Senate’s version of ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ would remove regulations on silencers, other firearms

Republicans’ attempts to partially repeal the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) have been expanded in the first draft of the Senate Finance Committee’s budget reconciliation plan, also known as the “Big Beautiful Bill.”

One proposal in the Trump-backed measure, which was released on Monday by Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID), would eliminate the National Firearms Act (NFA) entirely, along with silencers and short-barrel rifles and shotguns, according to Breitbart News.

That change would do away with the need to register this type of weapon or modification with the ATF and abolish the $200 federal tax that is currently levied on the items.

Additionally, shotguns would no longer be considered “destructive devices,” a term that is still regulated, and the NFA category known as “any other weapon” would be eliminated under the plan.

House passes its version

Last month, the House of Representatives passed a legislative package that includes a comparable provision on firearms.

The language used by the Senate exceeds what was used by the House, which will most certainly increase the expense of the reform, though it is as yet unclear by how much.

Republicans in the House predicted that over the next decade, doing away with the silencer tax will result in $1.4 billion in lost revenue for the federal government.

However, the vast majority of NFA purchases are silencers, often known as sound suppressors. At this time, almost four million individuals have registered theirs with the ATF.

Registration by the numbers

Silencers accounted for 41.8% of registrations with the ATF from 2016–2020, according to a study by the agency that was released in 2022.

Short-barrel shotguns and rifles accounted for 6%, and “any other weapons” for 0.3%.

Gun rights advocates expected to support the more inclusive phrasing, with the opposite true of the gun control camp.

However, it is thought that the repeal effort will be challenged by Democrats under the Byrd Rule, which states that all reconciliation items must mainly affect the budget rather than policies.

There is a greater chance that the lawmakers, who determine which provisions comply with the rule, will remove the entire section, rather than duke it out and risk tying up the entire bill.