On October 11 the California Governor signed Assembly Bill 1263 which will go into effect on January 1, 2026.  The bill was among several aimed at the firearms industry that were passed into law last month.  AB 1263, titled “Firearms: ghost guns” impacts far more than so-called “ghost guns” and sets forth onerous new sales requirements for any company selling “firearm accessories” to purchasers residing in California – yes, this applies to sales via the internet made by FFLs on the other side of the country.  In addition to the amendments made to the Penal Code, the bill also amends the “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act” (California Civil Code Title 20) and the Firearm Manufacturing title of the Civil Code.  We’ll provide a brief rundown of the bill and what it means to companies selling and shipping goods to California.

“Firearm Industry Responsibility Act” Amendments

Sections 1 and 1.5 modify the definitions of FIRA at California Civil Code 3273.50.  Specifically, “firearm accessory” was amended to now be defined as:  “an attachment or device designed or adapted to be inserted into, affixed onto, or used in conjunction with a firearm that is designed, intended, or functions to increase a firearm’s rate of fire or to increase the speed at which a person may reload a firearm or replace the magazine, or any other attachment or device described in subdivision (a) of Section 30515 of the Penal Code that may render a firearm an assault weapon when inserted into, affixed onto, or used in conjunction with a firearm.  The term firearm accessory also includes any other device, tool, kit, part, or parts set that is clearly designed and intended for use in manufacturing firearms. (new text indicated by italics). The items incorporated by reference in 30515(a) are the following: pistol grips, thumbhole stocks, folding stocks, telescoping stocks, grenade launchers, flare launchers, flash suppressors, forward pistol grips, threaded barrels for handguns, and “a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer’s hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.”

 The definition of “firearm manufacturing machine” was broadened in scope to include 3D printers, CNC machines, or other similar machines that produce not only firearms, but firearm components and accessories as well.  The “reasonable controls” definition of FIRA was amended to include a requirement of industry members to “prevent the installation and use of a pistol converter.” 

 Section 2 of AB 1263 amends the core of the FIRA by adding new subsection (e) to California Civil Code Section 3273.51.  In pertinent part:

 Prior to completing the sale or delivery in California or to a California resident of a firearm accessory or a firearm manufacturing machine…or of a firearm barrel…a firearm industry member shall…

• provide a prospective purchaser with a clear and conspicuous notice of the information provided in paragraph (2)…
• receive an acknowledgement from the prospective purchaser attesting that the prospective purchaser received and understand the notice…
• require the prospective purchaser to provide proof of age and identity verifying that the prospective purchaser is at least 18 years of age.

The notice to be provided to purchasers shall clearly inform them that it is prohibited to engage in any of the following conduct without a valid license to manufacture firearms:

• Manufacturing more than three firearms per calendar year in California.
• Manufacturing a firearm using a three-dimensional printer or CNC milling machine.
• Manufacturing a firearm for the purpose of selling or transferring ownership of that firearm to another individual who is not licensed to manufacture firearms.
• Manufacturing a firearm for the purpose of selling, loaning, or transferring that firearm, with the intent to complete the sale, loan, or transfer without a required background check initiated by a licensed firearms dealer.
• Allowing, facilitating, aiding, or abetting the manufacture of a firearm by a person who is legally prohibited from possessing firearms.
• Manufacturing, or causing the manufacture of, assault weapons, machineguns, undetectable firearms, unserialized firearms, unsafe handguns that are not on the Department of Justice roster of handguns certified for sale in California, or other generally prohibited weapons.

Section 2 also requires particular shipping practices when selling firearm accessories and manufacturing machines.  Specifically:

(A) Ensure all packages are conspicuously labeled with the words: “Signature and proof of identification of person aged 18 years or older required for delivery.”

(B) Ensure the shipping instructions list an address that matches the purchaser’s identification.

(C) Require the purchaser, upon delivery, to present a courier with proof of identification and the purchaser’s signature in order to receive the item.

Specific shipments are exempted from the foregoing requirements, such as shipments to FFLs and ammunition vendors, shipments to military and law enforcement officers, and shipments to forensic laboratories.

Amendments to California Civil Code Title 21, Firearm Manufacturing

AB 1263 Section 3 broadens the definition of “digital firearm manufacturing code” significantly.  Currently it only controls such code if it is used to produce firearms, frames and receivers, or “firearm precursor part”, as defined by CA law.  “Digital firearm manufacturing code” now includes digital instructions and files to make any of the following:

• Firearms, frames, receivers, and “firearm precursor parts”
• “Large Capacity Magazines” and “Large Capacity Magazine Conversion Kits”
• Machine guns, “switches”, and “auto-sear devices”
• “Multiburst trigger activators” as defined by California Penal Code 16930
• Silencers
• “Firearm accessories”, as defined above
• Firearm barrels

Section 4 broadens who may sue companies or individuals for violating the Firearm Manufacturing provisions of the California Civil Code.  Section 5 adds a new provision to the Firearm Manufacturing provisions of the Civil Code that provides “It is unlawful to knowingly, willfully, or recklessly cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms, or to knowingly, willfully, or recklessly aid, abet, promote, or facilitate the unlawful manufacture of firearms” and allows for private individuals and state actors to bring suit to enforce the provisions.  In addition to injunctions a civil penalty of up to $25,000 for each violation is authorized. 

Penal Code Amendments

In addition to the civil actions authorized above for violation of the Firearm Manufacturing provisions, Section 6’s addition to the Penal Code of Section 29186 likewise makes it “unlawful to knowingly or willfully cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms, or to knowingly or willfully aid, abet, promote, or facilitate the unlawful manufacture of firearms.”

“Unlawful manufacture of firearms” is defined as:

(1) The manufacture of a firearm by a minor, or by a person who is prohibited from owning or possessing firearms under California law.

(2) The manufacture of four or more firearms within the state in the same calendar year by an individual who is not licensed to manufacture firearms pursuant to California law, in violation of Section 29010.

(3) The manufacture of any firearm using a three-dimensional printer or computer numerical control (CNC) milling machine by an individual who is not licensed to manufacture firearms pursuant to California law, in violation of Section 29185.

(4) The manufacture of a firearm by a person who is not a federally licensed firearms manufacturer, for the purpose of selling or transferring ownership of that firearm to another person who is not a federally licensed firearms manufacturer, in violation of subdivision (d) of Section 29180.

(5) The manufacture of a firearm for the purpose of selling, loaning, or transferring the firearm to another person, with the intent to complete the sale, loan, or transfer without a required background check on the transferee initiated by a licensed firearms dealer, in violation of Section 27520.

(6) The manufacture of any of the following:

(A) Assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles, in violation of Section 30600.

(B) Firearms that are not immediately recognizable as firearms, in violation of Section 24510.

(C) Firearms that are not imprinted with a valid state or federal serial number or mark of identification, in violation of subdivision (f) of Section 29180.

(D) Large-capacity magazines or large-capacity magazine conversion kits, in violation of Section 32310 or 32311.

(E) Machineguns, in violation of Section 32625.

(F) Multiburst trigger activators, in violation of Section 32900.

(G) Short-barreled rifles or short-barreled shotguns, in violation of Section 33215.

(H) Undetectable firearms, in violation of Section 24610.

(I) Unsafe handguns, in violation of Section 32000.

(J) Zip guns, in violation of Section 33600.

(K) Any other weapon defined as a “generally prohibited weapon” under Section 16590.

Finally, Section 7 provides for a penalty if an individual convicted of certain crimes possesses a firearm within 10 years of the conviction.  Sections 8 – 10 of the bill primarily contain certain standard parliamentary provisions common in California legislation.

What does this mean for my company?

There has been a lot of concern over the (not so) specifics of this bill and the full extent of risk to industry members, particularly over new Penal Code Section 29186.  Before we get into the ambiguities and scope of risk there, let’s address the straightforward. Regardless of where you operate, if you are selling to California residents the bill applies to you and you need to implement procedures to comply. 

Companies need to provide the warnings described above to California consumers prior to their purchase of “firearm accessories” (as defined), “firearm manufacturing machines,” and barrels.  The definition of “firearm accessories” is ambiguous enough to create pause.  While the items identified by Penal Code Section 30515(a) are specific and easy to understand, the following text is very broad: “increase a firearm’s rate of fire or to increase the speed at which a person may reload”.  One could make a case that myriad seemingly benign accessories could fall within that definition.  Practically speaking, a company may be better served to simply provide the warning for all its products to California consumers (similar to the infamous “Prop 65” warnings that are everywhere – “this product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer…”) to reduce risk as much as possible.

In addition to the warning, as highlighted above, a company needs to obtain an affirmative acknowledgement from the consumer that they received the warning.  There is no direct mandate for how to implement this requirement, but dialog boxes at or before online checkout seem to be the simplest solution. 

Perhaps the biggest issue for some will be the age verification requirement as companies are now forced to obtain ID from the consumer to verify that they are at least 18 years of age.  There are certain software solutions available to execute this task but integrating such solutions with a website takes money and time; the latter of which is rapidly coming to a close as this law goes into effect January 1, 2026.  Many companies may be manually verifying age in the short term until they can get an automated solution up and running.  Companies will also need to change their shipping practices for effectively all shipments to California, unless shipping to exempted parties such as FFLs.

As for Penal Code 29186 and what actions fall within its ambit, let’s re-review the criminal provision: “It is unlawful to knowingly or willfully cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms, or to knowingly or willfully aid, abet, promote, or facilitate the unlawful manufacture of firearms.” (emphasis added) Many companies fear that selling any parts or accessories into California opens them to prosecution under this provision such that their sales could be interpreted as “facilitating” the unlawful manufacture of firearms.  While the risk is certainly not zero, individual sales of miscellaneous parts to California consumers is likely not an automatic prosecutable offense. 

We will assume here that companies selling goods to California residents – certainly the companies taking the time to read this information – are not affirmatively causing others to unlawfully manufacture firearms.  So we will not even address that clearly criminal action.  However, the provision is written broadly enough such that it can provide an avenue to prosecute what a company believes to be legitimate sales activity.  Let’s walk through some examples. 

Selling a pistol grip, without more, would be a tough case to make that a company knowingly or willfully aided, abetted, promoted, or facilitated the unlawful manufacture of a firearm (e.g., an “assault weapon”).  Perhaps the consumer purchased it for a pump action firearm they own – not an “assault weapon” and therefore there is no prosecutable offense.  Perhaps the consumer has a grandfathered and legally registered “assault weapon.”  Perhaps the consumer is exempt from “assault weapons” prohibitions (e.g., a police officer).  There are many legal actions that the consumer could be performing with this pistol grip while there is only effectively one single unlawful action.  The overwhelming majority of individual parts sales, without more, would likely not subject a company to prosecution. 

However, certain sales activity can certainly expose companies to risk.  Let’s change the hypothetical.  Perhaps that consumer in a single purchase ordered a pistol grip, a flash hider, a 10” barrel for an AR-15, a standard lower parts kit, and a telescoping stock.  While technically they could still be building their own firearm in a “CA compliant” fashion, there is enough here to warrant at least a minimal level of concern.  Taking the example even further, perhaps this hypothetical customer makes similar parts purchases on a weekly basis.  While they certainly may be a collector building several “CA compliant” firearms it starts to look a lot more like unlawful manufacture and distribution of firearms should such sales rise to a quantity of 15 or 20 within a few weeks.  

Another variation shows how even sales of single parts could cause issues for companies selling to CA residents.  Perhaps on Monday a consumer purchases a lower parts kit for an AR platform firearm.  The following week they purchase a pistol grip.  A few days later they purchase a flash hider.  While the first sale raised no flags, these follow up sales again raise suspicion that the consumer may be assembling their own “assault weapon”.  Given that these seemingly innocuous sales may expose a company to civil and/or criminal sanctions, companies would be best served to plan ahead for implementing systemic or process controls to reduce their risk profile. 

So, the questions arise: what do we do to avoid risk and guarantee ourselves we will avoid liability?  The statutes are deliberately written broadly to give authorities as much discretion as possible to bring an action against the firearms industry.  After all, it is California.  The only way to guarantee avoidance of risk?  Unfortunately that answer is to stop selling goods in California.  

However, California is a very large market with millions of law-abiding firearm enthusiasts.  For most companies, cutting off sales to the State in its entirety is a nonstarter and an action that we would not want to undertake.  Given the economic incentive, to avoid being charged for or being sued in a civil context for violation of this new statute a company should assess its product portfolio and its sales activity.  We gave some examples of sales activity above.  As you can see there is a sliding scale of sales from “good” and safe to “potentially bad” and causing risk. 

In conjunction with taking a look at sales processes, companies should also look at their product lines.  A part for a firearm for which there is no known “unlawful” use (e.g., a replacement grip for a handgun on the California Roster) – very little risk present for the company.  A part for a firearm that is explicitly prohibited by law (e.g., a bump stock) – obviously a sale to be avoided.  Unfortunately, most firearm parts and accessories probably fall in a middle category; uses that are both lawful and unlawful (e.g., a flash hider).  In fact, given that “unlawful manufacture of firearms” includes manufacturer of four or more firearms in a calendar year by an unlicensed individual or entity, technically every part sale could be seen as within the scope of the new law under the broadest possible reading.  

While there is no silver bullet for companies who wish to sell goods to California residents, failing to take any proactive measure is a surefire way to enhance risk.  Burying your head in the sand is not a viable option. 

As of the date of this writing there is no lawsuit against these new laws.