Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08919

I oppose this proposed rule as written and urge ATF to FULLY RESCIND the Biden "Engaged in the Business" framework in its entirety rather than issuing a partial replacement that preserves the same legal theories a federal court already rejected in Texas v. ATF. I have a small amount of firearms I want to leave to my children when I pass. The executor of my estate (likely my spouse) small as it may be, should NOT run the risk of being imprisoned because she gave or sold my guns to my children without an FFL. Likewise, emergencies happen, and a lot of times for people having to sell a gun is how they cover the expense. If you have a critical, expensive emergency, such as a septic tank failure, do you really expect someone to get an FFL just to be able to sell a few firearms to pay the cost of repair? These FFL lists required for the simple sale of any firearm also present major privacy hazards for all involved. Specifically, I urge ATF to: (1) rescind all retained sections of the 2024 Biden rule, including any provisions allowing routine personal collection activities to be used as evidence of unlicensed dealing; (2) eliminate the assertion that intent alone is sufficient to establish unlicensed dealing, a theory the Texas court rejected; (3) issue a new rule that follows the plain statutory language of federal law and the limits Congress imposed; and (4) clearly reject all legal theories already vacated by federal courts. A rule that survives in fragments still threatens the same law-abiding Americans it targeted from the start. RIN 1140-AB01.