‘Confusing for Everyone.’ Suppressor Sales Boom Even as Many Gun Shops Wait for Federal Guidance After Deregulation Ruling
In the week since the ruling by a Texas judge went into effect to deregulate suppressors at the federal level, manufacturers, dealers, and customers have noted a surge in sales — and plenty of “ongoing chaos” about how to legally transfer those suppressors.
The Department of Justice and the headquarters for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have, so far, been silent on public (and many private) requests for clarity or guidance on suppressor purchases. Inquiries to these agencies have been made across the gun industry, including in a letter by the successful plaintiffs in the combined cases of Silencer Shop v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF. The letter asked five key questions and requested a response by today, Aug. 21.
As of press time, the ATF and DOJ had not responded to the letter.
This is unsurprising, according to industry insiders, who say it would be unwise for the DOJ or ATF to attempt to interpret the judge’s ruling. Doing so could potentially damage the Trump administration’s chances for a successful reversal. The DOJ has until Oct. 5 to appeal or stay the decision.
What Changed with Suppressor Purchases
On Aug. 5 a federal district court ruled in favor of a handful of gun-rights groups and companies that make and sell suppressors, essentially removing “silencers” from the National Firearms Act’s list of restricted items.
Related: Suppressors Have Been Deregulated and Can Now Be Bought Over the Counter (With Some Key Exceptions)
Previously, anyone who wanted to buy a suppressor needed to submit an ATF Form 4, fingerprints, and a photo, and wait for federal approval. While that process has been streamlined recently with waiting periods as short as a day in some cases and the NFA tax stamp slashed from $200 to $0, it’s still more onerous than purchasing a firearm.
Since the DOJ did not file an appeal during the seven-day stay after the ruling, customers who fulfill certain key requirements can now legally buy suppressors using a 4473 as of Aug. 13. This is the same form used to purchase or transfer a gun at an FFL. Requirements include living in one of the 27 states that does not have its own law requiring the federal NFA stamp, as well as membership in a plaintiff organization or the purchase of a suppressor supplied by one of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiff organizations listed in the combined cases of Silencer Shop v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF include:
While Gun Owners of America declined to provide specific figures about recent member growth, the organization confirmed that membership is booming.
“When the ruling first came out, traffic to our website was so substantial that it was crawling as people registered. Which was a great problem to have,” says GOA director of development marketing Kailey Neiman, who was unable to log into the site at that time. “We’ve been working around the clock to make sure that it continues to speed up.”
The plaintiff retailers and manufacturers include:
While those requirements might seem straightforward, the reality on the ground is more complicated.
Mixed Messaging from the Feds
Some gun shops initially said they received guidance from their local ATF offices. Grand Teton Gun and Range in Rexburg, Idaho, reported “going through inventory like crazy” in the first 20 minutes of opening for the day late last week. In a since-deleted Instagram post, an employee announced the shop was pausing suppressor sales without NFA registration after receiving advice from its local ATF branch to halt those transfers.
Two days ago, however, the shop announced it had resumed suppressor transfers via 4473 forms as outlined in Jensen v. ATF after “a long weekend of further discussions with industry partners, associations and others.”
One source familiar with the lawsuits says the ATF issued internal instructions to its local branches to stop providing any guidance related to the ruling. This is because the ATF does not have decision-making authority on suppressor regulations. While the agency may be able to make recommendations to the DOJ, any decision to appeal rests with the DOJ and the White House.
“There are back-channel conversations that are happening right now between the attorneys,” says Bill Sack, a lawyer and the senior director of legal operations for the Second Amendment Foundation. “There are ongoing conversations about trying to achieve some additional clarity as to how all of these things are going to work, how the government is going to treat [the transfers]. All that is ongoing, but nothing formal has hit the docket just yet.”
Sack declined to expand on the substance of those conversations since SAF’s sister organization is a named plaintiff in Jensen v. ATF. (SAF is a named plaintiff in Brown v. ATF in Missouri, one of two similar cases filed in other federal districts. The other is Roberts v. ATF in Kentucky.)
NO MORE FORM 4? What the NFA Court Victory Means for PSA Customers | Palmetto State Armory
“ATF is not normally in the position of interpreting law, especially when it was a judgment from a judge,” says Brandon Maddox, president and CEO of Silencer Central.
Silencer Central joined one of the plaintiff organizations and is selling silencers without NFA registrations to customers who walk into its South Dakota shop. Palmetto State Armory, one of the plaintiffs, is doing the same out of its South Carolina headquarters.
Silencer Shop does not sell suppressors out of its Texas-based showroom, but it is working with dealers — local and out-of-state — to sell suppressors without NFA registration. Its headquarters is currently fielding an extraordinarily high call volume (I tried ringing their shop today and found myself 52nd in line) but the company confirmed its current transfer status over email.
“In Texas, which is a free state, suppressors purchased through us are typically transferred using a Form 4473 and NICS check, not a Form 4,” Silencer Shop wrote in what appeared to be an automated or AI-generated email. “The ATF is barred from enforcing NFA registration against Silencer Shop customers for suppressors and AOWs.”
A Silencer Shop employee confirmed by phone that the high call volume is from customers who want to buy suppressors, customers who have questions, and customers who need help because they ordered a Silencer Shop suppressor but the dealer who received it won’t transfer it without an NFA stamp.
Some Silencer Shop dealers in Texas and in qualifying states are selling suppressors without NFA registration over the counter, he added, while others are not.
“We don’t tell them how they have to do [transfers]. We give them as much advice as we can on it, but it’s at their discretion,” the employee says, noting that Silencer Shop employees have been working overtime to answer customer questions as quickly as possible. “If [dealers] choose to do it on a 4473, absolutely great. If they want to use a Form 4 still, if they don’t feel comfortable yet, then we understand that and will respect that decision.”
Many dealers want to wait for guidance before participating in suppressor transfers without NFA registration.
“A lot of the more technical questions are the ones we are trying to answer,” says Sack. “For example, one of the manufacturers put out information online in the last week, saying both the gun store and the individual recipient in a 4473-style suppressor transfer have to be covered by the injunction. That’s not our reading of what it says. But we do appreciate that there is a lack of clarity and uncertainty on that. So issues like that abound.”
Maddox of Silencer Central has not received guidance from his usual ATF contacts and has heard similar reports of mixed messages from ATF employees. While he’s still hoping for guidance, Maddox understands why ATF staff cannot give advice and doubts the agency will offer broad guidance until the 60-day appeal window expires.
“At any time during that time, DOJ could still appeal or stay the ruling,” says Maddox. “Appeal it, meaning, continue the fight, or stay it, meaning pause that judgment and everything kind of reverts back to the way it was. So I can’t see ATF jumping in until that’s over because why would they? Things could change.”
Cautious Gun Shops, and a New Kind of Customer
Given that uncertainty, groups like the National Shooting Sports Foundation are urging caution in their published guidance, even as they await word from the ATF.
“This is confusing for everyone and a difficult legal decision for even the industry to figure out. We’re advising everyone to proceed with caution,” says NSSF managing director for public affairs Mark Oliva. “Being bold on this may not be in [a dealer’s] best business interest and we want them to stay in business … There was big excitement when the decision came down … but FFLs really do need to check with their own state attorneys general. Take a deep breath. Read the decision. Talk to your lawyer.”
While Maddox reported “a big surge in sales” of suppressors immediately following this month’s ruling, he says some of that has since quieted.
“The problem we’re having is a lot of dealers are unfortunately unwilling to do 4473s, really all over the country,” says Maddox. “It’s their own choice. So if a dealer decides not to make transfers [without NFA registration], it’s creating some friction with our customers. Because people have had silencers shipped to their local dealer, and their local dealer is like ‘No I’m not doing that.’ And I get it. At the end of the day, suppressors might be ten percent of their business, so do they really want to risk their whole license on something that might be a small percentage of their total business?”
Maddox notes a surge of new customers taking advantage of the 4473 process. While aware of the new transfer option, many existing Silencer Central customers are content sticking with the NFA Form 4 process they’re familiar with.
“It’s not necessarily repeat customers,” says Maddox of the surge in suppressor sales. “It’s been new customers who’ve been waiting for this day to happen. I think there were people who maybe had an aversion to the government fingerprints or maybe they were always on the sideline saying ‘if this [NFA process] ever goes away, I’m going to get one’ … That seems to be the majority of the people buying suppressors right now.”
Remaining Uncertainty for 4473 Transfers
What happens to anyone who buys a suppressor with a 4473 if the DOJ ultimately appeals the recent ruling? This is a key question the gun industry wants answered by the ATF or DOJ.
Online commenters and content creators warn that anyone who now buys a suppressor without NFA registration could eventually be charged with a felony. Several experts familiar with the lawsuit say lawful buyers would likely be covered by what’s called judicial reliance.
“If you do something that is legal at the time that you did it, but the legality of that thing changes after the fact, you have something — in this case an injunction and a court order — that you could point back to and say ‘When I did this thing, I was doing it in accordance with the law,’” says Sack of the Second Amendment Foundation.
If the DOJ appeals the case and wins (thereby outlawing the transfer of suppressors without NFA registration) the federal government will have to come up with a solution to resolve that legal gray area. Potential solutions include amnesty from future enforcement for those customers or a retroactive registration program, as happened with pistol braces.
“There’s any number of things [the ATF] potentially could do,” says Sack. “If they’re going to try to enforce it, I think they’re going to have a real uphill battle. And I think courts would be very apt to toss that out. But it just remains to be seen how they would treat it.”
If the DOJ chooses not to appeal by Oct. 5, the current landscape of suppressor transfers becomes locked in.
“In essence you would get a permanent disposition that the injunction stands, which would create this strange circumstance where different manufacturers, different gun shops, and different individuals are treated differently under the law,” says Sack.
In that case, states will likely become motivated to address suppressor regulation with their own laws.
That’s because another current problem involves the 15 states that have laws requiring the federal NFA stamp for lawful suppressor ownership. (Suppressors are outlawed in eight states.) If a suppressor has NFA registration, it’s legal in 42 states. If a suppressor does not have NFA registration, it’s only legal in 27 states. That makes crossing state lines with a suppressor illegal depending on where you’re traveling.
“If someone bought a silencer in Alabama and they bought it over the counter, it could create a problem if they went to another state [where suppressors are legal],” says Maddox. “So if someone went from Alabama to hunt in North Dakota, they’d have a problem because in North Dakota, state law says you can’t have a silencer unless it went through the federal process.”
Related: We Tested More Than 100 Suppressors and Brake Combos for Sound and Recoil
This is a key reason Maddox helped spearhead legislation in South Dakota to clear a path for lawful suppressor ownership in the event suppressors were removed from the NFA. Senate Bill 2 was passed unanimously by the South Dakota legislature and signed into law by the governor in February. A similar law recently passed in Kansas and is pending in Ohio, while others have stalled in states like Georgia and Mississippi.
Maddox remains hopeful that more states will see a need to deregulate suppressors at the state level in the wake of the lawsuits. He expects this process will be easier in red states and may never happen in some blue states.
Silencer sales were already on the rise in 2026, with a record number of NFA applications this year. The suppressor market saw a 265 percent growth in registrations from 2020 through 2024, and the number of suppressors in circulation doubled during that window, according to the NSSF. ATF now reports more than 6.65 million registered suppressors in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.
Read the full article here
