Silencer Central and the NFA: Allegations, Lobbying Disclosures, and Community Reaction

Background

Silencer Central, one of the largest suppressor manufacturers and retailers in the United States, has recently come under intense scrutiny within the firearms community. Allegations surfaced that the company was lobbying against efforts to remove suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA), a move that would significantly deregulate suppressor ownership. This controversy has sparked heated debate online, with many gun owners questioning the company’s true stance and motivations.

The Allegations and Evidence

Lobbying Disclosures

The controversy began when federal lobbying disclosures revealed that Silencer Central paid $50,000 in 2024 to a lobbying firm for efforts described as “develop and support suppressor tax stamp conservation legislation.” This language, while vague, raised suspicions that the company was advocating to preserve the current NFA tax stamp system for suppressors, rather than supporting their removal from NFA regulation.

In 2025, subsequent lobbying filings showed Silencer Central hired another firm to lobby on the Hearing Protection Act (HPA), and “regulation of suppressor purchases,” but these filings did not specify a position for or against deregulation.

Natural Resource Results LLC LD-2 Disclosure Form From Silencer Central 1-1-3-31 2024 

The Business Model Factor

Some industry observers speculate that Silencer Central’s business model-which relies on the ability to ship NFA-regulated suppressors directly to customers’ homes-could be impacted if suppressors were moved from the NFA to the Gun Control Act (GCA), which does not allow direct-to-consumer shipping. This has fueled further suspicion about the company’s lobbying priorities.

Silencer Central’s Response

Official Statements

After the lobbying disclosures gained traction on social media and forums, Silencer Central issued a public statement on their Twitter/X account, asserting:

“Our commitment to our customers is unwavering, and we support any effort that reduces barriers to make suppressor ownership more accessible!”

CEO Brandon Maddox later clarified to AmmoLand News:

We have always been vocal supporters of the HPA, as well as the current proposed provision of a $0 tax stamp. Our priority has always been, and will continue to be, advocating for deregulation and 2nd amendment rights, while supporting any win we can get for our customers regarding their firearm and accessory ownership rights along the way.

Despite these statements, the company did not directly address why its lobbying disclosures referenced “tax stamp conservation” or why it did not sign a Gun Owners of America (GOA) letter explicitly supporting the full removal of suppressors from the NFA, as other industry players did.

Community and Industry Reaction

Online Backlash

The firearms community’s response has been swift and critical. Many users on forums like Snipers Hide, Carolina Firearms Forum, and SIGTalk expressed outrage, interpreting the lobbying disclosures as evidence that Silencer Central was working against full deregulation of suppressors. Some called for boycotts, drawing comparisons to other high-profile industry controversies.

Calls for Clarity

Others in the community have urged caution, noting that while the disclosures are concerning, the precise intent and effect of Silencer Central’s lobbying efforts remain unclear. Some point out that the company’s official statements support deregulation, but the lack of transparency and direct answers has left many unsatisfied.

What Remains Unclear

• The exact nature of the “suppressor tax stamp conservation legislation” Silencer Central supported is not fully detailed in public filings.

• It is not definitively proven that Silencer Central lobbied to keep suppressors on the NFA, but the language in their disclosures and their business interests have fueled ongoing speculation.

• The company’s refusal to sign certain pro-deregulation letters and lack of direct answers to pointed questions have contributed to the controversy.

Summary Table: Key Points

Video Coverage

For a video breakdown of the controversy, check out this YouTube analysis by The VSO Gun Channel:

Conclusion

The situation surrounding Silencer Central’s lobbying activities remains contentious and somewhat ambiguous. While official statements assert support for deregulation and the Hearing Protection Act, lobbying disclosures and business interests have led many in the firearms community to question the company’s true priorities. The lack of clear, direct answers from Silencer Central has only intensified speculation and backlash.

As the debate continues, gun owners and industry observers are watching closely for further clarification-both in future lobbying disclosures and in the company’s public actions. For now, the controversy underscores the importance of transparency and trust between firearms companies and the communities they serve.