The GHOST Act of 2025 creates a new federal program—the Federal Interstate Firearm Parts Reporting System—run by the Attorney General to collect advance notice of shipments of three firearm components: barrels, slides, and bolt carriers. Entities shipping those components in interstate or foreign commerce must register shipments, follow delivery protocols that capture recipient signatures, and provide delivery confirmations to the Department of Justice.
The bill centralizes that registration data in an Attorney General‑maintained database exempt from public FOIA access and available to federal, state, local, Tribal, and foreign law enforcement, prosecutors, and authorized designees. It authorizes seizure and administrative destruction of unregistered components, provides criminal penalties for knowing evasion, and gives the Attorney General rulemaking authority to implement the program.
For compliance officers and manufacturers, the GHOST Act turns common carriage of a handful of firearm parts into a reportable, traceable transaction with legal and operational consequences.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a DOJ‑operated registration system for interstate or foreign shipments of firearm barrels, slides, and bolt carriers; requires pre‑shipment notice, delivery methods that record recipient signatures, and prompt confirmation of delivery.
Who It Affects
Manufacturers, distributors, retailers, private sellers, and couriers that ship the named components across State lines or internationally; the Department of Justice, federal and state law enforcement, and postal and commercial carriers.
Why It Matters
It extends federal oversight to stand‑alone firearm components rather than complete firearms, establishes a searchable law‑enforcement database exempt from FOIA, and ties civil‑administrative tools (seizure/destruction) and criminal penalties to failures to register or evade the system.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill requires that, before shipping in interstate or foreign commerce any barrel, slide, or bolt carrier, the shipper must register the shipment with the Attorney General in a form the department prescribes. Registration must include identifying information for the shipper and recipient, the carrier or delivery method, and a manifest or bill of lading that lists the items being transported.
The statute frames these steps as a pre‑shipment compliance obligation for any "entity" making such a shipment.
Delivery rules are prescriptive. Shipments sent through the U.S. mail must use registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) or an AG‑approved equivalent; non‑mail delivery must be on services that require the recipient’s signature and provide the shipper notice of that signature.
After registering, the shipper must submit confirmation documents or a certification that documentation has not yet been received; if documentation is not available the shipper must update the Attorney General at five‑business‑day intervals until delivery proof arrives or the AG waives further certifications.The Attorney General compiles the registration records into a centralized database and may share the information with federal, state, local, Tribal, and foreign law enforcement, prosecutors, federal agencies, and any individual who has express authorization from those entities. The bill expressly exempts the database from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, limiting public access while enabling broad law‑enforcement use.
The AG can promulgate regulations to run the program and to set administrative procedures for seizures and destructions.For noncompliant shipments, the Attorney General (or designated government entities) may seize covered components transported without registration; state, local, or Tribal officers may also seize under exigent circumstances with notice to the AG. The bill allows administrative destruction where no objection is raised and provides for court review when someone contests destruction.
Criminal penalties apply for knowing evasion of the registration requirement—up to 1 year imprisonment for ordinary violations and up to 10 years where an offense involves at least 50 components in a single act. The statute defines the covered components narrowly (barrel, slide, bolt carrier) and sets an effective date 120 days after enactment.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The shipper must register a covered component shipment with the Attorney General not later than 5 business days before shipping.
Mail shipments must use registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) or an AG‑approved equivalent; non‑mail shipments must use a service that requires recipient signature and notifies the shipper.
Within 5 business days after initial registration, the shipper must submit delivery documentation or certify that documentation is unavailable and then file additional certifications every 5 business days until delivery proof is provided or the AG waives the requirement.
The Attorney General may seize unregistered covered components and may administratively order destruction if no objection is raised; judicial review is available where destruction is contested and the court must find no registration (including retroactive or putative registration) and a failure by the recipient to timely file a putative registration.
Criminal penalties: knowing evasion carries fines or up to 1 year imprisonment, but if the offense involves shipment of 50 or more covered components in a single act the maximum rises to 10 years imprisonment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the statute as the "Gun Hardware Oversight and Shipment Tracking Act of 2025" or "GHOST Act of 2025." This is purely a labeling provision but is useful for citations, triggers the later effective date, and signals the bill’s focused subject matter for regulatory drafting and stakeholder outreach.
Creates the Federal Interstate Firearm Parts Reporting System
Directs the Attorney General to establish and operate the reporting program to assist law enforcement in monitoring interstate or foreign shipments of covered firearm components. Practically, this gives DOJ operational control over form design, authentication, and the technical platform that will receive shipper submissions; the AG’s discretion here shapes how burdensome or streamlined registration will be.
Pre‑shipment registration, delivery methods, confirmation, and safe harbors
Specifies that entities must submit identifying information for shipper and recipient, carrier method, and item manifests not less than 5 business days before shipping. Prescribes registered/certified mail or signature‑on‑delivery services to create verifiable chain‑of‑custody. Offers a retroactive 5‑business‑day registration safe harbor and allows recipients to file a "putative" registration within 5 business days of receipt; the AG can bar retroactive filings for repeat noncompliance. These mechanics will define day‑to‑day compliance processes for shippers and couriers and determine how private sales are documented.
DOJ database, sharing rules, and FOIA exemption
Requires the Attorney General to compile and maintain the registration data in a centralized database and permits disclosure to federal, state, local, Tribal, and foreign law enforcement, prosecutors, federal agencies, and individuals expressly authorized by those actors. The statute expressly exempts the database from public FOIA requests under the cited FOIA exemption, narrowing public oversight while enabling broad law‑enforcement access—raising design and privacy concerns that agencies will have to address in rulemaking.
Seizure authority, exigent‑circumstance provision, and administrative destruction
Gives the Attorney General and designated government entities power to seize unregistered covered components. State, local, and Tribal officers can seize under certified exigency with post‑seizure notification. The AG can use administrative proceedings to destroy seized components absent objection; if an owner objects, the AG may seek a district court order to authorize destruction, with the statute setting the evidentiary baseline the court must find (no registration and no putative recipient filing when the recipient had a reasonable opportunity). These are operationally significant because they substitute administrative processes for some judicial routes and place the burden of timely objection on property holders.
Unlawful acts, criminal penalties, AG rulemaking authority, and key definitions
Makes it a crime to knowingly ship or transport a covered component without registration with intent to evade the statute. Adds penalties to section 924: up to 1 year imprisonment for violations, escalating to up to 10 years if 50 or more components are shipped as part of a single act. Grants the Attorney General authority to issue regulations and defines covered components (barrel, slide, bolt carrier) and eligible identification numbers (EIN, last 4 SSN, or AG‑approved ID). These definitions and the AG’s regulatory power will shape who counts as an "entity" and how identification and authentication are handled.
Table of contents entry and 120‑day effective date
Adds the new section to the chapter table of contents and sets the statute to take effect 120 days after enactment. The 120‑day delay is the statutory window for DOJ rulemaking, logistics with carriers, and stakeholder compliance planning.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Federal, State, Local, and Tribal law enforcement — Gains a searchable central database tying shipments to senders, carriers, and recipients, improving investigative leads and the ability to detect bulk or suspicious movements of key firearm components.
- Prosecutors — Receives pre‑assembled documentary trails (manifests, delivery receipts) that can support charges or asset forfeiture decisions, reducing investigative time to establish interstate transport.
- Victim‑safety and regulatory compliance units — Can use the reporting system to flag atypical patterns (e.g., repeated shipments to the same non‑licensed recipient) and prioritize enforcement resources.
Who Bears the Cost
- Manufacturers, retailers, private sellers, and individual shippers — Face new pre‑shipment reporting duties, additional postage/carrier costs (registered/certified mail or signature services), and recurring administrative overhead to submit confirmations and certificates.
- Postal and commercial carriers — Must implement or integrate verification flows (return receipts, signature notifications) and handle potential disputes or hold requests; may face contract and operational adjustments to accommodate DOJ form requirements.
- Small sellers and peer‑to‑peer platforms — Encounter compliance ambiguity about whether individual private sellers count as "entities," potential delays in sales, and reputational/legal risk if shipments are seized or misregistered, raising transaction costs and platform moderation burdens.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma pits two legitimate goals: giving law enforcement a timely, centralized picture of cross‑State movements of critical firearm components versus protecting privacy, limiting regulatory burdens on small shippers and private sellers, and preserving robust procedural protections for seized property. The bill solves the first by concentrating data and seizure powers at DOJ, but it does so in ways that raise localized compliance burdens, potential overreach in administrative destruction, and significant privacy and transparency trade‑offs.
The bill centralizes broad discretionary authority in the Attorney General: form design, what constitutes an acceptable carrier equivalent, who qualifies for an AG‑approved identification number, and whether to bar retroactive registrations. Those delegations will determine whether the statute functions as a light tracing tool or as a heavy compliance regime that captures casual private sales.
Rulemaking choices (authentication, identity verification, data retention and security) will materially affect privacy risks and business costs.
Seizure and destruction mechanics pose procedural risk. Administrative destruction absent objection shifts the burden to owners to monitor DOJ actions and mount timely objections; judicial review is available only after an objection and requires courts to find a lack of registration and recipient inaction.
That process could produce uneven due‑process outcomes and burdens on property owners and courts. The statute’s FOIA exemption reduces public transparency about how the database is used, while broad sharing to foreign law enforcement raises cross‑border data‑sharing and civil liberties questions.
Finally, the law’s narrow component list excludes other parts that can materially affect weapon functionality, creating potential enforcement avoidance through substitution or packaging strategies.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.