If we don't understand what G does and how it operates, and if we sit around moaning about G, and if that moaning is about non-factual matters-then we should not be surprised if we are not taken seriously. 
Valid criticism requires knowledge of the matter, and that knowledge comes from a little work.
Moaning alone changes no minds or laws.

marlinguy wrote on Oct 21^st, 2023 at 12:18pm:

Hi Val, I have just completed reading the "proposal" and I agree that your above comments pretty much, "hit the nail on the head". The DOJ and ATF have muddied the water such that weather you are or are not in violation of the "law" is left up to the discretion of the ATF agent and prosecutors. One could go ahead and obtain a FFL (with the new proposed increases in costs) so that you can sell that one gun per year, however doing so would admit that you are "engaged in the business" and open you up to many other intrusions into your life, like inspection of your "place of business" or residence or just about anywhere else you can think of. And then of course how far behind the ATF agent would you think the IRS agent would be? Remember the IRS has 80,000 new agents with their side arms to handle this.

I would like to say more, in particular about the "sky is falling" but ding dong it already has fallen you just haven't been hit on the head yet, so why bother? 

Quote:


Biden got the money for it. What makes you think he is not using that money for that purpose?

Maybe he is just going to send it to Hunter?

Here's a quote from a recent article:

"The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 includes about $80 billion in funding for the IRS over the next 10 years. 

About $45.6 billion of that IRS funding will be put toward expenses for IRS tax enforcement services through September 2031, including hiring more employees. 

But the claims that this funding will be used to hire 87,000 new agents specifically tasked with audits are false.

The text of the Inflation Reduction Act doesn’t specify a number of new hires for the IRS. The 87,000 number comes from a May 2021 report from the Treasury Department that estimated more funding allocated by President Joe Biden’s administration would allow the IRS to hire nearly 87,000 full-time employees by 2031. 

More from VERIFY: Yes, the Internal Revenue Service did buy nearly $700K in ammunition in early 2022

That report was specific to previous legislation, and it’s not clear yet how many people the IRS will hire with the Inflation Reduction Act funding.

The majority of IRS hires would fill positions of people leaving the agency over the next decade, the Treasury Department said. That includes staff members across departments, not just agents tasked with audits. 

An estimated 52,000 IRS employees are expected to leave the agency or retire in the near future.

The IRS will determine the final numbers and breakdown of potential new staff for the next decade in the coming months, but the addition of new employees won’t mean increased audits for middle-class Americans, according to the Treasury and IRS. 

“New staff will be hired to improve taxpayer services and experienced auditors who can take on corporate and high-end tax evaders, without increasing audit rates relative to historical norms for people earning under $400,000 each year,” a spokesperson for the Treasury Department said."

So whether it's begun, or how far along it is currently is really nothing to debate. It is planned, and it will happen over a period of time. Yes, a number of the "new agents" will be replacements for those retiring. But even if you subtract the number retiring, it still looks like about 35,000 will be new positions, not replacements. With plenty of ammo for them to enforce their tasks.

frnkeore wrote on Oct 26^th, 2023 at 12:59pm:


I have the same questions Frank! I would think most instances involving firearms would be a different alphabet agency than the IRS. Maybe they just like playing sheriff?

I started this and maybe this will finish it.   The comment period is almost over (Dec 7).  You can access the proposal by searching atf.gov for “Definition of Engaged in the business as a dealer in firearms”.   

I’ve sifted through the rather lengthy and legalistic document several times and I believe this regulation could/would make anyone selling a firearm obligated to becoming a dealer and subsequently requiring them to perform background checks for anyone buying a firearm from them.  Further, the qty of firearms and the compensation related to the transactions are not considered as key considerations.  The regulation suggests what is referred to as “rebuttable presumptions” regarding “doing business as a dealer in firearms”.  My understanding is that this means you are considered guilty by the ATF until you prove that you are not guilty.  The entity determining guilt. .  .  . The ATF.   

There is more; internet sales are noted as an example supporting the need for the regulation.  It completely ignores that internet sales are required to go through an FFL with the subsequently required background check. 

This is truly a very onerous proposal.

Redrighthand wrote on Oct 26^th, 2023 at 1:12pm:


The IRS purchases guns and ammunition for special agents in its criminal investigation division, a law enforcement branch established in 1919. The typical IRS auditors that Americans would encounter in a routine audit are unarmed. The special agents who are armed investigate crimes ranging from money laundering to cybercrime.
No, Biden is not arming up the IRS with guns and ammunition
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

gnoahhh wrote on Dec 7^th, 2023 at 10:13am:

Very good! I would laugh but it's probably more true than we want