A number of states are adopting new taxes on firearms, firearm parts, and ammunition, directing the funds to gun violence prevention or gun control programs. California has implemented an 11% excise tax on these items, while Colorado’s 6.5% excise tax began last year. Lawmakers in Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Virginia, and Washington have also introduced similar proposals.
Supporters present these taxes as public safety measures. Critics argue that such policies make it harder for working families and first-time gun owners to afford firearms for lawful purposes.
The Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act (S.1169) aims to prevent states from imposing targeted excise taxes on firearms and related products if the intent is to discourage lawful ownership or fund gun control initiatives. “States can regulate within constitutional limits, but they cannot impose punitive, targeted excise taxes designed to burden the free exercise of the right to keep and bear arms,” the bill’s supporters state.
Excise taxes are commonly applied to goods like tobacco that governments seek to discourage consumption of. Applying this concept to constitutionally protected rights is seen by some as an attempt to limit access by increasing costs.
These taxes are often justified as making the “gun industry” pay for public safety programs addressing criminal misuse of firearms. In practice, critics say this singles out lawful activity for extra financial penalties and channels revenue toward advocacy that treats legal gun ownership as a problem.
The Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act was introduced in the U.S. House (H.R.2442) by Representatives Darrel Issa (R-California) and Richard Hudson (R-North Carolina), and in the Senate (S.1169) by Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho). The legislation would prohibit state or local governments from imposing special excise taxes on sales of firearms or ammunition by manufacturers or retailers if those taxes are used specifically for gun control efforts.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), a cosponsor of the bill, stated: “Alongside President Trump, I was proud to champion provisions to reduce the federal suppressor tax to $0 as part of the Working Families Tax Cuts Act. This bill would take it a step further by ensuring blue states can’t usurp Congressional intent and use state taxes to deter law-abiding Americans from exercising their Second Amendment right to purchase firearms and ammunition.”
Virginia recently proposed HB919, which includes an 11% retail tax on firearms and ammunition sold by dealers.
Critics note that most criminals do not obtain guns through retail purchases—a point referenced in Department of Justice findings—and argue that such policies mainly affect law-abiding citizens and small businesses.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual rights related to firearm possession for lawful purposes including self-defense, applying these protections at both federal and state levels through prior decisions.
Opponents compare targeted firearm excise taxes with poll taxes previously struck down by courts because they placed a price tag on fundamental rights.
Supporters describe The Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act as narrowly tailored so it does not impact existing federal wildlife conservation funding provided under Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration laws.
According to its official website, Buckeye Firearms Association is a grassroots organization focused on defending firearm rights primarily in Ohio; it provides legislative alerts about gun-related laws and political developments along with training information and event updates relevant for Ohio residents.
“Rights are not luxuries,” supporters emphasize in advocating for passage of S.1169/Senate Bill 1169: “They do not belong only to those who can afford an additional 6.5% here or 11% there.” They contend Congress should act so that Second Amendment rights remain accessible regardless of income level.
