The "Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act of 2025" prevents states from imposing excise taxes on firearm sales, ammunition, or gun parts if the businesses are involved in interstate or foreign commerce, while specifically protecting the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act.
Darrell Issa
Representative
CA-48
The "Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act of 2025" prevents states and local governments from imposing excise taxes on firearms, ammunition, and firearm parts if the manufacturers or dealers are engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. This act does not affect the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act.
This proposed legislation, officially named the 'Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act of 2025,' aims to stop state and local governments from adding specific taxes, known as excise taxes, onto the sale of firearms, ammunition, or firearm parts. This restriction applies specifically when the manufacturers or dealers selling these items are involved in business across state lines or internationally (interstate or foreign commerce). It's important to note the bill explicitly states it doesn't interfere with the existing federal Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, which itself is funded by an excise tax on firearms and ammunition.
The core of this bill, outlined in Section 2, is a direct prohibition. It essentially tells states and localities: you cannot levy an excise tax – a tax typically targeting specific goods, often imposed at the point of manufacture or sale – on guns, ammo, or parts if the seller operates beyond your state's borders. This targets taxes applied before the final retail sale, distinct from general sales taxes consumers pay at the register. The bill singles out manufacturers and dealers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce, which could cover a significant portion of the firearms market.
By barring this specific type of tax, the legislation directly limits a tool states might use to generate revenue. Excise taxes are often earmarked for particular purposes, though this bill doesn't specify how states might currently use such funds if they exist. Removing this option means states looking to tax firearm sales would lose this specific avenue for manufacturers and dealers involved in commerce beyond their borders. This could potentially impact state budgets or require finding alternative revenue streams if such taxes were previously planned or implemented and relied upon for funding.