Open AB-1263 - Online sale ban - I changed the title because it was too clickbaity.

[shroom]

You are technically correct in that the law does not specifically call out that scenario. But the way the law is written requires an in-state, face-to-face FFL transaction and background check for any non-exempt barrel transfer after July 1st, 2026. Is there a loophole as you've outlined it? I don't know, NALNLA

If you didn't have an FFL-03/COE would you risk importing ammo into California?

You can always find an outlier shop who will not comply with California law, I was speaking in general about the larger, well-known retailers when I spoke of not risking it.

I understand and agree 100% with the spirit of your argument, we all know how misguided and draconian these California laws are, but I don't see much value in rationalizing or arguing the minutia after they have passed. Like all laws, we can choose to follow them or not, but then we accept the consequences. I think it's more productive to fight these laws through the court system, educate non gun owners, donate to CPRA, GOA, etc., engage with our representatives, and vote.

"This bill would require, prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident of a firearm barrel that is unattached to a firearm, firearm accessory, or a firearm manufacturing machine, a firearm industry member to comply with specified requirements." The way I see it is that this only applies to within California, or to vendors who do business in California. Surely there's no way that CA can write a law that small business FFLs in Nevada have to adhere to.

A person would be at risk if they brought ammo in without an 03+COE, but the law specifically states so. In this case I don't see anything that says "barrels cannot be brought into the state from out of state." Frankly even with an 03+COE you're still probably at risk bringing ammo over the border, considering cops may very well not know about the exemption.

Oh, yea, if you meant the big retailers/online sellers then absolutely I agree, they will be in compliance. Or just stop sales to not deal with the ballache.

 

[cali_jazz]

"This bill would require, prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident of a firearm barrel that is unattached to a firearm, firearm accessory, or a firearm manufacturing machine, a firearm industry member to comply with specified requirements." The way I see it is that this only applies to within California, or to vendors who do business in California. Surely there's no way that CA can write a law that small business FFLs in Nevada have to adhere to.

Correct on SB 1263 which is about how Californian's can receive parts directly (or not) and can probably not legally compel out of state vendors to comply as you assert. However the companion bill SB 704 is the one I quoted that requires face-to-face transactions via a California FFL for all standalone firearm barrel purchases starting July 1st January 1st, 2026 and mandatory background checks starting July 1st, 2027. So your point is valid, you can manually import a barrel from another state legally until July 1st without providing proof of age, address?

 

[star.3d]

face-to-face transactions via a California FFL for all standalone firearm barrel purchases starting July 1st 2026

I think you meant January 1st 2026. The eligibility check starts 7/1/27.

AB1263 does not add any new language regarding importation. SB 704 also does not regulate importation, only sales or transfers of barrels within CA. I'd say you're okay physically importing barrels or most other parts (for your own use) after 1/1/26. Could you take delivery out of state and mail it to yourself? Yes, in my opinion - because there's no sale or delivery from a firearms industry member, and you're not transferring it.

 

[cali_jazz]

Yes, you're right, January 1st, 2026, but the language while not directly speaking to importation specifies all barrel purchases must take place face to face at a California licensed FFL, starting July 1st, does it not? Where does it say "within CA"? I cannot find that in the bill text.

If all purchases must take place face-to-face at a California licensed FFL, that would effectively preclude manually purchasing a barrel in another state and bringing it back to California.

 

[star.3d]

The following starts 1/1/2026:

33700. (a) (1) A firearm barrel, as defined in Section 16525, shall not be sold or transferred unless that transaction is completed in person by a firearms dealer licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive.

California cannot regulate commerce that take place outside its borders (there are exceptions, and "State compliance" products may fall under nexus rules). Online sales are different, because the seller is selling into the state. So if you buy a barrel face-to-face in NV, and they're complying with Nevada state law, you're fine... and there's no specific ban on from returning to CA with a barrel you already own (yet) provided you don't intend to distribute it.

AB1263 aspires to regulate California citizens wherever they reside, but CA state law has no jurisdiction outside its borers.

(e) (1) Prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident ...

 

[sw629]

The following starts 1/1/2026:

California cannot regulate commerce that take place outside its borders (there are exceptions, and "State compliance" products may fall under nexus rules). Online sales are different, because the seller is selling into the state. So if you buy a barrel face-to-face in NV, and they're complying with Nevada state law, you're fine... and there's no specific ban on from returning to CA with a barrel you already own (yet) provided you don't intend to distribute it.

AB1263 aspires to regulate California citizens wherever they reside, but CA state law has no jurisdiction outside its borers.

The "Big Picture" here, why big companies like Smith & Wesson, Springfield Armory, EGW, CDNN, Palmetto State, etc etc are hung up on this is not only the complete vagueness of what could be INTERPRETED as an affected item, but that once an item DELIVERS into CA, you have been party to facilitating the transaction. As a Seller, you are opening up yourself to criminal and civil litigation - someone, or the DOJ (or both, or multiple parties) are able to sue you. So are they able to, if you live out of state? I have no idea - but if the State Attorney General in your home state is buddy-buddy with Bonta, I'm sure they have ways of making someone's life miserable by throwing suit at you. From an even higher perspective, it is my opinion that what might be going on here is an attempt for CA to "override" the Federal Commerce in Arms Act - which prevents industry members from litigation due to negligent use of their products. But CA is just gonna do it anyway, until it's stopped in the courts. These are the concerns from our of state vendors I'm speaking with, daily. Literally NO ONE actually "wants" to stop selling into CA. For my operation it will cripple us, not having that market. But I'd rather my business is crippled versus ki**ed outright by a lawsuit no one can afford to fight.

 

[sw629]

How about you just not contact ebay and rat yourself and everyone else out? First post? Hmmm.....

Rat out "what"... I'm trying to get SOMEONE, somewhere, inside the company and outside to get something worked out: A checkout system that accommodates these transactions. The ability to get an ID verification system implemented that eBay could juggle, rather than the impossible task of having small businesses and individual Sellers try to comply with data collection of YOUR I.D. when buying something - do you want me to keep your ID on my hard drive at the office, or have the marketplace retain that data? What sort of services exist for Sellers with their own websites have at their disposal to implement something that will accommodate CA buyers outside the eBay platform? Go ahead and gripe all you want. The biggest hesitation I had signing up to post here was to set aside any pre-conceived notions about the supposed arrogance a lot of the county sees in Californians - The way I see it, we're Americans and should be fighting those who are pulling this sort of legislation, not each other. Acting like eBay "doesn't know about this" is ridiculous. Why don't you, and everyone else who gives a sh** call them and offer some ideas that will help everyone, instead.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

The "Big Picture" here, why big companies like Smith & Wesson, Springfield Armory, EGW, CDNN, Palmetto State, etc etc are hung up on this is not only the complete vagueness of what could be INTERPRETED as an affected item, but that once an item DELIVERS into CA, you have been party to facilitating the transaction. As a Seller, you are opening up yourself to criminal and civil litigation - someone, or the DOJ (or both, or multiple parties) are able to sue you. So are they able to, if you live out of state? I have no idea - but if the State Attorney General in your home state is buddy-buddy with Bonta, I'm sure they have ways of making someone's life miserable by throwing suit at you. From an even higher perspective, it is my opinion that what might be going on here is an attempt for CA to "override" the Federal Commerce in Arms Act - which prevents industry members from litigation due to negligent use of their products. But CA is just gonna do it anyway, until it's stopped in the courts. These are the concerns from our of state vendors I'm speaking with, daily. Literally NO ONE actually "wants" to stop selling into CA. For my operation it will cripple us, not having that market. But I'd rather my business is crippled versus ki**ed outright by a lawsuit no one can afford to fight.

AB1263 specifies the liability though, it's not just supplying to someone who commits a crime it's :

29186.​

(a) It is unlawful to knowingly or willfully cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms, or to knowingly or willfully aid, abet, promote, or facilitate the unlawful manufacture of firearms.

This isn't the whole law but the language is similar throughout, it's worded that you are in violation only if you actively facilitate or fail to follow the "reasonable controls" requirements.

 

[Coolguy]

Rat out "what"... I'm trying to get SOMEONE, somewhere, inside the company and outside to get something worked out: A checkout system that accommodates these transactions. The ability to get an ID verification system implemented that eBay could juggle, rather than the impossible task of having small businesses and individual Sellers try to comply with data collection of YOUR I.D. when buying something - do you want me to keep your ID on my hard drive at the office, or have the marketplace retain that data? What sort of services exist for Sellers with their own websites have at their disposal to implement something that will accommodate CA buyers outside the eBay platform? Go ahead and gripe all you want. The biggest hesitation I had signing up to post here was to set aside any pre-conceived notions about the supposed arrogance a lot of the county sees in Californians - The way I see it, we're Americans and should be fighting those who are pulling this sort of legislation, not each other. Acting like eBay "doesn't know about this" is ridiculous. Why don't you, and everyone else who gives a sh** call them and offer some ideas that will help everyone, instead.

All ebay is gonna do now that you brought it to their attention is ban the sale of all firearms parts and accessories once and for all. They are not going to try to implement anything you discussed with them. They are going to look around and realize that other State's have similar laws (Washington) and other States are going to probably follow suit. They will not want that headache, and will just can the entire category just to be safe. Its gonna be Amazon 2.0

If you are indeed a long term seller there, then you of anybody should already know how they work and that they will always err on the side of caution and just ban gun related products whenever the wind blows a certain direction.

 

[cali_jazz]

All ebay is gonna do now that you brought it to their attention is ban the sale of all firearms parts and accessories once and for all. They are not going to try to implement anything you discussed with them. They are going to look around and realize that other State's have similar laws (Washington) and other States are going to probably follow suit. They will not want that headache, and will just can the entire category just to be safe. Its gonna be Amazon 2.0

If you are indeed a long term seller there, then you of anybody should already know how they work and that they will always err on the side of caution and just ban gun related products whenever the wind blows a certain direction.

Does eBay really have liability as a marketplace and not a direct seller or "firearm industry member" with regards to parts & accessories? It would seem to be up to the "firearm industry member" to comply with the law, collect & verify ID and manage the delivery outside of eBay's purview. For barrels, I could see them banning sales similar to gun sales. I certainly wouldn't ask or expect eBay to engage as a middleman in terms a system of collecting ID's, etc. Do they do that today for any kind of legal compliance for other categories?

 

[Deleted member 16735]

Does eBay really have liability as a marketplace and not a direct seller or "firearm industry member" with regards to parts & accessories? It would seem to be up to the "firearm industry member" to comply with the law, collect & verify ID and manage the delivery outside of eBay's purview. For barrels, I could see them banning sales similar to gun sales. I certainly wouldn't ask or expect eBay to engage as a middleman in terms a system of collecting ID's, etc. Do they do that today for any king of legal compliance?

I feel like they may fall under the definition of firearm industry member:

(f) “Firearm industry member” shall mean a person, firm, corporation, company, partnership, society, joint stock company, or any other entity or association engaged in the manufacture, distribution, importation, marketing, wholesale sale, or retail sale of firearm-related products.

 

[cali_jazz]

I feel like they may fall under the definition of firearm industry member:

(f) “Firearm industry member” shall mean a person, firm, corporation, company, partnership, society, joint stock company, or any other entity or association engaged in the manufacture, distribution, importation, marketing, wholesale sale, or retail sale of firearm-related products.

Boy, I hope not. That would implicate a much wider swath of gun-related sites.

According to the Legislative Council's Digest:

"Existing law establishes a firearm industry standard of conduct, which requires a firearm industry member, as defined, to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls, as defined, and to take reasonable precautions to ensure that the member does not sell, distribute, or provide a firearm-related product, as defined, to a downstream distributor or retailer of firearm-related products who fails to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls."

If it's existing law, one would think eBay and others would have been targeted long ago.

It will be interesting to see how this actually gets implemented and enforced, hopefully the DOJ will put out some clarifying guidelines.

 

[fiatlux]

So let me get this straight.

When it comes to barrels, to get em in California I need to get it in person from a FFL. Starting 7/1/27 I need a background check. But I can go to the next state over and buy it there without a background check and skip that process because the current wording doesn't say anything about import. Only sales.

For online purchase of firearm parts, companies need to have a system put into place to collect your ID and ship with a signature confirmation. They also need a box that you check to satisfy A & B below.

(e) (1) Prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident of a firearm accessory or a firearm manufacturing machine, as those terms are defined in Section 3273.50, or of a firearm barrel unattached to a firearm, a firearm industry member shall comply with all of the following requirements:
(A) The firearm industry member shall provide a prospective purchaser with a clear and conspicuous notice of the information provided in paragraph (2).
(B) The firearm industry member shall receive an acknowledgment from the prospective purchaser attesting that the prospective purchaser received and understands the notice provided in paragraph (2).

When it comes to out of state purchases, the bill does have "or to a California resident" as someone already mentioned and claims that CA state law has no jurisdiction outside it's borders. Which makes sense initially.

The following starts 1/1/2026:

California cannot regulate commerce that take place outside its borders (there are exceptions, and "State compliance" products may fall under nexus rules). Online sales are different, because the seller is selling into the state. So if you buy a barrel face-to-face in NV, and they're complying with Nevada state law, you're fine... and there's no specific ban on from returning to CA with a barrel you already own (yet) provided you don't intend to distribute it.

AB1263 aspires to regulate California citizens wherever they reside, but CA state law has no jurisdiction outside its borers.

But in theory, If they knowingly sell to a CA resident without complying with AB 1263's warning and verification protocols, they may face civil liability or fines from the CA Attorney General.

Ik some of you hate AI but I got this from my Gemini prompt and it makes sense to me.

The primary reason a Nevada vendor will refuse you is not because they fear the part will be found at a crime scene 5 years later. It is because they fear you are the threat.

• The Mechanism: The California DOJ Bureau of Firearms conducts "sting" operations at out-of-state gun shows (e.g., the "Crossroads of the West" in Reno/Vegas) and stores near the border.
• The Operation: An undercover agent (or a "straw buyer" working for them) walks into a Reno store, presents a California ID, and attempts to buy an item or a part subject to AB 1263 without following the new protocols.
• The Trap: If the clerk sells the $40 flash hider without the warning/waiver, the agent signals the team. The store is then hit with a civil lawsuit for violating CA Civil Code § 3273.51.
• The Cost: The lawsuit isn't for a crime; it's for "Unfair Business Practices." The fine is $25,000 per violation.
  
  
• Civil Litigation Precedents (The "Long Arm" of the Law)You might ask: "How can California sue a Nevada business?"
  
  • Long-Arm Jurisdiction: Courts have ruled that if a Nevada business "knowingly" sells to California residents (evidenced by checking your ID), they are "purposefully availing" themselves of the California market. This makes them subject to California lawsuits.
  • Real-World Examples:
    • CA v. Blackhawk / MDX / Glockstore (2024 Judgment): California successfully sued these out-of-state companies for selling "precursor parts" into CA. The result was $500,000+ in fines and a permanent injunction. This proved that CA can and will punish out-of-state vendors.

Summary for the Nevada Vendor: If a Nevada gun store sells you a $40 flash hider on Jan 2, 2026:

1. They must print a special "California AB 1263 Warning" sheet.
2. They must make you sign it.
3. They must scan/file that paper and link it to your transaction record.
4. If they fail to do any of this, they have committed a "civil violation" that allows the CA DOJ to sue them for $25,000 per violation plus damages (Civil Code § 3273.61).

 

[Deleted member 16735]

Boy, I hope not. That would implicate a much wider swath of gun-related sites.

According to the Legislative Council's Digest:

"Existing law establishes a firearm industry standard of conduct, which requires a firearm industry member, as defined, to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls, as defined, and to take reasonable precautions to ensure that the member does not sell, distribute, or provide a firearm-related product, as defined, to a downstream distributor or retailer of firearm-related products who fails to establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls."

If it's existing law, one would think eBay and others would have been targeted long ago.

It will be interesting to see how this actually gets implemented and enforced, hopefully the DOJ will put out some clarifying guidelines.

Yeah at this point it's so up in the air, who knows!

 

[star.3d]

Ik some of you hate AI but I got this from my Gemini prompt and it makes sense to me.

Some of these scenarios seem implausible to me. The way California is regulating firearm accessories is very different from how they regulate 80% lowers and unserialized parts or ghost gun kits. In the Blackhawk case, those companies were selling into (i.e. shipping to) California - that's why the DOJ was able to bring suit. Selling non-precursor parts to a California resident in Nevada isn't the same as marketing a product specifically to Californians - I think that's a stretch. Also, you can legally acquire the same parts in California, so the burden of proof for the DOJ is pretty high. Again - California cannot regulate commerce outside its borders. A Nevada gun shop selling to a Californian face-to-face in NV does not have to provide you with the AB1263 disclaimers.

Sting operation for barrels? I doubt it. The CA DOJ can't conduct sting operations outside CA without the help of the other state.

 

[Coolguy]

Does eBay really have liability as a marketplace and not a direct seller or "firearm industry member" with regards to parts & accessories? It would seem to be up to the "firearm industry member" to comply with the law, collect & verify ID and manage the delivery outside of eBay's purview. For barrels, I could see them banning sales similar to gun sales. I certainly wouldn't ask or expect eBay to engage as a middleman in terms a system of collecting ID's, etc. Do they do that today for any kind of legal compliance for other categories?

The short answer is maybe, but the reality is they are risk adverse and likely to overcorrect on the side of caution. I'm basing that on their past actions from when they got sued for "facilitating" the sale of "high capacity" mags to that guy who used them in a mass shooting.

 

[Joker67]

29 Outdoor Gear quoted. me $70 for a transfer fee to buy a complete blem BCM upper and have it shipped. On top of that, I would have to pay the CA 11% penalty. I think the total taxes would bring a $706.89 order close to $ 839.43, plus $15.95 Shipping , plus a $70 fee coming to $925.38. I bit the bullet and ordered the upper and a part. With shipping and tax , it all came to $788.23. That's a $137.15 difference.

What would it cost to drive to Nevada, maybe spend the night, find the right shop that has what you need, (if you can find a shop that sells what you need), and drive back? Gas, hotel and food is going to exceed that $137.15 charge even if you drop shipping .

Someone else offered a transfer service , involving a fee and reshipping costs. That was $25.00 plus whatever it costs to reship the item. Let's say $50.00 for an upper. That come to $ 863.23, $ 62.15 less than buying in CA and less than paying for gas for a Nevada trip. That's absolutely worth it for specialty parts with lower shipping costs, excluding barrels .

 

[cali_jazz]

The short answer is maybe, but the reality is they are risk adverse and likely to overcorrect on the side of caution. I'm basing that on their past actions from when they got sued for "facilitating" the sale of "high capacity" mags to that guy who used them in a mass shooting.

I could see them creating a POLICY but probably not any programmatic functions the isolate people with CA addresses and block or remove listings for specific items from "Firearm Industry Members" I've seen this before on eBay and elsewhere with other CA restricted items, typically the sellers ad will contain a disclaimer "will not ship to the following states", etc. Since the items are totally legal to ship to other states, it doesn't make sense for them to have a no firearms parts/accessories blanket policy.

Also, for private (non "Firearm Industry Members") sellers / used items - they can still sell to us (I think)

 

[Deleted member 16735]

29 Outdoor Gear quoted. me $70 for a transfer fee to buy a complete blem BCM upper and have it shipped. On top of that, I would have to pay the CA 11% penalty. I think the total taxes would bring a $706.89 order close to $ 839.43, plus $15.95 Shipping , plus a $70 fee coming to $925.38. I bit the bullet and ordered the upper and a part. With shipping and tax , it all came to $788.23. That's a $137.15 difference.

What would it cost to drive to Nevada, maybe spend the night, find the right shop that has what you need, (if you can find a shop that sells what you need), and drive back? Gas, hotel and food is going to exceed that $137.15 savings even if you drop shipping .

Someone else offered a transfer service , involving a fee and reshipping costs. That was $25.00 plus whatever it costs to reship the item. Let's say $50.00 for an upper. That come to $ 863.23, $ 62.15 less than buying in CA and less than paying for gas for a Nevada trip. That's absolutely worth it for specialty parts with lower shipping costs, excluding barrels .

you know you can still get barrels sent to your house until the end of the year?

 

[pikachu]

I would think that services wouldn't be affected. Perhaps there might be some grey area with the flat faced trigger, unlike the other elements which aren't selling you any kinds of goods. But I would think that since they're a company that is focused on smaller volumes, they'd be able to work with the requirements like Midway without much difficulty.

Wager Machine works will also continue services for now. I asked, because they also sell iron sights etc.

Wager Machine Works updated their CA shipping policy in response to AB1263: https://wagermachineworks.com/california-orders-new-procedures-dec-2025/

If you’re sending a pistol slide out of state to get milled or serviced (ie: sending to manufacturer or gunsmith for work), will the new AB1263 requirements still apply if you’re not buying parts?