Florida AG: SBRs and SBSs Legal Without NFA Registration

Last updated November 2026 · By Nick Hall, NFA owner who has tracked the registration fight from the Texas ruling through Alaska, Ohio and now Florida

Quick take: Florida’s attorney general told police and prosecutors on November 6 that law-abiding Floridians can possess short-barreled rifles and shotguns without NFA registration or a tax stamp. It’s his office’s reading of state law, not a new statute or a court ruling, and it holds only while those guns stay untaxed and ATF keeps its pen down.

• What happened: Attorney General James Uthmeier issued a memo dated November 6, 2026 saying it is “no longer unlawful to possess an SBR or SBS under section 790.221, Florida Statutes.”
• Why it matters: Florida makes owning an SBR, SBS or machine gun a second-degree felony unless the gun is lawfully owned and possessed under federal law, and the AG now reads that exception to cover unregistered SBRs and SBSs.
• What’s next: The guidance applies only “so long as no taxes are imposed on SBRs and SBSs,” so a new federal tax or a change in ATF policy reopens the question.
• Who to watch: Florida’s elected state attorneys, who handle trial prosecutions, and the first judge asked to read the 790.221(3) exception the AG’s way.

Three state attorneys general have now looked at the same problem. Alaska’s asked its Legislature for a fix, and Ohio’s warned that unregistered owners could still be committing a felony. Florida’s went the other way and fixed it with a memo. I read all five pages, the statute and the federal paperwork it relies on, so here is what it says and where it stops.

Table of Contents

What the Florida SBR Memo Says

The memo is on Office of the Attorney General letterhead, dated November 6, 2026, with the subject line “National Firearms Act Enforcement.” It is addressed to “Florida’s Law Enforcement Agencies and Prosecuting Authorities,” and the From line reads “Florida Attorney General,” initialed by hand. Uthmeier posted the memo on X that afternoon as four images, with pages 4 and 5 sharing one.

The opening paragraph does the work. Law-abiding residents, it says, may now possess an SBR or SBS “without fear of prosecution,” because his office “determined that it is no longer unlawful to possess an SBR or SBS under section 790.221, Florida Statutes.”

The post on X was shorter. “We are issuing guidance and will not defend a conviction on appeal,” Uthmeier wrote.

The guidance itself is a numbered list that takes effect immediately “so long as no taxes are imposed on SBRs and SBSs.” Point one says “Mere possession of an SBR or SBS does not supply reasonable suspicion or probable cause for a search or seizure.” Point two says finding one during an otherwise lawful encounter doesn’t, by itself, justify a plain-view seizure.

Point three is the hard promise. “My office will not defend a conviction under section 790.221 on appeal on the sole basis that the owner of the SBR or SBS lacked NFA approval, registration, or a federal tax stamp.”

Point four keeps federal Gun Control Act rules in place: prohibited persons still can’t have one, school-zone and federal-facility limits still apply, and dealer transfers stay subject to ATF’s temporary policy. Point five says local governments are blocked by section 790.33 “from imposing any additional restrictions on possession of SBRs or SBSs.”

Why Section 790.221 Is the Whole Ballgame

Florida’s own ban is short. Section 790.221 makes it unlawful to own or possess “any short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun which is, or may readily be made, operable,” antiques aside, and calls a violation a second-degree felony. Florida defines an SBR as a rifle with a barrel under 16 inches or an overall length under 26, and an SBS as a shotgun with a barrel under 18 inches or the same 26-inch overall length.

Then subsection (3): “Firearms in violation hereof which are lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law are excepted.”

That wording is the reason Florida could do this by memo. Ohio’s exception names the federal registry itself, so an unregistered can fails it no matter what ATF enforces. Florida’s asks only whether the gun is lawfully owned and possessed under federal law, and the memo admits “The language suffers from unfortunate imprecision.”

Its answer is that state law “does not independently criminalize possession of firearms if those firearms may lawfully be owned and possessed under federal law.” It cites Rinzler v. Carson, a 1972 Florida Supreme Court decision the memo says reasoned that 790.221 “does not bar possession of a firearm lawfully possessed under federal law.”

And it adds a constitutional backstop. Reading 790.221 as a standalone ban on SBRs and SBSs, the memo says, “would implicate Floridians’ Second Amendment rights and would likely fail Bruen’s test.” It also says owning one doesn’t violate Florida’s destructive-device law, section 790.161, because that statute only reaches possession that is both willful and unlawful.

What the Uthmeier Memo Does Not Do

It doesn’t change the statute. Section 790.221 reads today exactly as it did on November 5, and its history line ends with a 1997 law. Nothing in the memo says it binds a judge, either. It describes itself as “this Office’s interpretation.”

It doesn’t take charging decisions away from local prosecutors. Under the Florida Constitution, each judicial circuit elects a state attorney who is “the prosecuting officer of all trial courts in that circuit.” The attorney general’s office handles the state’s side in the Florida Supreme Court and the district courts of appeal, which is why the firm promise is about appeals. The memo tells state attorneys how the AG reads the law. It doesn’t claim to order them not to charge.

It doesn’t touch machine guns. Congress kept the making and transfer taxes on machine guns and destructive devices, the memo’s guidance covers SBRs and SBSs only, and a machine gun in Florida still needs to be lawfully held under federal law to fit the exception.

It doesn’t change federal law. ATF’s October 9 Open Letter calls its move a “change in enforcement policy,” and as we covered in our breakdown of the ATF NFA guidance, that is enforcement discretion and not a repeal. ATF’s own FAQ warns that “Material changes in legal or factual circumstances could cause NFA enforcement to resume,” and says ATF “cannot opine” on whether an unregistered item held under that discretion counts as lawfully held for state-law purposes. Florida’s AG has now answered that question for Florida. ATF hasn’t.

The court ruling under all of this is narrower than the headlines. Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF is an August 5 decision from a single federal district court in Texas, and its injunction covers the plaintiffs and their members and customers. Florida wasn’t one of the 15 states that sued. The Justice Department told Congress on September 24 that it “has determined not to file an appeal,” and the public docket, as last updated on November 5, shows no notice of appeal.

What Florida SBR Owners Should Do Now

If your SBR is already registered, leave it that way. The memo itself notes that ATF still takes voluntary applications, but that “this does not guarantee later registration of an already unregistered firearm or grandfathering if federal policy changes.”

If I were building a short-barreled AR in Tampa this month, I would still file the form. The tax is $0, ATF is still approving voluntary filings, and a registered gun fits the 790.221(3) exception under anybody’s reading of it, including a future ATF that decides to start enforcing the NFA again.

Leaving the state is its own problem. The memo says “Prior ATF authorization on Form 20 remains required for interstate transportation of SBRs and SBSs” when 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(4) applies, even for guns that aren’t NFA-registered, and other states’ laws still apply once you cross the line. Our Florida gun laws guide covers the rest of the state’s rules.

Alaska asked for a fix. Ohio asked for a fix. Florida wrote its own in five pages, and it holds for exactly as long as the federal tax stays at zero.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

---

Related Reading

• ATF Stops Enforcing NFA Registration for Suppressors, SBRs
• DOJ Will Not Appeal the Texas NFA Registration Ruling
• Ohio AG Asks Lawmakers to Fix Suppressor and SBR Law
• Alaska AG: State Suppressor and SBR Law Needs a Fix
• Florida Gun Laws (2026): Constitutional Carry, Open Carry and Stand Your Ground
• Suppressor Laws by State (2026): Where Silencers Are Legal