Why I Still Recommend a Form 4 for Most Suppressor Buyers – For Now

Posted on September 28, 2026 by John Pierce

The 4473-only option is faster, but an approved Form 4 provides important flexibility for trusts, shared possession, travel, repairs, later transfers, and estate planning.

The recent permanent injunction in Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF is an important victory. For qualifying purchasers, sellers, and transactions, it creates a path to acquire a suppressor without waiting for ATF approval of a Form 4 and without registering the purchaser as the suppressor’s owner in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.

That does not necessarily mean the fastest path is the best path for every buyer.

For most of my clients, I presently recommend seriously considering the traditional Form 4 process—particularly a Form 4 directly to a properly drafted NFA trust—even when a qualifying 4473-only transfer may be available. The reason is not that the injunction is meaningless. The reason is that it is limited, many important questions remain unresolved, and the traditional registration system provides practical benefits that a 4473-only purchaser may be giving up.

The choice is no longer simply between paying $200 and waiting many months or taking a suppressor home immediately. The federal transfer tax on suppressors is now $0, and ATF’s most recent published statistics reported a median processing time of eight days for eForm 4 applications. Processing times can vary of course, but the burden of choosing a Form 4 is substantially lower than it once was.

This Is Really “Form 4 Plus Form 4473” Versus “Form 4473 Only”

Form 4 and Form 4473 are not interchangeable forms serving the same function.

An ordinary dealer transfer using the traditional NFA process generally involves both forms. The Form 4 is the application to approve the transfer and register the suppressor to the individual or trust. Form 4473 is then completed as the dealer’s federal firearms transaction record when the approved transferee takes possession.

The new injunction-based option eliminates the Form 4 for a qualifying transaction. It does not eliminate Form 4473 or the required background check. The accurate comparison is therefore:

  • Traditional route: approved Form 4, NFRTR registration, and Form 4473; or
  • Injunction route: Form 4473 and background check, but no approved Form 4 registering the suppressor to the purchaser.

That missing Form 4 affects far more than the speed of the original purchase.

The Injunction Is Permanent, but It Is Not Universal

The court permanently enjoined ATF and DOJ from enforcing specifically identified NFA provisions against the plaintiffs and, where applicable, their current and future members and customers. It did not strike the NFA from the United States Code, and it did not issue a nationwide injunction protecting everyone in every transaction.

DOJ has publicly indicated that it does not intend to appeal the judgment. That makes the existing injunction more durable, but it does not expand the judgment beyond the parties and protected classes identified by the court. It also does not answer the many implementation questions the judgment left open.

As of this article’s publication, ATF had not issued comprehensive guidance addressing later registration, trusts, resale, interstate travel, estates, or the NFRTR status of suppressors transferred through the 4473-only process.

The court was particularly clear about two limitations that matter after the original sale.

First, the court held that protection for customers of the commercial plaintiffs and commercial members extends only to those customers’ transactions with the protected businesses. The court expressly rejected the idea that becoming a customer gives someone a blanket exemption for every NFA firearm that person later possesses, makes, sells, or transfers.

Second, the court declined to extend protection automatically to resident family members living in the same household as a protected purchaser.

Those limits create serious questions about what happens after a qualifying purchaser leaves the dealer with a suppressor that is not registered to the purchaser. The original transaction may be protected while a later loan, transfer, trust contribution, shipment, or estate distribution is not.

A Form 4 to a Trust Provides Shared Possession

One of the most important advantages of a properly drafted NFA trust is that more than one authorized trustee can lawfully possess and use trust-owned firearms, subject to the trust terms and applicable law. That can allow a spouse, adult child, or other trustee to have independent access without the primary purchaser being physically present.

That flexibility is not automatically available when an individual acquires a suppressor through a 4473-only transaction.

The NFA definition of “transfer” is exceptionally broad. Under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(j), it includes selling, assigning, pledging, leasing, loaning, giving away, or otherwise disposing of an NFA firearm.

A protected owner’s GOA membership does not automatically protect the owner’s spouse, family member, friend, employee, or hunting companion. The court specifically declined to include resident family members merely because they live with a protected person.

A buyer should therefore not assume that another person may borrow the suppressor, take it hunting alone, keep it in a jointly accessible vehicle, or have unsupervised access merely because the buyer was protected during the original purchase.

For someone who wants genuine shared access, the more predictable path is a Form 4 directly to a trust, with the intended users added as trustees or responsible persons in accordance with the trust and federal law.

An Individual’s Membership Does Not Automatically Protect a Trust

A trust is a separate legal person for NFA purposes. An individual’s membership in GOA or another protected association does not automatically make the individual’s trust a member or extend the injunction to the trust.

There may eventually be procedures through which a trust can establish independent associational or customer-based protection. But unless the organization has accepted the trust itself as a member and confirmed that status in writing, relying on the settlor’s personal membership to protect the trust would be risky.

Moving a 4473-only suppressor from the individual into a trust later presents an even larger problem. That would be a new transfer to a different legal person. It would not be the original dealer-to-customer transaction protected by the injunction, and the trust might have no independent protection at all.

There Is No Assured “Register It Later” Procedure

Someone considering a 4473-only purchase should not assume that the suppressor can simply be moved into a trust or placed on a Form 4 later if circumstances change.

ATF’s longstanding NFA Handbook states that ATF will not approve a transfer unless the firearm is registered to the transferor in the NFRTR. Under the ordinary system, only a previously registered NFA firearm can move through a later Form 4 transfer.

The recordkeeping situation after a 4473-only transfer is itself unsettled. The suppressor may already appear in the NFRTR through the manufacturer’s Form 2 and later dealer-to-dealer Form 3 transfers. What is missing is an approved Form 4 transferring and registering it to the retail purchaser or the purchaser’s trust.

Industry guidance has noted that ATF has not supplied a clear mechanism for removing such an item from the dealer’s NFRTR inventory after a 4473-only disposition—or for registering it to the purchaser later.

That means a buyer should not rely on the theory that the choice can easily be reversed. ATF may eventually create a corrective or voluntary-registration process, but no purchaser should assume that such a process presently exists or will be made available.

Lending, Selling, or Trading the Suppressor May Be Much Harder

The original purchaser may be protected, but a later transferee may not be.

A conventional registered suppressor can be sold or transferred through the established Form 4 process. A dealer can determine who is shown as the registered owner, submit the proper application, and wait for ATF approval before delivery.

A 4473-only purchaser has no approved Form 4 identifying that purchaser as the registered transferor. A later private sale, trade-in, consignment, gift, or transfer to a trust may therefore lack an established administrative path. The original commercial plaintiff’s customer protection does not automatically follow the suppressor into later private transactions.

This may substantially reduce the suppressor’s resale value. A dealer or prospective buyer may be unwilling to accept an item when its NFRTR status and the legal authority for the next transfer are unresolved.

Interstate Travel Is a Serious Unresolved Risk

Registered suppressors ordinarily do not require advance approval on ATF Form 5320.20 before interstate travel, although the owner must still comply with the laws of every destination and intervening jurisdiction.

A suppressor that is not registered to its owner presents a different problem. The injunction did not enjoin 26 U.S.C. § 5861(j), which prohibits transporting, delivering, or receiving in interstate commerce an NFA firearm that has not been registered as required by the NFA.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has warned that this leaves interstate movement unresolved, including moving to another state, traveling for a hunting trip, shipping the suppressor for repair, or otherwise transporting it across state lines. SilencerCo has gone further and currently recommends that customers who use the 4473-only route keep the suppressor in the state of purchase until the issue is resolved.

For a Virginia purchaser, that means a same-day 4473-only suppressor should not be treated as an ordinary travel item merely because possession is permitted in Virginia.

Fifteen States Still Tie Suppressor Possession to NFA Registration or Compliance

Current post-ruling guidance identifies fifteen—not sixteen—states in which state law continues to require the traditional NFA process or otherwise conditions lawful suppressor possession on federal registration, licensing, authorization, or NFA compliance:

  • Alaska
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Georgia
  • Michigan
  • Mississippi
  • Montana
  • Nevada
  • North Carolina
  • North Dakota
  • Ohio
  • Oregon
  • Pennsylvania
  • Washington
  • Wisconsin

The language differs from state to state. Some statutes expressly require registration in the NFRTR. Others define registration, federal authorization, or compliance with the NFA as an exception, exemption, or affirmative defense to an otherwise applicable prohibition.

Because the federal injunction does not alter state law, a Virginia resident should not take a 4473-only suppressor into one of these states without obtaining state-specific legal advice. Current industry guidance treats these jurisdictions as continuing to require a Form 4.

Suppressors also remain generally prohibited for ordinary citizens in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia. A Form 4 does not override those prohibitions.

Even when traveling only between states classified as “free states,” the unresolved federal issue under § 5861(j) remains. State legality is therefore only one part of the travel analysis.

Repair and Warranty Work May Be More Complicated

ATF’s August 28, 2026, Open Letter on silencer repairs permits qualified manufacturers to repair a registered complete silencer or change its caliber without treating the work as the making of a new silencer, provided the serialized frame or receiver and required markings are preserved and the work stays within the stated limits.

The letter repeatedly bases its conclusions on the silencer already being registered in the NFRTR. It explains, for example, that replacement components become part of the already registered complete device and may then be returned to the registered owner.

That guidance does not clearly provide the same safe harbor for a suppressor that was delivered through a 4473-only transaction and is not registered to the customer. Shipping the suppressor across state lines for repair also raises the unenjoined § 5861(j) issue.

Manufacturers may choose to honor warranties, but the legal mechanism for receiving, repairing, replacing parts in, and returning a suppressor that is not registered to the customer is not yet as settled as it is for a Form 4 suppressor. Buyers should ask the manufacturer and dealer about their written warranty and repair policies before choosing the 4473-only route.

Estate Planning and Inheritance Are Far More Predictable With Registration

ATF’s established estate procedure allows a registered NFA firearm to pass tax-free to a lawful heir on an approved Form 5. If the suppressor is owned by a properly administered trust, trust ownership may also provide continuity after the death or incapacity of an individual trustee.

ATF’s NFA Handbook takes a very different position on an unregistered firearm found in an estate. Under its standing guidance, an NFA firearm that was not registered to the decedent is treated as contraband that cannot be lawfully possessed or transferred through the ordinary estate process.

The injunction may supply constitutional or equitable arguments in a future estate dispute, particularly if the decedent was a protected member. But membership ordinarily ends at death, the estate and heirs are different legal persons, and the court refused to extend protection automatically to family members. There is presently no dependable Form 5 procedure for passing a 4473-only suppressor to an heir.

For a durable asset expected to remain in a family for decades, that uncertainty matters.

A Form 4 Provides Recognized Proof of Lawful Ownership

An approved Form 4 and NFRTR entry provide a familiar record identifying the suppressor, its serial number, and the person or trust entitled to possess it. Federal law expressly requires a registrant to retain proof of registration and make it available to ATF upon request.

A 4473-only buyer instead depends on proving why the injunction covered the original transaction. That may require preserving:

  • proof of qualifying organizational membership;
  • proof that the membership was effective on the relevant dates;
  • the purchase invoice and serial number;
  • documentation showing that the manufacturer, seller, and dealer were within the protected transaction chain;
  • evidence of the completed Form 4473 and background check; and
  • copies of the judgment and other supporting legal materials.

That evidence may ultimately establish a defense, but it is less familiar to local officers, out-of-state authorities, repair facilities, insurers, executors, and future purchasers than an approved Form 4.

The Form 4 Burden Is Currently Much Smaller

There are real advantages to the 4473-only process: no fingerprints, no passport photograph, no CLEO notification, no NFA approval wait, and no registration of the purchaser in the NFRTR. For a buyer whose primary objective is avoiding federal registration, those advantages may be decisive.

But the traditional process no longer carries a $200 transfer tax for suppressors. ATF’s latest published processing figures reported:

  • a median of eight days for eForm 4 applications;

Those figures are not guarantees, but they materially change the cost-benefit analysis. A relatively short wait may purchase years of additional certainty concerning possession, trust ownership, travel, repairs, resale, and inheritance.

My Present Recommendation

The injunction is a major step toward dismantling an unnecessarily burdensome federal system. I hope it becomes the foundation for broader relief that ultimately makes these concerns obsolete.

We are not there yet.

For most Virginia purchasers—especially anyone who wants to share the suppressor with family members, place it in a trust, travel or hunt outside Virginia, preserve manufacturer repair options, sell it later, or pass it to heirs—I believe the more prudent choice is still to use a Form 4.

If shared possession or estate planning is important, the cleaner approach is usually to acquire the suppressor directly through a properly drafted NFA trust rather than first registering it to an individual.

A 4473-only transfer may make sense for a carefully informed purchaser who:

  • places a high value on avoiding federal registration;
  • intends to remain the only person exercising possession or control;
  • expects to keep the suppressor in Virginia;
  • accepts the uncertainty surrounding repairs, resale, later trust ownership, and inheritance;
  • maintains the organizational membership supporting injunction coverage; and
  • preserves extensive documentation of the purchase and the basis for protection.

The key is to make that decision with full knowledge of the long-term limitations. Taking possession today is only one part of owning a suppressor for the next twenty or thirty years.

For most buyers, an approved Form 4 remains the more portable, transferable, shareable, repairable, and estate-friendly option. Until broader relief or clear ATF guidance resolves the remaining questions, speed should not be the only consideration.

This article provides general legal information and does not constitute transaction-specific legal advice. The injunction’s implementation and related federal and state laws remain subject to change.

Principal Authorities and Further Reading

This entry was posted in 2A, 4473, ATF, Federal Court, Federal Law, FFL Issues, Form 4, Injunctions, Interstate Travel, NFA Injunction, NFA Transfers, NFA Trusts, Suppressors, Tax Stamp. Bookmark the permalink.