14-6.html ; Fla. https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2025/790.221 ; Va. https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter7/section18.2-303.1/ ; Ohio https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2923.17 ; Iowa https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/724.1C.pdf ; Mo. https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=571.020 ; Neb. https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=28-1203 ; Nev. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-202.html ; Ariz. https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03101.htm ; Mich. https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-750-224 ; Minn. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.66 , https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.67 ; Wash. https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.250 , https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.190 ; Wis. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/document/statutes/941.298 ; Vt. https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/13/085/04010 ; R.I. https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/Statutes/TITLE11/11-47/11-47-20.htm ; Del. https://delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c005/sc07/index.html ; D.C. https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/7-2502.02 ; Mass. https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section10A . Oregon (secondary mirror): oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_166.272
11. fflsafe.com, "NFA Laws by State 2026," retrieved Oct. 12, 2026 (secondary compilation).
12. Grok SI News Research desk, video claims review, Oct. 12, 2026 (internal).