Universal Background Check States (2026): Complete List of 21 UBC States

Affiliate disclosure: This article contains affiliate links. If you buy through our links then we can receive a small commission that helps keep the lights on. You don’t pay anything more.

Last updated April 2026 · By Nick Hall, CCW instructor tracking universal background check statutes across all 21 UBC states + DC, the all-firearm vs handgun-only distinction (Pennsylvania’s PICS-only-for-handguns framework), the limited-exception structure that exempts immediate-family transfers in most states, the 2024 expansions in Maine, Michigan, and Minnesota, and the federal NICS framework that underlies every state-level rule

Disclaimer: This is an editorial round-up of universal background check laws across the United States. We do our best to make sure it’s correct, but do not rely on this as legal advice. Background-check law has procedural detail that varies meaningfully state to state. Consult a licensed firearms attorney in your state for any specific question.

Universal Background Check Laws in 2026: What You Need to Know

TL;DR: As of April 2026, 21 U.S. states plus the District of Columbia require background checks on virtually all firearm transfers (universal background check, or UBC). The 21 states are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania (handguns only via PICS), Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. Federal law (the Brady Act of 1993, 18 U.S.C. § 922(s) + (t)) requires NICS background checks only at federally licensed dealers (FFLs), not at private sales. UBC laws extend the requirement to private transfers, typically by routing them through an FFL or a state-managed equivalent. Most UBC statutes include narrow exemptions for immediate family transfers, antique firearms, and certain temporary loans (range/hunting). Maine joined in 2024 (LD 22), Michigan in 2024 (PA 7-9), and Minnesota expanded in 2024.

Universal background check laws are the most-discussed but least-uniform firearm regulation at the state level. The federal Brady Act of 1993 established NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) and required FFLs to run NICS on every prospective buyer. The federal law does NOT require background checks at private sales. The 21 UBC states close that gap by extending the check requirement to private transfers, but the procedural details vary significantly: some states route private sales through an FFL, others use state-managed permit-based systems (Pennsylvania’s PICS for handguns, Connecticut’s permit-based check), others provide for direct state-managed checks (CO, NV, OR).

The 21 UBC states divide into three procedural groups. The all-firearm UBC states (CA, CO, NM, NV, OR, RI, VT, VA, WA) require background checks on every transfer regardless of firearm type. The handgun-only UBC states (Pennsylvania’s PICS) require checks on handgun transfers but not long-gun private sales. Pennsylvania remains a unicorn on this point. The permit-substitute states (CT, IL, MA, NJ, NY) achieve the UBC effect through purchase-permit or licensing requirements that incorporate background-check elements. Each procedural framework has different practical implications for buyers and sellers.

I hold an out-of-state CCW and have processed private-transfer paperwork in three different UBC states. The single most important practical point: every UBC state has limited exceptions for transfers between immediate family members (parent/child/spouse/sibling/grandparent/grandchild typically) and to/from active or retired law enforcement. The exception scope is the most important variable for a private seller. A transfer that doesn’t fit an exception MUST go through an FFL.

This page is the master comparative index for UBC laws across the country. State-specific rules are detailed in our state gun law index; this article gives you the comparative procedural framework. For the federal framework that underlies every state rule, see our National Firearms Act explainer and the broader Brady Act / NICS background context.

The 21 Universal Background Check States: Complete List

TL;DR: The 21 UBC states (alphabetical) with their statute citations and effective dates: California (Penal § 28050, effective 1991), Colorado (HB13-1229, effective July 1, 2013), Connecticut (PA 13-3, 2013), Delaware (10 Del. C. § 1448B, effective May 8, 2013), Hawaii (HRS § 134-2, expanded 2019), Illinois (430 ILCS 65/3.1, effective 2014/expanded 2019), Maine (LD 22, effective Aug 8, 2024), Maryland (Md. Code Pub. Safety § 5-118, expanded 2013), Massachusetts (G.L. c. 140 § 131E, expanded 2014), Michigan (PA 8 of 2023, effective Feb 13, 2024), Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 624.7132, expanded 2024), Nevada (NRS 202.2547, effective Jan 2, 2020), New Jersey (N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3, expanded 2018), New Mexico (NMSA 30-7-7.1, effective July 1, 2019), New York (NY Penal § 400.00 with SAFE Act 2013), Oregon (ORS 166.435, effective Aug 9, 2015), Pennsylvania (18 Pa.C.S. § 6111, PICS for handguns only), Rhode Island (R.I.G.L. § 11-47-35.1), Vermont (13 V.S.A. § 4019, Act 17 of 2018), Virginia (Va. Code § 18.2-308.2:5, effective July 1, 2020), Washington (RCW 9.41.113, Initiative 594 of 2014).

• California — Cal. Penal § 28050 (effective 1991, Dealer Record of Sale)
• Colorado — C.R.S. § 18-12-112 (HB13-1229, effective July 1, 2013)
• Connecticut — Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-37a (Public Act 13-3, effective Oct 1, 2013)
• Delaware — 10 Del. C. § 1448B (effective May 8, 2013)
• Hawaii — HRS § 134-2 (expanded 2019)
• Illinois — 430 ILCS 65/3.1 (effective Jan 1, 2014; expanded 2019)
• Maine — LD 22 (effective Aug 8, 2024)
• Maryland — Md. Code Pub. Safety § 5-118 (Firearm Safety Act of 2013, effective Oct 1, 2013)
• Massachusetts — G.L. c. 140 § 131E (expanded by 2014 Act)
• Michigan — MCL 28.422 et seq. (PA 8 of 2023, effective Feb 13, 2024)
• Minnesota — Minn. Stat. § 624.7132 (expanded 2024)
• Nevada — NRS 202.2547 (effective Jan 2, 2020)
• New Jersey — N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3 (expanded 2018)
• New Mexico — NMSA 30-7-7.1 (Senate Bill 8, effective July 1, 2019)
• New York — NY Penal § 400.00 (NY SAFE Act of 2013)
• Oregon — ORS 166.435 (effective Aug 9, 2015)
• Pennsylvania — 18 Pa.C.S. § 6111 (PICS for handguns only; long-gun private sales exempt)
• Rhode Island — R.I.G.L. § 11-47-35.1 (effective 1990s, expanded by 2018 amendments)
• Vermont — 13 V.S.A. § 4019 (Act 17 of 2018, effective April 11, 2018)
• Virginia — Va. Code § 18.2-308.2:5 (effective July 1, 2020)
• Washington — RCW 9.41.113 (Initiative 594, effective Dec 4, 2014)

The 29 states without universal background checks: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming. In these states, FFL purchases run NICS as required by federal Brady Act, but private sales between residents do not require a background check.

Federal Brady Act and NICS: The Foundation

TL;DR: The federal Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 established NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System), administered by the FBI, that all federally licensed dealers (FFLs) must use to check prospective buyers. NICS checks the buyer against federal disqualifying criteria under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g): felony convictions, domestic violence misdemeanors, fugitive status, controlled substance use, mental adjudication, dishonorable discharge, illegal alien status, citizenship renouncement. The federal Brady Act does NOT require background checks at private sales between non-FFL parties. The 21 UBC states extend the check requirement to private transfers; the 29 non-UBC states leave private sales exempt.

Federal disqualifying criteria under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) prohibit firearm possession by:

• Persons convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment (felony equivalent)
• Fugitives from justice
• Unlawful users of controlled substances
• Persons adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution
• Aliens (illegal aliens, and certain non-immigrant visa holders)
• Persons dishonorably discharged from the armed forces
• Persons who have renounced U.S. citizenship
• Persons subject to specific domestic-violence restraining orders (post-Rahimi 2024)
• Persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence (Lautenberg Amendment, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9))

NICS returns one of three results: Proceed (no disqualifying record), Denied (disqualifying record found), or Delayed (incomplete record requiring further research). Under the federal default, an FFL may transfer the firearm if NICS does not return a definitive result within three business days; some UBC states override this default and require a definitive Proceed before any transfer.

How Universal Background Check Laws Work

TL;DR: UBC statutes typically require private firearm transfers to be processed through a federally licensed dealer, who runs the buyer through NICS as if the FFL were the seller. The seller and buyer meet at the FFL, complete an ATF Form 4473 (federal) plus any state form, and pay the FFL’s transfer fee (typically $25-$50). Some states use a state-managed permit system that incorporates background checks (Connecticut’s permit, Illinois FOID, Massachusetts LTC, New Jersey FPIC) so that already-permitted buyers don’t need an FFL transfer for each sale. Pennsylvania uses PICS for handguns only.

• FFL-routed UBC. The most common procedural framework. Seller and buyer meet at a federally licensed dealer; the FFL processes the transfer as if it were a sale from the FFL’s inventory; the FFL runs NICS on the buyer; if NICS returns Proceed, the FFL executes the transfer to the buyer. The FFL charges a transfer fee. Used in CA, CO, NV, NM, OR, VT, VA, WA, ME, MI, MN, RI.
• Permit-based UBC. Connecticut requires a state-issued permit to buy any firearm; the permit is issued only after a background check; transfers between permit holders are exempt from per-transaction NICS. Similar frameworks in Illinois (FOID), Massachusetts (LTC), New Jersey (FPIC).
• Pennsylvania PICS (handguns only). Pennsylvania State Police operates the Pennsylvania Instant Check System for handgun transfers (FFL or private). Long-gun private sales between PA residents do NOT require a check.
• Hawaii state-managed. Hawaii issues a permit to acquire that incorporates a background check; permit must be renewed periodically.

The transfer fee at FFL-routed UBC states is a real practical cost. A $300 used handgun sold privately in California or Washington costs the buyer an additional $25-$50 in FFL transfer fees, plus the seller’s time to meet at the FFL. The transaction friction is one reason why UBC laws are sometimes evaded; enforcement is limited because the underlying transfer is hard to detect.

Common Exemptions to Universal Background Checks

TL;DR: Every UBC statute includes narrow exemptions for transfers that don’t require a background check. The most universal exemptions are: (1) Immediate-family transfers between parent/child, spouse/spouse, sibling/sibling, grandparent/grandchild (some states extend further); (2) Transfers to or from active or retired law enforcement officers; (3) Transfers of antique firearms (typically pre-1898 cartridge or pre-1899 black powder); (4) Temporary transfers at a gun range or for hunting purposes (typically while in the seller’s presence); (5) Inheritance transfers via probate. The exemption scope varies meaningfully. California has narrower exemptions than Pennsylvania, which has narrower exemptions than Texas (which has no UBC at all).

• Immediate family. Most UBC states exempt transfers between parent/child, spouse/spouse, sibling/sibling, and grandparent/grandchild. Some states extend to nephew/niece, first cousin (Vermont), or domestic partners.
• Law enforcement. Transfers to or from active duty law enforcement, retired law enforcement, or sworn correctional officers are typically exempt.
• Antique firearms. Federal definition (18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(16)) covers firearms manufactured in or before 1898 and certain replicas. Most UBC states adopt the federal definition.
• Temporary transfers. Most states permit temporary transfers (one to seven days typically) at a shooting range, during hunting, or while at a competition. Some require both parties to remain in the same general area.
• Inheritance. Estate-distribution transfers via probate are typically exempt.
• Loans. Some states permit firearm loans of less than 24-72 hours without a background check (typically for self-defense in immediate emergency, hunting, or range use).

Practical implication for private sellers in UBC states: if your prospective buyer doesn’t fit a clear exemption, the transfer MUST go through an FFL. Failing to use an FFL for a non-exempt transfer is typically a misdemeanor on first offense, a felony on subsequent. Sellers should request photo ID and verify the buyer’s eligibility regardless; a private seller can be charged if they “knew or had reason to know” the buyer was a prohibited person.

UBC Effectiveness and Empirical Evidence

TL;DR: Empirical evidence on UBC effectiveness is mixed and politically contested. Research published in 2018 (RAND Corporation review) found “limited evidence” that UBC laws reduce firearm homicide and suicide rates at the state level. Subsequent studies have produced varying results depending on the time window, comparison states, and statistical methodology. Critics note that determined criminals often acquire firearms through theft (the most common source per BJS data) rather than private sales, and that UBC laws primarily affect law-abiding private sellers rather than criminal acquisition channels. Proponents note that closing the private-sale gap is a necessary precondition for any meaningful background-check system.

Major empirical findings:

• RAND 2018 review. Found limited evidence that UBC laws reduce firearm violence at the state level. The review noted methodological challenges in isolating UBC effects from other contemporaneous policy changes.
• Bureau of Justice Statistics surveys. Document that the most common source of firearms used in crime is theft (typically from legally-owned residential firearms), followed by friends/family, then street/illegal market, with FFL purchase the smallest segment. UBC laws primarily affect the private-sale channel, which is a secondary acquisition source for criminals.
• Webster et al. studies. Have shown some statistical association between UBC adoption and reduced firearm suicide rates, particularly in domestic-violence contexts.
• Critics. The Crime Prevention Research Center and others argue that UBC laws primarily impose costs on lawful private sellers without meaningful impact on criminal acquisition.

Recent UBC Legislation (2024-2026)

TL;DR: Three states adopted or expanded UBC laws in 2024: Maine (LD 22, effective Aug 8, 2024), Michigan (PA 8 of 2023, effective Feb 13, 2024), and Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 624.7132 expansion, effective Jan 1, 2024). The 2025 legislative sessions saw UBC bills introduced in Pennsylvania (HB 1593, passed PA House Sep 30, 2025, awaiting Senate), New Hampshire (no advancement), and several other states. The 2026 sessions have focused on procedural refinements rather than new adoptions. No state has repealed UBC during 2024-2026; the trend remains toward expansion in blue states.

• Maine (2024). LD 22 enacted UBC for the first time, effective August 8, 2024. Maine had previously had no UBC despite a high-permit shall-issue framework.
• Michigan (2024). PA 8 of 2023 enacted UBC effective February 13, 2024. Michigan had previously required permits-to-purchase for handguns only.
• Minnesota (2024). Minn. Stat. § 624.7132 expanded to require checks on most private transfers, effective January 1, 2024. Minnesota had previously required permits for handgun transfers.
• Pennsylvania (2025-2026). HB 1593 (universal background check for long-gun private sales) passed the PA House September 30, 2025 by a narrow margin and is in the state Senate as of April 2026. If passed and signed, would close the long-gun exception in 18 Pa.C.S. § 6111.
• 2025-2026 sessions. UBC bills introduced in NC, NH, AZ, NV (additional refinement), and several other states. No major adoptions.

Practical Implications for Private Sellers

TL;DR: For private sellers in UBC states, the practical implications are: (1) Know whether your transfer fits an exemption (immediate family, LEO, antique, temporary). If yes, document the exemption clearly. If no, route through an FFL. (2) Even for exempt transfers, request the buyer’s photo ID and verify eligibility. A private seller can be charged if they “knew or had reason to know” the buyer was a prohibited person. (3) Keep documentation of every transfer (bill of sale, copy of buyer’s ID, NICS approval reference if FFL-routed). (4) For FFL-routed transfers, expect a $25-$50 transfer fee per firearm. Some FFLs offer “private party transfer” rates for non-customer sales.

• Document everything. Bill of sale, photo ID copies, NICS reference numbers (if FFL-routed). Retain records indefinitely.
• Verify buyer eligibility. Even for exempt transfers, ask the buyer if they’re prohibited. A private seller can be liable if they should have known.
• FFL fees. Expect $25-$50 per firearm for non-exempt transfers. Some FFLs charge less for “private party transfers” than for full retail sales.
• Cross-state transfers. Federal law requires interstate firearm transfers to go through an FFL in the buyer’s state regardless of state UBC status. The federal rule is the floor.
• Online sales. Internet sales (Armslist, GunBroker, etc.) must be processed through an FFL when the buyer and seller are in different states. UBC states require FFL processing even within the state.

Our Take on Universal Background Checks

For practical everyday purposes, UBC laws now cover roughly 50% of the U.S. adult population in 21 states + DC. The procedural details vary significantly: an FFL-routed UBC in California operates differently from a permit-based UBC in Connecticut, which operates differently from Pennsylvania’s handgun-only PICS. Each framework has different practical implications for buyers and sellers.

The strongest practical advice for private sellers in UBC states: if you’re uncertain whether a transfer fits an exemption, route through an FFL. The transfer fee is modest, the documentation is clean, and you eliminate any ambiguity about your legal exposure. For private buyers, the same advice holds in reverse: an FFL-routed transfer protects you from any “stolen firearm” claim and provides clean record of your lawful acquisition.

The hardest part of UBC laws in 2026 is the cross-state friction. A buyer who lives in Vermont (UBC state) and finds a private seller in New Hampshire (no UBC) faces federal interstate-transfer rules that override state UBC framework. The federal rule requires FFL processing in the buyer’s state regardless. Two-state UBC complications often surface unexpectedly. For our complete state-by-state breakdown, see the state gun law index.

---

Frequently Asked Questions: Universal Background Checks