Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09157

**Comment on ATF Docket ATF-2026-0266** I strongly oppose the proposed rule allowing federally licensed firearms dealers to complete ordinary firearm sales through remote identity verification and ship firearms directly to purchasers without requiring an in-person transfer. As a small business owner (licensed FFL business), I believe this proposal would have significant unintended consequences for local firearm retailers while providing very little practical benefit to consumers. Local gun shops depend on in-person firearm sales and transfer services to remain viable. Allowing large online retailers to ship directly to customers after only a remote identity verification shifts business away from local dealers who provide valuable services to their communities. Small independent dealers cannot compete with the pricing and volume of large national sellers, and this rule would accelerate that imbalance. In addition to lost firearm sales, local dealers stand to lose transfer fees, accessory sales, ammunition sales, and long-term customer relationships that often begin with an in-store purchase. The current process also provides an important opportunity for a dealer to interact with the purchaser in person. Face-to-face transactions allow dealers to directly examine identification, compare the purchaser to the identification presented, and observe the transaction in a way that cannot be fully replicated through a remote video connection. While remote identity verification may confirm identification documents, it is not a complete substitute for an in-person transaction. The proposal also appears to impose additional costs on lawful purchasers. ATF estimates that remote identity verification will cost approximately $7 per transaction, a cost that will ultimately be passed on to consumers. Buyers would still be required to complete a background check and wait seven days before the firearm could be shipped, meaning the practical convenience gained is limited while the cost of the transaction increases. Existing law already provides pathways for certain firearms to be transferred directly to qualified individuals after extensive federal review, including fingerprinting, photographs, and formal government approval. Those procedures involve a higher level of government review before direct shipment is permitted. This proposal would create a separate pathway for ordinary firearms that relies on remote verification and the absence of an objection rather than an affirmative approval process. ATF characterizes this proposal as providing greater flexibility and convenience for lawful purchasers. However, convenience alone is not sufficient justification for replacing an established in-person process that has functioned effectively for decades. The proposal does not demonstrate that the current system has created a widespread problem requiring this change. Instead, it shifts sales away from local federally licensed dealers while offering only a modest convenience benefit to purchasers who would still be subject to a background check and waiting period. In addition, I do not believe the proposal adequately demonstrates that this rule is necessary. Before adopting a rule that would significantly affect thousands of federally licensed firearms dealers, ATF should clearly demonstrate that the benefits of the proposal outweigh its economic impact on small businesses and any reduction in the value of in-person transactions. Based on the information presented in the proposed rule, I do not believe ATF has met that burden. For these reasons, I respectfully urge ATF to withdraw this proposed rule.