ATF Proposes Same-State Direct Firearm Shipping: What Would Change
Published: August 8, 2026 at 12:10 PM MST
Editorial illustration created for Gun Place. Not documentary photography.
Updated August 8, 2026: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has proposed expanding “non-over-the-counter” firearm transactions, potentially allowing an eligible customer to receive a firearm without visiting the selling dealer’s licensed premises.
Despite some descriptions of the proposal as “direct-to-consumer firearm shipping,” it would not remove the federal firearms licensee from the transaction. The seller would still be an FFL responsible for the transaction record, identity verification, background check, law-enforcement notification, and compliance with applicable laws.
The proposal is also limited to customers residing in the same state as the FFL’s licensed business premises. It would not create a general method for shipping firearms directly to customers across state lines.
ATF published the proposed rule, RIN 1140-AB05, on May 8, 2026. Its public-comment period closed August 6. As of August 8, the agency has not issued a final rule or announced an effective date. ATF’s official rulemaking page describes the measure as an expansion of lawful non-over-the-counter transactions using modern remote identity verification.
What ATF is proposing
Federal law already recognizes certain firearm sales in which the buyer does not appear at the licensee’s business premises. These are known as non-over-the-counter, or NOTC, transactions.
Current ATF regulations effectively limit this procedure to transactions exempt from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System requirement. That significantly restricts which customers and dealers can use it.
The proposed rule would establish a method for an FFL to conduct the required NICS background check while remotely verifying the customer’s identity. If every applicable requirement were satisfied, the participating FFL could ship or deliver the firearm to the eligible same-state customer.
The proposal says this option would be available to licensed dealers, manufacturers, and importers. It would be optional: the rule would permit qualifying remote transfers but would not require an FFL to offer them. The complete proposed text appears in the May 8 Federal Register notice.
How a remote firearm transfer would work
Under the proposal, a participating FFL would have to complete several steps before transferring a firearm.
First, the customer would complete Form 4473 and provide a true copy of a valid government-issued photo identification document. Additional documentation would be required when the identification does not display the customer’s current residence.
The dealer would then conduct a live video conference with the customer. During that conference, the FFL would inspect the customer’s actual identification and compare its photograph with the person appearing on video.
The customer would also undergo remote identity proofing through a credential service provider. That provider’s process would have to conform to specified National Institute of Standards and Technology digital-identity assurance levels and be independently assessed.
The identity-verification process would require either a live facial comparison performed by a representative or an automated biometric comparison using a live image, such as a selfie, with measures intended to establish that a real person is present.
After successful identity verification, the FFL would initiate the NICS background check. The dealer could not ship or deliver the firearm until receiving the required NICS response or reaching the end of the legally applicable investigatory period.
A seven-day period and local notification would still apply
The proposal would retain the special requirements Congress established for non-over-the-counter transfers.
The customer would provide a sworn statement containing required information about the purchaser, residence, and firearm. The FFL would send the statement and firearm description to the chief law-enforcement officer serving the customer’s place of residence.
The proposal would permit that notification to be made electronically in a form prescribed by the attorney general, rather than requiring registered or certified mail in every case.
After receiving confirmation that the law-enforcement agency accepted or refused delivery of the notification, the FFL would have to wait at least seven days before shipping or delivering the firearm. This requirement would operate separately from the NICS background-check process.
Accordingly, a remote transfer would not necessarily be faster than an in-person purchase. Its principal benefit would be reducing or eliminating the need to travel to the dealer’s premises.
This would not authorize nationwide direct shipping
The proposal’s most important limitation is residency.
The remote procedure would apply only when the customer resides in the same state where the FFL’s licensed business premises are located. It would not allow an Arizona FFL, for example, to use this procedure to ship a firearm directly to an ordinary customer residing in another state.
Existing rules governing interstate firearm transfers would remain in place. In most online transactions involving an out-of-state customer, the firearm would continue to be shipped to an appropriate FFL in the customer’s state, where the customer would complete the transfer.
The proposal would also leave federal eligibility requirements, age restrictions, Form 4473 requirements, NICS checks, recordkeeping obligations, and prohibited-person laws in place.
State and local laws would remain equally important. A state could prohibit or restrict direct delivery, impose its own waiting period, require a permit, mandate an in-person transfer, or establish other conditions. A transaction permissible under the proposed federal rule might therefore remain unavailable in a particular jurisdiction. Readers can follow related developments in Gun Place’s Legal & Regulatory coverage.
Potential benefits and concerns
For customers, the proposal could make lawful purchasing more accessible when a participating dealer is located far away or travel is difficult. Rural residents and customers with mobility limitations could be among those who benefit.
FFLs could potentially serve more customers within their state without opening additional retail locations. ATF estimated an illustrative identity-verification cost of approximately $7 per transaction, although actual provider charges, administrative expenses, insurance requirements, and shipping costs could differ.
The procedure would also introduce practical and privacy questions. Dealers would need secure systems for video conferencing, identity documents, electronic records, and credential-provider integration. Customers may want to understand what biometric information is collected, who retains it, how long it is stored, and how it is protected.
Dealers would separately need to consider carrier policies, delivery security, fraud prevention, state restrictions, and the consequences of a firearm being delivered to the wrong person. Those operational details may determine whether many FFLs adopt the procedure even if ATF ultimately authorizes it.
What happens next
The public-comment period has closed, but that does not make the proposal effective. ATF must review the submitted comments and decide whether to issue a final rule, modify the proposal, publish another proposal, or withdraw the rulemaking. Gun Place recently explained what happens after several ATF comment periods close.
Until a final rule is published and becomes effective, firearm dealers and customers must continue following current transfer procedures. Gun Place will monitor the rulemaking for a final decision and any implementation guidance.
This article is provided for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. Firearm laws and transfer requirements vary by jurisdiction and can change. Customers and FFLs should verify current federal, state, and local requirements before arranging a transaction.
Sources
- ATF: Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements
- Federal Register: Proposed Rule RIN 1140-AB05
- ATF Modernize rulemaking summary
Gun Place newsroom policies: Editorial Policy · Corrections · Ownership & Funding · Editorial contact.
