Editor's Note - This story was first published on July 10, 2025 on NSSF's website, and reprinted with their permission.
By Larry Keane
Now that the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” (OBBB) is law, there is reason for gun owners and the firearm industry to celebrate. There’s also work that’s still waiting.
While passage of the Hearing Protection Act (H.R. 404/S. 364) and the Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today (SHORT) Act (H.R. 2395/S. 1162), would have been preferable and remains an NSSF priority, it’s important to recognize the important progress that was made for the firearm industry and gun owners. Reducing the National Firearms Act (NFA) tax stamp fee on suppressors and short-barrel rifles and short-barrel shotguns to $0 from $200 was no small feat. Those tax reductions will take effect Jan. 1, 2026.
The reality of zeroing out a tax that’s been in place for over 90 years was a Herculean effort. Anyone who watches Congress understands that the federal lawmaking process is cumbersome and glacial – for a reason. That’s what the Framers intended to protect against heated rhetoric and passionate policymaking. After all, three of the first four presidents were said to have discussed this notion at the time the U.S. Constitution was signed into law.
James Madison, America’s fourth president, wrote to Thomas Jefferson that the U.S. Senate would be the great “anchor” of the government and a “necessary fence” against the “fickleness and passion” that would hold sway in the U.S. House of Representatives. George Washington is said to have also explained to Jefferson that the Framers intended the Senate to be the “saucer” that cools the hot tea of House legislation.
Working in the Framework
That’s what happened with the One, Big, Beautiful Bill. Originally, the plan was to include the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) in its entirety, but there were concerns early on about the price tag, and what portions would be acceptable using the budget reconciliation process. The price tag concerns were addressed because of the cost savings elsewhere in the bill. Then the attention turned towards whether all sections, including the preemption section, would survive the Senate’s so-called “Byrd Rule” that controls the Senate’s reconciliation process.
Mindful of the potential Byrd Rule problem, the House Ways and Means Committee, which focuses on tax issues, proposed the NFA tax on suppressors could be reduced from $200 to just $5. That proposal was pushed to the House of Representatives, which decided on a two-pronged approach. The House version of the OBBB included both the HPA repeal language as well as a provision to reduce the NFA tax to $0 and at the same time, a proposal would be included to remove the tax altogether for suppressors.
NSSF understood the House’s two-pronged strategy. In the end, that strategy proved to be the correct approach as the Senate parliamentarian reviewing the Senate’s proposal ruled that including HPA and the SHORT Act in reconciliation did not comply with the Byrd Rule. And Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), early in the reconciliation process and several times during the legislative sausage-making, made clear he would not overrule the parliamentarian. In the end, the Senate ended up including language to reduce the NFA tax on suppressors and short-barreled rifles and short-barrel shotguns and “any other weapons” to $0 from $200. The House concurred with the Senate version of the OBBB and President Donald Trump signed it into law on July 4.
The strategy of trying to enact the HPA and SHORT Act through reconciliation is understandable because reconciliation bills require a simple majority, not the usual 60 votes to move legislation in the Senate. While full repeal was not accomplished, and remains an industry priority, removing the tax eliminated one of the main barriers to more law-abiding Americans being able to afford to fully exercise their Second Amendment rights by purchasing these products.
And, as ownership of these products significantly increases, as NSSF fully expects, and crime continues to fall, it will be easier to pass full repeal – which remains the goal.
Public Lands Proposal
The Senate Parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled out a provision offered by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who chairs the Senate Natural Resources Committee, to sell off a portion of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands. The public reaction to Sen. Lee’s proposal was very negative. Conservation groups rallied support to oppose the measure. After the parliamentarian ruled against the proposal, Sen. Lee tried to winnow down the scope of his proposal, including dropping consideration of USFS land, reducing the number of acres, limiting it to land within five miles of population centers and for it to be used for building affordable housing.
Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) had prepared an amendment for floor consideration should Sen. Lee’s revised proposal pass the “Byrd Bath.” Faced with growing bipartisan opposition, Sen. Lee ultimately withdrew the revised proposal, promising to revisit it at a later date.
NSSF has long advocated for increased public land access so hunters and recreational shooters can access the lands for which their tax dollars pay. It is important to note that federal law already provides a means for the sale of marginal public lands that do not provide meaningful recreational use including target shooting and hunting. NSSF is ready to work with Congress and the Trump administration to forge a plan that works to benefit public land hunting and recreational target shooting that will also be fiscally beneficial for the nation. That work won’t be easy and must be done in a thoughtful and meaningful way.
