What is the Gun Store Transparency Project?

ATF — short for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — is the federal law enforcement agency charged with, among other responsibilities, inspecting the 129,000 federal firearms licensees (FFLs) in the United States. It does this as part of its public safety mission to “protect[] America’s communities by confronting violent crime driven by the illegal use of firearms, explosives, and acts of arson… concentrate on identifying and dismantling illegal firearms traffickers who fuel violence by arming prohibited persons, gang members, drug cartels, illegal aliens, and terrorist organizations... [and] partner[] with state and local law enforcement to investigate, identify, and prosecute violent offenders;[and] safeguard lawful commerce…”

A federal firearms licensee, or FFL, is an individual or business licensed by ATF to be engaged in the business of firearms, including dealing, manufacturing, and importing firearms. There are approximately 129,000 FFLs in the United States, including about 48,000 gun dealers (FFL Type 01), 6,000 pawnbrokers (FFL Type 02), 21,000 manufacturers (FFL Type 07), and 2,000 importers (FFL Type 08) as of FY24.

No. This map shows the documents that ATF has produced to Brady in response to its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for FFL compliance inspection reports since July 2015 that resulted in the issuance of a Warning Letter or more severe remedy, nearly all of which are from the requested time period, but ATF also produced a handful from years prior. These reports represent a small subset of all ATF inspection reports generated during this period of time. Brady will continue to update this website as it receives additional reports.

Most, but not all, of these businesses appear to have an active federal firearms license. The ATF’s Federal Firearms Listings provide the most current list of active FFLs throughout the country.

You may download a complete list of nearly all FFLs in your state by visiting this page on ATF’s website. The only FFLs excluded from these listings are those with Collector of Curios and Relics license types, also known as “Type 03” licenses. Less than 0.1% of the reports in this database are for dealers with Collector licenses. 

Brady believes that FFLs should adopt the safest business practices to prevent dangerous and risky transactions, including transfers to straw purchasers, firearms traffickers, prohibited purchasers, and others that intend to misuse firearms. FFLs should consult Brady’s Gun Dealer Code of Conduct for a list of practices to help ensure they are selling firearms safely.

According to documents, ATF conducted 9,696 compliance inspections in FY24, 8,689 in FY23, 6,979 in FY22, 6,639 in FY21, 5,823 in FY20, 13,079 in FY19, 10,323 in FY18, 11,009 in FY17, 9,790 in FY16, and 8,696 in FY15. While data is not publicly available for FY25 at this time, the number of inspections is expected to be lower than in FY24 as ATF lost inspectors in 2025, now having the lowest number in decades.

ATF’s stated goal for FFL compliance inspections has varied. At one time, ATF’s goal was to inspect each licensed dealer, pawnbroker, manufacturer, and importer once every 3 or 5 years depending on the state in which it was located. In 2020, ATF stated that its goal is to inspect each licensed dealer, pawnbroker, manufacturer, and importer every 3 years, but, according to a 2022 report, ATF would need more than double the number of investigators  to meet this objective. In fact, a 2023 OIG audit found that not only did ATF fail to meet these inspection benchmarks, with the majority of FFLs being inspected only once per decade, but also that over 2,200 active FFLs had gone without a single inspection in 12 years. In 2025, ATF lost many of its inspectors, and now has the lowest number of inspectors since at least 2005 — when there were 20,000 fewer gun dealers.

Among other job duties, ATF Industry Operations Investigators (IOIs) are responsible for conducting FFL compliance inspections and identifying any violations of law. IOIs will also make a recommendation of which administrative action, if any, ATF should take against non-compliant FFLs.
A higher level ATF official such as an Area Supervisor (AS) and/or, in certain cases, a Director of Industry Operations (DIO), will review the IOI’s findings and recommendations. Such officials can concur with the IOI’s recommendation, or modify the recommendation and issue a final disposition. ATF counsel also reviews inspections that warrant revocation. FFLs have the right to challenge ATF’s administrative findings and determinations in federal court.

No. Investigations and reports issued by The Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General (DOJ OIG) have found major shortcomings in ATF’s FFL compliance inspection program. For example, in 2004 the DOJ OIG found ATF was not effective in ensuring FFL compliance, in part because inspections were infrequent and inconsistent. In a 2013 follow-up review, the DOJ OIG found that the ATF did not meet its operational goals of inspecting all FFLs on a cyclical basis, resulting in over 58% not being inspected within five years, and that the ATF failed to track whether high-risk FFL inspections met its operating plan priorities. In 2023, the OIG found that ATF’s compliance inspection activity remains a concern, as ATF has not achieved its stated goal of inspecting FFLs every three years – resulting in over 2,000 active FFLs not receiving an onsite inspection for over a decade – and that ATF is inconsistent in its use of administrative actions, including license revocation, in response to inspections. 

During the previous administration ATF took promising steps to improve its inspections program. In 2021, ATF launched its Crime Gun Intelligence Analytics (CGIA) platform, which helps ATF investigators use data to prioritize higher-risk dealers for inspection. ATF also adopted a new enhanced regulatory enforcement policy, which required ATF to revoke an FFL’s license when certain serious and willful violations were uncovered, except in extraordinary circumstances. 

In 2025, the current administration made changes to ATF’s inspection program that make inspections both rarer and less effective. ATF lost many of its inspectors in 2025 and now has the lowest number of inspectors in at least two decades — when there were 20,000 fewer FFLs. In 2025, ATF ended its enhanced enforcement policy and weakened its industry enforcement policies,  making it incredibly difficult to revoke a dealer’s license and simultaneously raising the threshold for taking any action against dealers.

Reporting in outlets such as USA Today and The New York Times, based on the inspection reports that Brady has obtained from ATF, highlight how these serious flaws can lead to gun violence.

There are many challenges, internal and external, that contribute to ATF’s inability to effectively oversee the gun industry and enforce the law. Federal laws pushed by the gun lobby prohibit ATF from conducting more than one warrantless compliance inspection per FFL per year; require ATF to prove that an FFL “willfully” violated a law in order to revoke a license; and forbid ATF from requiring FFLs to perform physical inventory of their business, making inspections much more time-consuming. ATF is also chronically underfunded and under-resourced, falling hundreds of thousands of IOI hours short of inspecting FFLs even on a 5-year cycle. Things have only gotten worse since 2025, with ATF lost many of its IOIs, leaving the agency with the lowest number of inspectors in at least two decades — when there were 20,000 fewer FFLs. 

In the past, ATF’s policy, adopted in 2009, gave supervisors tremendous discretion to elect alternatives to revocation, allowing non-compliant FFLs to stay in business. The cumulative effect of this policy has had a clear impact on ATF’s enforcement: in FY11, ATF revoked 43% fewer licenses than it did in FY04, while the number of alternative actions skyrocketed – warning conferences by 80%, warning letters by 1,121%, and reports of violations by 276%. 

The enhanced regulatory enforcement policy, active from 2021 to 2024, changed this by requiring ATF to revoke an FFL’s license for certain serious and willful violations unless there are truly extraordinary circumstances, which ATF superiors had to fully detail. Subsequently, the percentage of inspections resulting in FFLs being revoked quadrupled from 0.4% in FY21 to 2.0% in FY24. However, that progress was more than reversed under the current administration, which narrowed what counts as a revocable offense and now requires a labyrinthian process of approvals from “a string of senior leaders” before a dealer’s license can be revoked. As a result, the latest reporting shows that in 2025, ATF was on track to revoke the fewest number of licenses in decades. 

Listen to Red, Blue, and Brady’s podcast “Why – and How – Are Lawbreaking Gun Dealers Being Protected” about these inspection reports for more information about obstacles to effective ATF oversight of the gun industry.

ATF is the sole federal agency with the authority to inspect the nation’s roughly 129,000 FFLs. However, certain states have laws that allow state and/or local law enforcement to conduct their own compliance inspections of licensed gun businesses as a complement to ATF’s efforts. With federal oversight being slashed, state and local oversight is the only remaining mechanism to ensure gun dealers are following the law. We encourage those states to learn more about Brady’s Enhanced Inspections Initiative, which promotes the use of advanced data analytics to optimize inspection resources.

Each gun that leaves an FFL when it legally should not could be a gun that is used to injure or kill a fellow American – and these reports detail violations of the law that may have real consequences for public safety. When FFLs that violate laws designed to prevent gun trafficking, assist law enforcement investigations, or keep guns out of the hands of those who should not possess them, even one FFL's actions thereby contribute to the epidemic of gun violence in America.

Investigative reporting in outlets such as USA Today in conjunction with The Trace, The New York Times, and The San Francisco Chronicle show how such violations have led to gun violence. For more information about the seriousness of such violations, read Brady’s 2006 in-depth report “‘Trivial Violations’?: The Myth of Overzealous Federal Enforcement Actions Against Licensed Gun Dealers.”

ATF releases a fact sheet every year that contains some high-level information about FFL compliance inspections, including a list of the most frequently cited violations. The FY24 Fact Sheet common violation list includes, among others, failure to maintain an accurate/complete/timely acquisition and disposition (A&D) record of firearms; failure to file multiple sales reports, a necessary tool to help law enforcement detect and shut down trafficking rings; failure to obtain a completed ATF Form 4473; failure to complete forms as prescribed; and failure to record National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) contact information on an ATF Form 4473.

Brady has noticed that in this database of reports, many of the violations appear to indicate a failure to properly verify a potential buyer’s identity, eligibility to purchase a firearm, and/or ensure that the necessary forms and documentation (such as the ATF Form 4473) are properly completed. Additionally, Brady has discovered that of the 6,104 reports on the current site, over 1,100 reports indicate that at least one firearm was identified as missing from inventory and its disposition could not be reconciled by the close of the inspection period. In some cases, missing firearms may indicate firearms trafficking. A 2022 ATF report noted that firearms reported missing from FFLs have an average time-to-recovery of under one year and that 32% of recovered guns were recovered in different states or other countries – suggesting that many were illegally trafficked. 

ATF has created internal guidelines for the administration of remedial action that dictate the circumstances under which a Warning Letter should be issued, a Warning Conference held, or an FFL’s license revoked. For the inspection reports published on the Gun Store Transparency project, those guidelines are found in ATF Orders 5370.1B, 5370.1C and 5370.1D. However, many of the inspection reports on this site show that ATF officials frequently rely on “mitigating factors” to issue a less severe administrative action than the guidelines call for.

Between June 2021 and the end of 2024, the Justice Department operated under a new enhanced regulatory enforcement policy (colloquially called “zero tolerance”) where absent extraordinary circumstances, ATF would seek to revoke the licenses of dealers the first time that they violate federal law by willfully 1) transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, 2) failing to run a required background check, 3) falsifying records, such as a firearms transaction form, 4) failing to respond to an ATF tracing request, or 5) refusing to permit ATF to conduct an inspection in violation of the law. Unlike in previous editions of ATF policy, when supervisors disagree with license revocation, they had to thoroughly explain why circumstances are extraordinary enough to avoid revocation, and get approval from higher levels of management for the decision to not revoke. 

However, in 2025, the enhanced policy was rescinded by the current administration and ATF narrowed what counts as a revocable offense, requiring a labyrinthian process of approvals from “a string of senior leaders” before a license can be revoked. As a result, the latest reporting shows that in 2025, ATF was on track to revoke the fewest number of licenses in decades. 

You can donate to support Brady in taking action, not sides; learn more about these efforts in gun violence prevention by visiting Brady's website; and join your local Brady chapter.

A dealer is marked as “known high crime gun dealer” if we know that the dealer had transferred 25 or more guns quickly recovered in crimes in at least one of the years 2020 - 2023. These firearms must have been purchased less than three years before the time they were recovered — a characteristic that the ATF has identified as a key indicator of gun trafficking. These dealers are or were part of ATF’s Demand Letter 2 (DL2) program during that time — a program created to aid law enforcement investigations by identifying firearms dealers that sell the most crime guns. Based on research by Brady, only 2% of gun dealers nationwide are subject to this program annually.

This information on crime gun dealers nationally will be the latest issued for years to come, as the current administration "paused" the ATF’s Demand Letter 2 program entirely in 2025.

Dealers marked as a “Known High Crime Gun Dealer*” with an asterisk had their license number change from the time the inspection was completed and the time the Demand 2 Letter was issued, possibly indicating a change in business structure or even ownership. 

Not all dealers on the GunStoreTransparency.org that had at least 25 guns recovered quickly (within three years from sale) in crimes are flagged as high crime dealers. DL2s could only be issued to dealers with retail (Type 1) or pawnbroker (Type 2) federal firearm license (FFL) types, as of the latest DL2s on this website (issued in mid 2024). That means dealers with manufacturing and importing licenses would not receive a DL2 no matter how many guns were quickly recovered in crimes and traced back to them. Historically, nearly all crime guns came from retail or pawnbroker dealers, as manufacturers and importers largely did not sell to individuals. The makeup of FFL has changed significantly since, as the number of dealers with manufacturer licenses rising ten times as high in 2023 as it was in 2000, while in the same period the number of dealers with retail and pawnbroker licenses decreased significantly. 

Unsurprisingly, the share of crime guns coming from dealers with manufacturer licenses grew more than 93% from 2017-2023. In January 2025, the DL2 program was expanded to apply to dealers with manufacturer and importer licenses, but those changes were never enacted, as the ATF effectively ended the DL2 program in summer 2025.

Through filing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Brady obtained Demand 2 Letters (DL2s) from 2022, 2023, and 2024. Most DL2 dealers for those years do not have inspection reports on GunStoreTransparency.org. This is due, at least in part, to the fact that more than 77% of gun dealers in the U.S. were not inspected at all in the time frame of inspections included in the database. In 2025, the current administration "paused" ATF’s Demand Letter 2 program.

Unfortunately, other information on the exact number of crime guns sold by dealers is limited due to ATF’s interpretation of the Tiahrt Amendment, which was drafted and passed in 2003 at the gun industry’s request and is interpreted by the ATF to prevent the release of much of this data.

No. The Gun Store Transparency project only includes a portion of compliance inspection reports that resulted in a Warning Letter or a more severe administrative action. The website currently includes nearly all compliance inspection reports that resulted in a Warning Letter or a more severe administrative action being “issued” to inspected federal firearm licensees from July 1, 2015 to August 2, 2018. 

It is important to remember that more than 77% of gun dealers in the U.S. were not inspected at all in this time frame, so a gun dealer’s absence from this website does not necessarily indicate that a dealer did not commit any serious violations. 

The website also includes more than 850 compliance inspection reports, resulting in a Warning Letter or more severe action, issued from August 3, 2018 to the end of 2020.  We continue to await more than 75% of the remaining reports from issued from August 3, 2018 - September 30, 2021 to be produced by ATF.

In August 2017, Brady submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request for all ATF FFL compliance inspection reports from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2017 in which the ATF issued an FFL a Warning Letter or more severe remedy as a result of its violations. After receiving no response to our request, in October 2017, Brady took the ATF to court to obtain inspection reports for these FFLs. Brady has since filed subsequent requests for additional reports beyond the original June 30, 2017 cut-off date. The FOIA effort and resulting litigation are still ongoing and have yielded all of the reports found in this database. Brady will continue to periodically update this website as it receives additional reports.

The inspection reports on this website are all public documents, and Brady obtained them through Freedom of Information Act requests and litigation. ATF can release these documents on its own website if it chooses to do so. The agency released several hundred reports in Fall 2023, before these records were deleted from government websites in January 2025. We will continue to utilize all tools at our disposal to push for transparency.

All redactions to the text in the reports were made by the ATF before they were provided to Brady, and Brady is releasing these reports exactly as we received them from ATF. ATF claims to have redacted the reports pursuant to exceptions contained in the Freedom of Information Act. Brady disagrees with ATF’s decision to redact certain categories of information.

This data has made Brady believe state and local gun industry oversight is necessary because ATF inspected many dealers only once from Fall 2010 to early 2022 — more than a decade. Even when the ATF does inspect an FFL, it often fails to adequately enforce the law.

Using this and other data, Brady has created a method for identifying key characteristics of dealers more likely to violate the law. Our method is 4.5 times more likely to identify a problem dealer than random selection.

Brady is working to integrate its proprietary data-analytics tool into state and local inspection processes. This tool allows state and local authorities to focus their limited resources on dealers who are likely to be violating the law. In doing so, states and localities will be able to fill the oversight void that currently exists due to ATF constraints, and conduct their own, more efficient oversight of dealers.

Brady is also working to educate communities on how they can hold the gun industry accountable. You can learn more about these efforts on Brady’s website.

Each inspection report on this map features the issuance of a Warning Letter or more severe remedy and was produced to Brady as a result of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and litigation. The fact that administrative action was taken and that these reports were subsequently obtained by Brady is the reason each one is included on this site. Remember, most gun dealers do not violate federal law: nearly half of dealers inspected by ATF between fall 2010 to early 2022 didn’t commit a single violation. All reports on this site resulted in at least the issuance of a Warning Letter, which indicates the violations were relatively serious, as inspections that find truly “trivial” violations tend to be given a less severe outcome: From FY20 - FY24, more than 40% of inspections that detected violations were issued a less severe action than a Warning Letter. We also encourage you to review Brady’s 2006 in-depth report “‘Trivial Violations’?: The Myth of Overzealous Federal Enforcement Actions Against Licensed Gun Dealers” for more information about how “paperwork” violations can be more serious than they appear.

Maybe. An FFL that does not appear on this map has (1) never been inspected by ATF (or not inspected since July 2015), (2) been inspected by ATF but not found to have any — or any serious — violations, or (3) been inspected by ATF after August 3, 2018 and found to have violations that resulted in administrative action, but ATF has not yet produced the report to Brady. ATF, however, has this information and we encourage it to release it to the public.

Brady has found that the sort of systemic change government may provide is more impactful, replicable, and ultimately successful than pressuring individual FFLs to change their behavior.

Brady is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization with one powerful mission — to unite all Americans against gun violence. We work across Congress, the courts, and our communities with over 70 grassroots chapters to take action, not sides, and create a safer America.

Thanks for visiting the site and wanting to get involved. Email us at [email protected] to get the conversation started.