Broke 0 #1 July 2, 2009 QuoteSenate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own. It may require fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun. This bill was introduced on Feb. 24. This bill will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all. The full text of the proposed amendment is on the U.S. Senate homepage, http://www.senate.gov/ You can find the bill by doing a search by the bill number, SB-2099. You know who to call; I strongly suggest you do. Please send a copy of this e-mail to every gun owner you know to help STOP this bill. got this in an email from a friend.Divot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #2 July 2, 2009 Quotegot this in an email from a friend. Tell your "friend" he's a gullible stooge that's been duped by an internet rumor/fear campaign and should check crap like that before forwarding it. http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_senate_bill_2099_put_a_yearly.htmlquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #3 July 2, 2009 Just forwarded the link to my friend.Divot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #4 July 2, 2009 Doh! that had me worried until I checked it out . . . There IS some scary legislation out there, though. Scary enough to enough people here that you can hardly buy ammo ANYWHERE - They are sold out.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #5 July 2, 2009 QuoteJust forwarded the link to my friend. General rule for me is that 99% of everything reforwarded via email is crap. Even if it sounds 100% plausable, it's probably 99% crap and usually not worth the time to even read. Most of these things can easily be fact checked with just a couple of keystrokes.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #6 July 2, 2009 Plenty of .22lr ammo around. Perfect for small game. Rabbit stew anyone?Divot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #7 July 2, 2009 QuoteDoh! that had me worried until I checked it out . . . There IS some scary legislation out there, though. Scary enough to enough people here that you can hardly buy ammo ANYWHERE - They are sold out. So, why do you think emails like this get created and reforwarded? My personal belief is that it feeds the fear and boosts gun sales.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #8 July 2, 2009 QuoteQuoteDoh! that had me worried until I checked it out . . . There IS some scary legislation out there, though. Scary enough to enough people here that you can hardly buy ammo ANYWHERE - They are sold out. So, why do you think emails like this get created and reforwarded? My personal belief is that it feeds the fear and boosts gun sales. OK - I believe that to an extent - it also could be the pooint and laugh crowd saying "Here, hold my internet, and watch this!"I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #9 July 2, 2009 QuotePlenty of .22lr ammo around. Perfect for small game. Rabbit stew anyone? What's kind of funny (in a strange way) is that I love rabbit meat but just because they're cute little furry animals I could never raise them for meat. But, I have no problem shooting a wild rabbit..."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #10 July 2, 2009 QuoteTell your "friend" he's a gullible stooge that's been duped by an internet rumor/fear campaign and should check crap like that before forwarding it. Except that things like the Blair Holt bill does include having to pay a tax to own any hangun or semi weapon, and the NFA of 1934 put a prohibitive tax on certain types of weapons. So it HAS happened, and there are people that want to do exactly that on other items. So while THIS letter may be false, that does not mean that the idea is not out there and in some peoples plans.... Hell, even Chris Rock said to make bullets so expensive no one can shoot any."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,434 #11 July 2, 2009 >Scary enough to enough people here that you can hardly buy >ammo ANYWHERE - They are sold out. The only possible answer - if you see any ammo, buy all of it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #12 July 2, 2009 QuoteGeneral rule for me is that 99% of everything reforwarded via email is crap. Sturgeon's law?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #13 July 2, 2009 snopes.com says FALSE on the rumor. The bill was introduced in 2000, died in committee, and never included listing guns on your tax return. http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/taxreturns.asp Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #14 July 2, 2009 QuoteTell your "friend" he's a gullible stooge that's been duped by an internet rumor/fear campaign and should check crap like that before forwarding it. http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_senate_bill_2099_put_a_yearly.html Your very own web reference demonstrates that actions like this DO happen. And just because it's not a current bill, doesn't mean that the sentiments and ideas contained in this year-2000 bill don't still exist in the minds of many legislators. Quote: "S. 2099 was introduced Feb. 24, 2000, by Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island. He called it the "Handgun Safety and Registration Act of 2000." "It's true that the bill would have required owners of handguns to register them with the federal government within one year... handgun owners would need to fill out a registration form, get fingerprinted by local law enforcement officials and obtain a local "Law Enforcement Certification." These would be sent to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, along with a recent photo (2 inches by 2 inches) and a $5 registration fee... "The bill would indeed have required a $50 tax on each handgun, but it would have been a one-time tax, not an annual tax. And it would have been imposed on the manufacturer..."So, since it HAS been introduced in the recent past, I'm not sure that I'd call someone "gullible" for believing that it could be re-introduced again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #15 July 2, 2009 the hoax claimed much more than "reintroduced." Quote This bill was introduced on Feb. 24. This bill will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #16 July 2, 2009 What guns? I sold all my guns a while back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #17 July 2, 2009 Quote What guns? I sold all my guns a while back. Did you pay tax on the income? Papers, please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #18 July 2, 2009 QuotePlenty of .22lr ammo around. Perfect for small game. Rabbit stew anyone? .22lr around here is sold out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #19 July 2, 2009 Mine had a tragic accident where they went into Lake Superior. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #20 July 2, 2009 Quote I'm not sure that I'd call someone "gullible" for believing that it could be re-introduced again. Is that your way of saying you got all tingly at the prospects of a good fight until it was pointed out it was bogus? quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #21 July 3, 2009 Quote Quote What guns? I sold all my guns a while back. Did you pay tax on the income? Papers, please. I sold them each in a year where I had no 1099 income and sold them each for $500 in separate years. That's below the $600 threshold where I'd have to report that income. So no, I didn't pay taxes on it. Nor was I required to pay taxes or report that income.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #22 July 3, 2009 Quote Quote What guns? I sold all my guns a while back. Did you pay tax on the income? Papers, please. You only have to pay tax on profit from personal property sales. Guns bought brand new on 4473 forms are generally worth less than you paid except when politics get in the way. You can always uphold your principles when that happens and not gouge people. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #23 July 4, 2009 Personally, I sold all mine for a small loss. I wonder if the government will reimburse me.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #24 July 4, 2009 QuoteThat's below the $600 threshold where I'd have to report that income. So no, I didn't pay taxes on it. Nor was I required to pay taxes or report that income. There is no lower threshold on of such income being taxable. The $600 refers to the level above which certain payers must file 1099 forms. Even with lesser amounts, the tax liability is there for the receiver (only on the gain, obviously, not the sale amount). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
