When the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) unveiled several proposed and final rules this April, the agency framed them as an effort to modernize gun regulations and reduce burdens on the gun industry. If implemented, however, many of the rule changes would have a disastrous effect on public safety by creating new gun trafficking channels and putting guns into the hands of more people prohibited from owning them.
As discussed below, a closer look at the rules shows that many are designed to not only save the gun industry millions in regulatory requirements, including at least $12 million in compliance and administrative costs, but also open up potentially billions in new revenue streams — in addition to the $380 million in the ATF’s own estimates. Taken together, the ATF rollbacks represent a significant handout to the gun industry.
Increasing Revenue for the Gun Industry
One of the largest direct industry benefits identified in the ATF’s analyses comes from its final rule revising the federal regulatory definition of “machinegun” following the Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. Cargill. The court held that the agency had exceeded its authority in classifying bump stocks as machine guns in 2018 in response to the Route 91 Harvest Festival mass shooting in Las Vegas, which involved over a dozen AR-15s equipped with the devices.
According to the rule, the ATF estimates that allowing the gun industry to return to selling bump stocks — as Slide Fire Solutions did months after the Supreme Court ruling — will bring in approximately $204.9 million in revenue over 10 years. Yet the rule offers no analysis on the potential impact on public safety, a critical flaw identified in several of the ATF proposals.
The ATF estimates that another proposal to ease import restrictions on training ammunition would not only save importers $45,215 over 10 years in terms of paperwork, but also generate $174.6 million in revenue due to “increase[d] retail sales.” If the rule is finalized, the ATF predicts consumers “would see lower prices” on training ammunition, and importers “would see higher profits.”
Between the bump stock and training ammunition rules, the industry could see at least $380 million in increased revenue. But the ATF did not attempt to estimate the industry’s increased revenue in several other proposals, focusing instead on cost savings for gun owners. The ATF’s non-over-the-counter firearms (NOTC) proposal, for example, which would allow people to purchase guns and undergo background checks fully online, skipping gun sales counters entirely, could lead to 3.28 million more gun sales per year according to the ATF’s estimate, but the agency did not quantify that revenue for the gun industry — only that it would save gun buyers approximately $1.04 billion over 10 years in terms of time spent driving to and from gun dealers. But this rule would also increase revenue for the industry: Assuming that guns sell for at least $300 on average, the industry stands to make well over $1 billion in revenue from this one proposal.
Several ATF proposals designed to make it easier to own National Firearms Act (NFA) items like silencers and short-barreled firearms will lead to more sales for the industry, but the ATF again instead provided estimates only on cost savings for gun owners. For example, the proposal to rescind the ATF’s arm brace rule — making it easier to own short-barreled ARs and AKs — “could have a qualitative disbenefit to public safety” but save gun owners an estimated $1.4 billion over 10 years in application costs. Other proposals relaxing NFA requirements would save gun owners at least $778.13 million over 10 years1See ATF, “Fingerprint and Photograph Requirements for Firearms Applications,” with an estimated cost savings of $646.9 million over 10 years, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/07/06/2026-13587/fingerprint-and-photograph-requirements-for-firearms-applications; “Removing CLEO Notification Under the National Firearms Act,” $115.8 million, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/05/06/2026-08912/removing-cleo-notification-under-the-national-firearms-act, “Joint Registration for Spouses Under the National Firearms Act,” $14.2 million, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/05/08/2026-09154/joint-registration-for-spouses-under-the-national-firearms-act; and “Interstate Transport and Temporary Export of National Firearms Act Firearms,” $1.23 million, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/05/08/2026-09161/interstate-transport-and-temporary-export-of-national-firearms-act-firearms. — savings that could be redirected into future sales. More broadly, the rules lower barriers to entry for NFA weapons, creating new markets for the industry.
Direct Industry Savings
The ATF can revoke the licenses of gun dealers who willfully violate federal firearm laws, but another proposed rule would redefine “willfully” to only apply when dealers know that their conduct is unlawful — something that will be very difficult for ATF inspectors to prove and lead to fewer license revocations. The ATF estimates that the proposal will save 1,130 gun dealers who would have otherwise needed to defend themselves in court $2.37 million in legal expenses over the next decade. The ATF admits that the rule may harm public safety by increasing the likelihood of dealers selling guns to prohibited people without conducting background checks, refusing to comply with crime gun trace requests, “or other similar consequential violations,” but dismisses those chances as “slim.”
The ATF’s proposed rule allowing importers to manufacture and assemble firearms in foreign trade zones and customs-bonded warehouses — instead of solely using them for storage, as currently required — would save a small subset of importers an estimated $1.67 million. That estimate hides a larger impact: As discussed here, the rule could potentially lower costs for importers who bring in parts to assemble and sell AKs and other assault weapons. The rule works in conjunction with another proposal that would allow for the importation of “dual-use” barrels, frames, and receivers for building assault weapons, but oddly enough, the ATF said that it did not have “sufficient information” to estimate the financial impact.
The ATF has also proposed eliminating the requirement that firearms dealers post Youth Handgun Safety Act notices and distribute pamphlets created to help prevent children and teenagers from illegally accessing handguns and hurting themselves or others. The ATF justifies eliminating this requirement — at a time when guns are the leading cause of death for children and teens — by saying it would save gun dealers $8 million over 10 years. But in its rule, the ATF also ignored the fact that it provides Youth Handgun Safety Act notices and pamphlets through its own website free of charge.
Following the Money
Not every ATF proposal can be characterized as a discretionary giveaway. But the ATF appears to be more focused on cutting costs for gun makers, importers, and dealers and creating new revenue streams for them instead of overseeing the industry and protecting the public, which will bear the public safety costs of many of these proposals.