On September 30, 2025, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a final rule rescinding an interim final rule (IFR) introduced by the Biden administration. This IFR had imposed new export licensing requirements on civilian firearms and related ammunition and components. In its press release, BIS stated that the previous administration’s actions are “onerous.” The IFR had also been a target of numerous complaints during the public comment period from U.S. gun manufacturers and distributors. The final rule essentially restores the controls on most firearms that existed under the first Trump administration.
The rescinded Biden-era IFR, published in April 2024, included several new restrictions, such as a “presumption of denial” policy (but not an outright prohibition) for licenses for civilian firearm exports to non-government end users in 36 destinations. These were designated by the Department of State (State) as “high risk” destinations for diversion or misuse, mostly by drug trafficking gangs and other criminal groups in the Caribbean and Latin America. The Biden-era controls also revoked some existing licenses to these countries and shortened the validity of other licenses, so that even multi-year license terms would expire in one year.
Under the final rule, exports of EAR-controlled pistols, rifles, and non-long-barrel shotguns will remain subject to a worldwide export license requirement. BIS highlighted that, “long-barrel shotguns and most optics can be exported without a license to U.S. allies and certain partners” and promised a “streamlined” license application process, in accordance with “normal BIS practice.”
Cancelation of the Biden-era firearms licensing policy reflects the reduced influence State now has in providing oversight of formally ITAR Category I articles. Notably, in 2020, export controls over less sensitive, commercially available firearms and ammunition shifted from State to BIS jurisdiction. This move, which dates to President Obama’s Export Control Reform initiative in 2013, was intended to streamline firearms licensing and treat many of these commodities as dual-use goods rather than defense articles that would have required State authorization. Human rights groups at the time raised many concerns that such transfers would lack transparency and government resources to ensure such items would not be diverted to criminal groups or human rights violators. Nevertheless, in its recent press release on the rescission, for the transactions that still have a license requirement, BIS promised to continue screening applications to reduce the risk of weapons diversion to “wrongdoers.”
Crowell will continue to monitor developments in U.S. export controls and their impact on the firearms industry.