At the House Rules Committee meeting hours before the House passed President Trump’s “big beautiful bill” (215-214), Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO) questioned a new provision that was added to the bill after the Committee first looked at it.
The provision will no longer require one to register a firearm silencer (also known as a suppressor) with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Note: The bill also eliminates a $200 tax on silencers, a tax which has not changed since 1934, when it was first enacted by Congress.
When Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) interrupted Neguse to say, “It did not eliminate all regulations for silencers,” Neguse replied: “This provision very clearly states that you no longer have to register a silencer with the ATF.”
Neguse: This provision clearly states you no longer have to register silencers with the ATF?
Scott: It will be sold the same way a rifle is
Neguse: That’s not the question I asked
Scott: Don’t yell at me! pic.twitter.com/iZ4SYAA6sr
— Acyn (@Acyn) May 22, 2025
When Neguse asked Scott, “Is that wrong, is that incorrect?” Scott replied, “That doesn’t mean you will not go through a background check. It’ll be sold the same way a rifle is.”
Neguse said: “That’s not the question I asked.” Scott replied, “I gave you an answer, if you don’t like it, it’s over with.”
Neguse used the rest of his time to note that “The National Firearm Act for 100 years, since the days of Al Capone — who’s the impetus behind the National Firearm Act in the first instance — has required registration for those purchasing silencers. That was the case up until 45 minutes ago, when Republicans negotiated the elimination of that registration requirement.”
When Neguse asked the Committee which Republican was responsible for getting the provision added to the bill, Committee chair Virginia Foxx (R-NC) replied, “I don’t believe anyone here knows that either.”
Note: Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO), who has been pushing for the elimination of the silencer tax said in January: “This is about making sure that people keep their hearing at the end of the day.”
Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) said: “As a combat veteran, a lifelong hunter and gun owner, I can tell you this has nothing to do with hearing protection, but everything to do about making money for one segment of the gun industry.”
Thompson also argued that the silencer provision will “make it harder for victims of mass shootings to know where the shots are coming from as they’re trying to run for cover.”