Umm. No.
Braces have been around for quite some time.
Modern AR braces, about 12 years now.
Every single tech opinion clearly stated/states that when used as reviewed, incidental use on the arm, chest thigh or gasp, even shoulder, does make the system a SBR.
The critical piece used to be whether or not the accessory was designed or intended for use from the shoulder. The exploitation as you label it. As if that would make it darker and more evil... Irrational minds at work. Congress asleep at the wheel.
Now, the proposed criteria is much less objective than before.
The goal of ATF is to make everything unacceptable.
Does NOT make an SBR...
Of late, most purchases and use of stabilizing braces was precisely to create rifles with short barrels which were legal only because of a semantic between “intent of design” vs “intent of use”. While I applaud the malicious obedience achieving freedom to bypass infringement, it’s annoying that such word games are played by our side in a way assured to lose.
Feel free to follow up this by using the sales figures of stabilizing braces to demonstrate “in common use” in a court case intended to remove short barreled rifles from NFA restrictions.