Bill Overview
Title: Firearm Training and Proficiency Act
Description: This bill allows individual taxpayers a deduction from gross income (above-the-line deduction) for the cost of any secure gun storage or safety device and for a concealed carry firearms or firearm safety course. The amount of this deduction is limited to $250 for any taxpayer in a taxable year.
Sponsors: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Target Audience
Population: Firearm Owners
Estimated Size: 139000000
- The bill provides a tax deduction for costs associated with secure gun storage and firearm safety courses which would primarily apply to firearm owners.
- Globally, the total number of gun owners is not explicitly known, but several countries have significant gun-owning populations.
- In the United States, a substantial portion of households own firearms, with estimates suggesting around 42% according to recent surveys.
- The bill's provisions are specific to individual taxpayers who purchase gun safety devices or take firearm safety training, implying financial involvement in such activities.
Reasoning
- The U.S. has approximately 329 million people with an estimated 139 million firearm owners who could potentially benefit from the policy in question.
- With a policy budget intended to subsidize expenses related to gun safety, the effectiveness and reach largely depend on how many people actively purchase such devices or take training courses.
- Firearm owners who are already safety-conscious or feel vulnerable (e.g., those living in urban areas with higher crime rates) might be more incentivized to use the deductions.
- People living in rural regions, who may already have safe storage practices due to hunting culture, might see a lesser impact from the policy.
- The policy's financial cap will dictate that it can't accommodate every firearm owner simultaneously, possibly leading to prioritization or a first-come, first-served basis for claiming deductions.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this bill is a great incentive for gun owners to invest in safety.
- As someone concerned about security, I'd definitely take advantage of the deduction to upgrade my gun lock.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This tax deduction is a good move; I've been thinking of getting a proper safe for quite a while.
- Every bit helps when budgeting for a family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Military (Charleston, SC)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As an advocate for firearm safety, I believe this deduction could encourage more to attend courses.
- It might make my classes more popular!
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freelance Journalist (New York, NY)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not a gun owner yet, but knowing I can get tax benefits for safety gear makes me more inclined to get trained and do it responsibly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Farmer (Rural Montana)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The deduction is nice, but I already have my setup.
- It's more beneficial for newer gun owners or those less prepared.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
School Teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's crucial that gun safety be encouraged financially.
- Even as someone who doesn't own a gun, I can see its societal value.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
College Student (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This deduction is especially useful for students like me who need to minimize costs.
- I might finally afford that course I've wanted to take.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Police Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm all for tax deductions that promote safety.
- This could motivate more law-abiding gun owners to act.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Entrepreneur (Denver, CO)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing I could get some deduction for securing my home makes the decision to own a gun more feasible.
- This bill could motivate future owners to prioritize safety right from the start.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Real Estate Agent (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though crime isn't a huge issue here, I still believe any step toward safer gun ownership is positive.
- I might use it to fund a safety course.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 2: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 3: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 5: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 10: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 100: $3475000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $4000000000)
Key Considerations
- Exact uptake of deduction by firearm owners is uncertain and subject to variance based on behavioral influences.
- Total tax expenditure could significantly fluctuate depending on IRS enforcement and regulatory changes.
- Policy realization could prompt administrative cost increases at the IRS to accommodate processing and auditing of new deductions.
- Shifts in consumer behavior related to firearms safety expenditures are driven by deduction incentives, potentially enhancing public safety measures.