Silencer Shop Lawsuit Looks to Make Suppressor Ownership Easier

In my lifetime, suppressors have gone from a niche item owned by only a few hardcore firearm enthusiasts (my family among them) to an almost mandatory accessory for mainstream shooters and hunters. These days, most of my stateside hunting takes place with a suppressor-equipped rifle. Obtaining a suppressor can be a bit of a pain, though, which gives many potential users pause. Thanks to recent changes in Washington, D.C., suppressor ownership is set to become easier than ever.

A suppressor is a device that delays the release of the propellant gases produced by a firearm, thus reducing its sound signature, recoil and muzzle blast. A suppressor works similarly to the muffler on a vehicle. It reduces the sound but does not eliminate it. Suppressors do not make firearms “silent,” especially in the context of centerfire rifles. I hunt with suppressors so that I don’t have to fiddle with hearing protection when I should be focused on shooting. I’ve also found suppressors to be a great aid when it came to teaching my children to shoot and hunt. There’s no rational argument against legal suppressor ownership, other than being fundamentally anti-gun.

A century ago, a variety of factors led to a violent crime wave across our nation. Infamous bank robbers such as John Dillinger and Baby Face Nelson made headlines by killing cops with exotic-looking weapons including machine guns. In Chicago, Al Capone’s Thompson-wielding crew slew seven members of a rival gang in a gruesome event that became known as the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre. These well-publicized examples of extreme violence spawned the modern gun-control movement.

President Franklin Roosevelt was sympathetic to the anti-gunners’ cause and his Attorney General, Homer Cummings, took up the cause with zeal. The administration crammed a comprehensive gun control bill through Congress in a matter of days. The law, known as the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA), taxed and regulated a variety of firearms including machine guns but also included suppressors, though there’s scant evidence they were being used in the nation’s crime wave. The law placed a hefty $200 tax on ownership of suppressors, a prohibitive sum in those days that would equal $4,800 in 2025 dollars. Beyond the tax, the law imposed a variety of administrative barriers designed to make ownership difficult.

The Suppressor Process

For those not familiar with the process of purchasing a suppressor, it involves completing a Form 4, either on paper or electronically, submitting fingerprints and a photo, and paying a $200 tax. This process used to be far more cumbersome and lengthier, with approvals sometimes taking a year or longer. The paperwork and wait times were enough to steer many individuals away from suppressor ownership and it was hard to blame them. Recent changes in the way that applications are processed have sped up wait times dramatically—my last several eForm approvals have all come within 2-3 days.

It pains me that obtaining a metal tube that makes a gun less obnoxious requires jumping through these legal hoops, but I’m not in charge. The good news, though, is that we just witnessed the most significant pro-suppressor action since the initial passage of the NFA. Thanks to language included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), signed into law by President Trump, the $200 tax will be eliminated effective January 1, 2026. Great news but, the story doesn’t end there.

Previous versions of H.R. 1 would have moved suppressors and some other items out of the NFA’s purview entirely, eliminating the need for the Form 4, fingerprints, photo and associated wait times, but that language was struck down by the Senate’s Parliamentarian as a violation of what’s known as the “Byrd Rule.” Under that rule, language that is “merely incidental” to the budget process cannot advance on a simple majority vote. Though the Parliamentarian’s ruling was a huge disappointment for suppressor advocates, the story doesn’t end there.

On July 4, 2025, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that could change the game dramatically. Silencer Shop Foundation v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives alleges that the NFA’s authority to regulate suppressors relies on the $200 tax that it imposed. With that tax repealed, the NFA does not have a constitutional basis to stand upon. “The constitutional foundation on which the NFA rested has dissolved…” the complaint states. “And the NFA cannot be upheld under any other Article I power. With respect to the untaxed firearms, the Act is now unconstitutional”.

Breaking Down the Lawsuit

In layman’s terms, the lawsuit is arguing that the NFA is a tax law and removing the tax should invalidate everything that goes along with the imposition of that tax. If the lawsuit is successful, purchasing a suppressor in most states would be no more cumbersome than purchasing a firearm: no Form 4, no fingerprints, no photograph and no delay.

This lawsuit only applies to the NFA and, even if it prevails, state laws will still apply. As of now, eight states prohibit suppressor ownership. Forty-one states allow suppressors to be used while hunting.

On August 1, 2025, a second lawsuit, Brown v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, was filed by a group of plaintiffs including the National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation and American Suppressor Association. This case was filed in the Eastern District of Missouri.

The second lawsuit includes similar language to the Silencer Shop suit but also makes additional claims. The complaint in Brown challenges the very constitutionality of the NFA, which could have broader implications. If the federal courts rule that effectively banning suppressor ownership is, in fact, a violation of one’s Second Amendment rights, state prohibitions might be effectively challenged in the courts.

Things Take Time

The wheels of justice turn slowly so this process could take years to unfold. In the meantime, suppressors will be available without a tax and with a streamlined process made easier by firms such as Silencer Shop.

If you’re reading this and you’re considering purchasing a suppressor, I would recommend you do it now—before the tax is eliminated on January 1, 2026. With the widespread $200 discounts currently being offered by retailers, the tax is effectively free, and most brands are readily available. Once the tax expires, I predict that there will be a rush to buy which will quickly wipe out the inventories of most dealers. Expect backorders and, potentially, a delay in approvals as the ATF’s eForm system becomes swamped with applications.

We live in an age of rapid suppressor innovation—increases in consumer demand have spurned serious investments in R&D and the products have become more effective, smaller and lighter than ever before. State-of-the-art construction methods, including 3D printing and space-age materials, have compounded these advances.

Add in the lessening legal burdens of suppressor ownership and we may look back at this time as just the beginning of a golden era for these products. One day, suppressors might be as commonplace on firearms as optics are today. Suppressors do not beautify a firearm and, no, they don’t belong attached to a classic rifle but, for working guns, they are amazing tools.

Suppressors aren’t quite available over the counter but, within a few months, they’ll come without the $200 tax attached. The eForm system is operating with unpreceded short wait times. Unless you are unfortunate enough to live in the handful of states that ban ownership, the excuses for not owning one are growing slim. Hopefully the courts will rule in favor of removing suppressors from the NFA altogether. In the meantime, they’re becoming increasingly simple to obtain.

---