Hearing Protection Act and tax reform

After reading the news that the House of Representatives has passed a version of tax reform (which allows budget reconciliation) and guarantees that the Senate only requires a simple majority to pass...

...wasn’t the original intent of the Hearing Protection Act was to be treated as a tax law? Seeing how the National Firearms Act is a tax law, and is Pittman-Robertson, where the HPA defines the NFA’s tax requirement being fulfilled by the Pittman-Robertson (THIS is why people thought it was strange they were treating suppressors as a firearm in of itself, thereby leveraging Pittman Robertson).

For those who don’t know, the Pittman Robertson Act (please correct me if i’m wrong) is a tax placed on all firearm sales that is directed towards land and wildlife conservation efforts.

Is this a plausible method to pass the HPA? Or am I missing something? Would they be able to earmark tax reform with the HPA? I mean, that would actually give it a chance and they could get two birds with one stone on that one.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Hearing Protection Act and tax reform