Category archives for “Alcohol Beverage License”

Off-Premise Retail Caps - Are They Constitutional?

May 02, 2017

A South Carolina law preventing an entity from holding an interest in more than three off-premise retail liquor licenses was deemed unconstitutional earlier this year. The South Carolina Supreme Court accepted an argument by Total Wines & More that the state’s cap on liquor stores had no legitimate basis. Numerous bills had been filed with the state legislature over recent years to have the cap overturned, but without success. The Supreme Court majority, however, found that the state had not offered a persuasive argument on why the restriction was a proper use of its general police power. The only justification provided by the state in the case was that the law was designed to support small businesses, and preserve the right of small, independent liquor dealers to do business, which the court identified as simple economic protectionism.

A number of other states have caps on ownership of retail off-premise liquor licenses, particularly across the Northeast. Similar laws have survived constitutional challenges in states like New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. In these states, justifications for these laws have included reasons such as intensifying the dangers of liquor sales stimulation through retail concentration, preventing monopolies, avoiding indiscriminate price-cutting and excessive advertising, and discouraging absentee ownership. The success of the suit in South Carolina is likely to encourage a new wave of challenges to these laws, as the chain stores focus more efforts on expansion of their model in the region. The ongoing legislative and judicial dispute between Total Wine & More and the State of Connecticut, for example, on the statutory minimum pricing restrictions there, follows a similar path of seeking to open up a market more friendly to chain store liquor retail.

Since the decision was handed down on March 29, the South Carolina Senate has already approved a move to legislate around it, by passing an amendment to the state budget. The change would delay the implementation of the court’s decision for a year, and would require an applicant for a fourth store to pay the equivalent of a year’s gross sales from one of its current stores before it could get the new license. The amendment now passes to the General Assembly for consideration. In the interim, the state has publicly said
that they are accepting liquor store applications in light of the new ruling.

It goes without saying that the elimination of the retail cap in South Carolina is likely to significantly alter the retail liquor landscape there, and that other similar decisions in other states would affect the retail market nationwide. If you want more information on retail liquor licensing, please contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.


Illinois SB 2989: Unlicensed Direct Wine Shippers Beware

September 01, 2016

On Friday, August 26, 2016, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed Senate Bill 2989 (“SB 2989”) into law. SB 2989 amends various sections of the Illinois Liquor Control Act that affect direct wine shipping into Illinois as well as use of third party providers (“TPPs”). This post summarizes the changes made by SB 2989, which take effect on January 1, 2017. The higher license fees, described below, take effect immediately.

Harsher Penalties for Direct Wine Shipping Violations

SB 2989 imposes tougher penalties on direct wine shipping violations. Any person, including wineries, importers, and retailers, who distributes or sells 108 liters or more of wine (144 bottles of wine), 45 liters or more of spirits (5 12/750 cases), or 118 liters or more of beer (more than 28 12-packs of beer) without a license is guilty of a Class 4 felony for each offense, which has a minimum sentence of 1 year. Prior to SB 2989, the first offense was a business offense with a fine of not more than $1,000, and any subsequent offense was a Class 4 felony. For illegal shipments of less than 108 liters of wine, less than 45 liters of spirits, or less than 118 liters of beer, the penalty for the first offense is still classified as a business offense with a fine of not more than $1,000, and the penalty for subsequent offenses remains a Class 4 felony. Furthermore, any person who has already been issued a cease and desist notice from the State Commission could face the same felony charges.

New Disclosure Requirements for Winery Shipper’s Licensees and Reporting Requirements for TPPs

For new and renewing applicants of an Illinois winery shipper’s license, SB 2989 requires disclosure of all third parties authorized to ship the licensee’s wine, excluding common carriers, to the Illinois Liquor Control Commission (“ILCC”). Licensees must submit each third party’s name and address and file a copy of the written appointment of the TPP with the ILCC. SB 2989 provides that a TPP, other than a common carrier, shipping wine on behalf of a winery shipper’s licensee is the agent of the licensee, and that the licensee is responsible for the acts and omissions of the TPP. In turn, SB 2989 requires that each TPP consent to the jurisdiction of Illinois and the ILCC. Furthermore, SB 2989 imposes a new audit requirement on any appointed TPP, which will be required to file with the ILCC, by February 1 of each calendar year, a statement detailing each shipment made to an Illinois resident. The ILCC also has the power to deny any third party appointment if the TPP previously violated the Liquor Control Act.

Higher License Fees

Across the board, SB 2989 increases license fees for manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers. The fees for a winery shipper’s license for a winery producing under 250,000 gallons annually have been increased from $150 to $350 for the initial application and $200 for an online renewal. The fees for a winery shipper’s license for a winery producing over 250,000 gallons, but under 500,000 gallons annually have been increased from $500 to $1,000 for the initial application and $750 for an online renewal. The fees for a winery shipper’s license for a winery producing 500,000 gallons or more annually have been increased from $1,000 to $1,500 for the initial application and $1,200 for an online renewal.

For more information about the changes to the Illinois direct shipping laws, contact an attorney at Strike & Techel.


California ABC Announces 2016 New License Authorizations

August 15, 2016

It’s that time of year when the ABC announces priority applications, and this year’s numbers are sure to make a lot of retail business owners very happy! Every year the California ABC announces which counties are eligible for new on-sale and off-sale general licenses based on population growth versus existing license ratios within each county. The 2016 figures have been released, and the numbers this year are higher than usual.

What is a Priority application?

General retail licenses authorize the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits. They are restricted by county population and must typically be purchased on the open market from an existing licensee, often for a very high premium. Licenses are usually confined to the county in which originally issued, so prices vary drastically across the state. Every year, the ABC announces a ‘priority application period’ when they will accept new license applications. In addition, they announce a number of inter-county transfer allowances – where a business owner in a priority county can purchase a general license from a licensee in any other county and transfer it into the priority county.

If you’re in the market for an Off-Sale General Package Store License (Type 21), an On-Sale General Eating Place License (Type 47), or a Special On-Sale General Club License (Type 57) within a county where licenses are available, you should apply.

Licenses Available by County

The maximum number of priority applications the ABC typically authorizes for each category (new on-sale, new off-sale, inter-county on-sale, inter-county off-sale) is twenty-five. The ABC has authorized the maximum number of priority applications in several counties, including Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, and San Diego. For a complete list of license available by county, click here.

2016 Filing Period

ABC District offices will accept priority applications by mail or in person from September 12-23, 2016. If by mail, it must be postmarked on or before September 23rd. If the ABC receives more applications than licenses available, a public drawing will be held at the District office. Successful applicants will have 90 days to complete a formal application for the specific premises.

Fees

Priority application fees are $13,800 for new general licenses and $6,000 for inter-county transfers. A certified check, cashier’s check, or money order must be submitted along with the priority application. Unsuccessful applicants will be refunded the application fee, minus $100 service charge.

Residency Requirements

Every applicant must have been a resident of California for at least 90 days prior to the scheduled drawing. Exact drawing dates vary by District office, but all are in mid-late October. For corporations, limited partnerships, and limited liability companies, the 90-day residency requirement starts ticking upon registration with the California Secretary of State. Individual and general partnership applicants must submit proof of California residency.

If you’re interested in applying for a new or inter-county on- or off-sale general priority license, contact an attorney at Strike & Techel.


California Brewpub Licenses: What You Need to Know

October 08, 2015

Craft beer continues to be all the rage in California and across the country. With the increase in demand for local craft beers, we’ve been getting a lot of questions about how to get licensed as a brewery in California. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) issues three primary license types that permit beer production, including Beer Manufacturer licenses (Type 1), Small Beer Manufacturer licenses (Type 23) and the increasingly popular On-Sale General Brewpub license (Type 75). The license privileges of each type of brewery license vary, and the brewpub license is a good choice for brewers that primarily want to operate a brewpub or microbrewery restaurant rather than sell their beers for consumers to drink off the brewery’s premises.

A Type 75 brewpub license authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption at a bona fide eating place, which essentially requires that the facility be a restaurant with its own kitchen that serves meals. The ability to sell distilled spirits as a brewpub is a privilege that many find attractive in deciding between brewery licenses. Type 1 and Type 23 breweries may, but are not required to, operate bona fide eating places, but they are limited to beer and wine, and cannot sell distilled spirits. Additionally, beer, wine, and distilled spirits restaurant licenses (i.e., Type 47 On-Sale General for Bona Fide Public Eating Place) are often extremely expensive as the number of licenses issued is limited per county based on population. There is no cap on the number of Type 75 licenses that can be issued, so the Type 75 license can be an attractive option for businesses that want to sell distilled spirits, although all Type 75 licensees must meet certain brewing requirements.

Brewpubs must produce at least 100 barrels of beer per year and can produce no more than 5,000 barrels of beer per year. That production cap is substantially lower than the production allowances for Small Beer Manufacturers (less than 60,000 barrels per year) and Beer Manufacturers (60,000 barrels per year or more). Additionally, a Type 75 brewpub premises must have brewing equipment that has at least seven-barrel brewing capacity. The ABC has recently been looking into the brewing equipment of Type 75 licensees and enforcing against brewpubs that aren’t actually brewing beer or don’t have the requisite brewing capacity.

Other key features of Type 75 brewpub licenses include the following:

• Cannot make sales from the brewpub premises for off-premises consumption. This means that a brewpub cannot sell bottles, cans, growlers or other containers for consumption away from the brewpub.

• Can sell beer produced by the brewpub to California licensed wholesalers.

• Must buy all wine, distilled spirits, and beer not produced by the brewpub from a licensed wholesaler or winegrower. Note that brewpubs cannot buy or sell beer or other alcoholic beverages from other brewpubs or retailers.

The initial fee for a brewpub license is currently $12,000, which is more expensive than most California license types. The annual fee is determined by the population where the brewpub is located, and varies between approximately $500 and $1,000 per year. Additionally, local rules where the brewpub is located may require additional permitting or other approvals before the brewpub can operate. Lastly, all breweries, including brewpubs, must obtain a brewery basic permit from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade bureau, the federal agency that regulates alcoholic beverages. There is no fee for the federal permit, but a bond is required.

Contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have any questions about starting a brewery!


TTB Reconsiders Use of “Estate Bottled” Following a Winery Sale

May 21, 2014

To be labeled as “estate bottled,” a wine must be, among other things, made from grapes grown in an American Viticultural Area, on land that is owned or “controlled by” the winery, and the winery must crush, finish, age and bottle the wine in a continuous process.

Previous guidance from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (“TTB”) suggested that a wine would not be entitled to use the “estate bottled” designation if a change of ownership of the winery occurred at any point during the winemaking process, because the new owner technically would not have “controlled” all phases of the process. To address this issue, sellers and buyers of wineries that produce “estate bottled” wines would sometimes enter into an Alternating Proprietorship Agreement (“AP”) whereby the seller would maintain its bonded winery operations until all wine in process at the winery as of the closing date had been bottled and labeled. This approach was difficult for both sellers and buyers, given that the AP could be in effect for a lengthy period of time depending on which stage of production the “estate bottled” wine was in.

In a recent private letter ruling, the TTB advised that it has reconsidered its position and that the proprietor of a winery can use an “estate bottled” designation for wine that was grown and fermented by a predecessor proprietor and bottled by a new proprietor (provided the wine also met the other requirements under 27 C.F.R. § 4.26). The ruling provides that the ownership of a winery may change while the wine is in process as long as the bottling winery does not change. The TTB further explains that the definition of “controlled by” refers to the land on which the grapes are grown and the winery operates, as opposed to the owner of such land. With a change in winery ownership, the “estate” land is not altered, and thus the new owner can maintain the “estate bottled” designation.

This guidance from the TTB should come as a welcome relief to potential purchasers and sellers of wineries that produce “estate bottled” wines.

For questions about the acquisition or sale of a winery, please contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2014 · All Rights Reserved ·


NYSLA Expands Suppliers’ Ability to Entertain Consumers

May 06, 2014

Suppliers’ ability to run events for consumers in the New York market has been up in the air for a number of years now, and especially since the industry consent orders in 2006. Now, the New York State Liquor Authority (SLA) has given helpful and detailed guidance on how these events can be run.

Supplier Purchases of Alcohol from On-Premise Retailers – #2014-8

This new SLA Advisory covers the ways in which suppliers and wholesalers may purchase alcoholic beverages from on premise retailers for consumers. Under the consent orders issued in 2006, there were three ways in which this could be done: (1) on an incidental basis; (2) for employees or private guests at an invitation-only event; or (3) at a bar spend promotional event open to the general public. The new advisory clarifies the scope of those activities and also expands on them.

Purchases for Consumers on an Individual or Incidental Basis

This is unchanged from SLA’s prior position. It is not intended to be an option for promotional events. It permits a supplier rep to buy themselves a drink and to buy a drink for individual patrons of a retailer.

Business Meetings and Private Events

- Business meetings or business entertainment

This means a gathering of a supplier employees, and/or representatives for entities that do business with a supplier (including other suppliers, distributors and retailers). There must be a legitimate business purpose for the meeting, like discussing product sales, new product introductions etc. It does not include holiday parties or other special occasion events. There are no spending restrictions, or limits on the number of meetings at any particular on premise location. The event must be in a reserved area (can be as little as one table), and at least one supplier employee must be present. Retail licensees and their employees can be invited and an invite can be sent to all employees of a particular retailer. Media reps can be present.

- Private invitation only events closed to the general public

This is an event not conducted for a business purpose or for promotional purposes. It must be a gathering of invitees who have an identifiable affiliation with a supplier (e.g., a party for employees, vendors or business associates), or a common affiliation or relationship with each other (e.g. journalists, sports teams or non-profit organizations). The language of the advisory makes it clear the group cannot just be a large gathering of a group of consumers or potential consumers without meaningful commonality other than an attempt to market or target a demographic. Invitations must be sent by a supplier to invitees by individual name, each such invitee may bring only one guest. Invites can be by phone, e-mail, letter, in person, etc. Invites cannot be in any type of media advertisement or generic communication to anyone wishing to attend and cannot be sent to a “mailing list” of consumers obtained or created by a supplier. The event must be in a reserved area (can be as little as one table) and at least one supplier employee must be present. Despite the stated non-business and non-promotional purpose of the events, retail licensees and their employees can be invited, as can the media. A supplier cannot send a general invite to all employees of a retailer or a retail chain.

Promotional Events Open to the General Public – No Invitation Required

Prior to the advisory, a bar spend was limited to $500 (plus 20% tip) and no more than six events per retailer, per year. Now, the limit is $700 (plus 20% tip), and no more than ten events per retailer, per year. A supplier cannot purchase food, non-alcoholic beverages, or anything else from the retailer for such an event. These events can now be advertised, identifying the time, date and location. Invites may also be sent to members of the general public, but the event cannot be restricted to people that received such invitations. There is no longer a need to submit statements after these events; a supplier must maintain a record of each event for two years that includes date, time, location and duration, brands that were purchased, and names of supplier reps or agents who conducted the event.

Promotional Events Open to the General Public – Invitation Required (“Brand Experience Events”)

This is a new category of events which will be extremely helpful for supplier marketing and promotions in New York. The advisory refers to these as “brand experience” events that are “much larger” than bar spend events. At a brand experience event, a supplier can spend up to $10,000 (plus 20% tip), and may purchase alcoholic beverages, non-alcoholic beverages and food. A supplier can also apply to the SLA for advance permission to spend more than $10,000 for an event. A supplier can have up to six such events per retailer per year (whether the event is at a retail premises or whether a retailer caters the event, as catering permits in New York are only held by on premise licensees). Attendees at these events must be invited and an event can be restricted to invitees only. A supplier can invite people individually (by phone, letter, e-mail, in person, etc.), or can also place media advertisements including invitations, generic communications inviting anyone who wishes to attend to register, and “mailing lists” of consumers. A supplier can advertise brand experience events, including date, time and location. Each person registered as an invitee may bring one guest. A supplier must maintain a record of each event for two years that includes date, time, location and duration, brands that were purchased, and names of supplier reps or agents who conducted the event.

Events Where the Supplier or Wholesaler Provides the Alcoholic Beverages

In a very helpful clarification, the new advisory notes that it is only intended to cover occasions where a supplier is purchasing alcoholic beverages from a retailer. It goes on to discuss the fact that a supplier may provide alcoholic beverages for an event without being bound to any of the above exceptions. Specifically:

- Not-for-profit organizations

A supplier may donate product to a not-for-profit organization for an event which the not-for-profit organization is conducting, either at licensed premises or at an unlicensed location with a permit from the SLA. A supplier can also receive promotional benefits in exchange for the donation to the organization. The only real restriction is that a supplier cannot choose the retailer for the event. The new advisory does not use the same restrictive “bona fide charitable organization” language used in the tasting advisory published in July, 2013. It appears that non-charitable not-for-profit organizations qualify for these events.

- Private/Brand Experience events at unlicensed locations

The new advisory allows a supplier to conduct a private invitation-only event or a brand experience event at an unlicensed location and to provide the alcoholic beverages for that event without having to fit into one of the four event types above. Note that any unused alcoholic beverages must be removed by a supplier after any event under this section.

An appropriate permit must be in place for these events. This means that a supplier should use a retail licensee caterer for such events at this stage. We anticipate a new supplier event permit will available in the future.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2014 · All Rights Reserved ·


Brewing Beer in California

April 14, 2014

With the explosive growth in craft beers and micro and nano and other really, really small breweries, we at Strike & Techel wanted to put together some helpful tips for anyone looking to brew beer in the state. If you want to make beer commercially, these guidelines will help you work out the best way to start your new business. You will find three ways to get going in the guidelines: small beer manufacturing, beer manufacturing (over 60,000 barrels of beer), and brewpub operations where you get to brew beer and sell it to people in a restaurant or pub setting.

Contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have questions about brewing beer in California or other states.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2014 · All Rights Reserved ·


Tennessee House of Representatives Overwhelmingly Passes Wine in Grocery Stores Bill

February 24, 2014

Last Thursday, the Tennessee House of Representatives passed House Bill 610 by a vote of 71-15, voting to allow the issue of the sale of wine in grocery stores to be submitted to voters in local referendums, and creating a permit for the sale of wine by grocery stores. On January 30, the Senate had approved Senate Bill 837 by a vote of 23-8. The Bill will now be returned to the Senate to review the remaining differences between the two bills, before it goes to the Governor for signature. If signed by the Governor, it is anticipated that the issue could be on local November ballots for consumers to weigh in on local approval of grocery store wine sales.

One of the key differences between the two bills was fixed by the House in its new version, with the reduction of minimum size for grocery and convenience stores from 2,000 to 1,200 square feet, allowing about 500 more convenience stores to qualify. The House also reduced the fee for a grocery store wine license to $1,250 from $2,000, bringing it closer to the $850 in the Senate Bill. Already, following the House vote, Sen. Bill Ketron, the Republican who sponsored the Senate Bill, indicated to reporters that he planned to accept the House version and could ask for a vote as soon as March 3.

Even if approved, wine sales won’t be possible in grocery locations until summer 2016 due to an agreement reached with lobbies for liquor stores and wholesalers that had opposed the proposals. In another concession to liquor stores, both bills open up opportunities for traditional liquor stores to sell items other than alcohol and to do so as soon as this summer, two years before any grocery store wine sales could begin. Liquor stores are currently allowed to sell only wine and distilled spirits and a few minor accessories like corkscrews. Additionally, grocery stores would be subject to a minimum 20% markup on wines sold, in an attempt to address volume discounting, and would be prevented from offering combined deals of wine and other grocery items. To encourage wholesaler support, the Senate Bill allows for wholesalers to be located outside the four major cities in the state which they are currently restricted to, and the House Bill would extend that even further to any county which currently permits bars or liquor stores to operate. Blue laws, preventing Sunday sales of alcohol, will not be affected by any new legislation, and such sales will continue to be prohibited.

The debate in Tennessee has been ongoing since 2006. It is not the only state which has been discussing this issue as we previously blogged here. Currently, thirty-five states do not restrict the sale of wine in grocery stores. No state has managed to pass legislation changing the status quo since Iowa permitted grocery store sales in 1985. Factions in New York, now the second largest wine-producing state by volume, have attempted to pass wine in grocery store bills on numerous occasions, including a significant push in 2011. The Kansas House Commerce, Labor and Economic Development Committee held a hearing Wednesday on House Bill 2556 which would allow the sale of full strength beer and wine in grocery stores, inducing vigorous debate. A bill introduced to the Oklahoma Legislature this month, which would permit wine to be sold in grocery stores and nonalcoholic beverages and refrigerated beer and wine to be sold in liquor stores, died in Committee. And last month, a federal appeals court in Kentucky ruled that the state’s ban on grocery store sales of wine and liquor was constitutional. The court said that the state had every right to ban such sales, “just as a parent can reduce a child’s access to liquor.” The grocers who filed the original challenge to the law are reviewing rehearing and appeal options now.

If you have any questions about where wine can be sold, contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2014 · All Rights Reserved ·


Getting Started in the Business: Entity

January 15, 2014

This blog entry is part of a continuing series discussing important steps to get started in the alcoholic beverage industry. In addition to choosing a location for your business (discussed in a previous post, here), and before you prepare the applications to obtain the license(s) required to operate your business (discussed in a previous post, here), you will also need to consider what type of business entity should be formed in order to operate your business.

We usually counsel clients to hold their alcoholic beverage license under an entity, rather than as an individual. Formation of an entity that is separate and distinct from its owners offers protection against certain liabilities and may be advantageous from a tax perspective.

The type of entity (e.g., corporation, limited liability company, trust, etc.) and the domicile (state) of the entity can impact how the entity is taxed. Your tax advisor may have an opinion on these issues. If the entity is not domiciled in California and you intend to apply for a California ABC license, the entity will have to qualify to do business in California before you can file your applications. You may also need to register a fictitious business name in the county in which your business will operate and obtain a local business license(s).

In order to establish an entity in California, you will have to file Articles with the Secretary of State. You will also need to prepare corporate bylaws or an LLC operating agreement, depending on which type of entity you form. These documents are very important, as they set forth the specifics about ownership percentages, voting rights, profit distributions, etc. Bear in mind that certain changes in ownership, such as added shareholders/LLC members can affect your alcohol licenses. It is wise to consider carefully who will be an owner of the business entity and whether any ownership changes are likely to occur before submitting your license applications.

Contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have questions relating to forming a business entity in order to get started in the alcohol beverage business.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2014 · All Rights Reserved


Getting Started in the Business: Licensing

December 12, 2013

This blog entry is part of a continuing series discussing important steps to get started in the alcoholic beverage industry. Once you have pinpointed a location for your business (discussed in a previous post, here), you will need to obtain a license, or a combination of licenses, before you commence operations. To determine what type(s) of license(s) you need, here are some answers to questions you may be asking:

* Do the Tied-House Laws Permit Me to Hold the Licenses I Want? Federally and across all states, “tied house” laws generally prohibit the same person or entity from having an ownership interest in alcohol beverage businesses in more than one of the 3 tiers -manufacturing/importing, distribution and retail. (To learn more about tied house laws, review this post.) However, that restriction is far from absolute. Many statutory exceptions have been carved out of the 3-tier system to permit cross-tier licensing and the resulting patchwork of exceptions can be difficult to comprehend. For example, in California, wineries can also own restaurants (subject to restrictions) and certain off-sale retail stores. Small breweries (less than 60,000 barrels/year) can own on-sale retailers but large breweries cannot. Beer and wine wholesalers cannot also be retailers, unless they sell only wine through the retail store. Other states have their own set of hard-to-explain exceptions.

* What Does My License Permit Me to Do? The general rule is that manufacturers sell to wholesalers; wholesalers sell to retailers; and retailers sell to consumers. But this, too, is riddled with exceptions. California wineries and breweries can sell their products directly to retailers and consumers without using a distributor, but distilled spirits manufacturers can sell only to distributors and cannot themselves hold a distributor license. Rectifiers, on the other hand, can act as their own distributor and sell their products – and spirits products made by anyone else – directly to retailers. Moreover, you may need more than one license to operate your business. For example, if you are going to be operating a distillery, you will need a Type 4 (Distilled Spirits Manufacturer’s license), and a Type 6 (Still) license. If you are importing distilled spirits from outside of California and distributing them to retailers you’ll need a Type 12 (Distilled Spirits Importer), and a Type 18 (Distilled Spirits Wholesaler). California issues dozens of different licenses so it is important to know exactly what you want to do, which licenses are needed to accomplish it, and whether you are eligible to hold them.

* What are the Processing Times to Obtain a License? In California, it takes about 90-120 days to process an application for a new license, and slightly less time to transfer an existing license at a premises that is already licensed. It will take longer to process an application that is incomplete, contested by neighboring residents or the local authorities, or filed incorrectly. Also keep in mind that the ABC cannot issue a license until it has received confirmation from the City/County that all required use permits have been obtained. Each applicant will be assigned a local ABC investigator to handle the application until the process is completed. Currently, U.S. Alcohol Tobacco Tax Trade Bureau (“TTB”) licenses are processing in about 90 days, similar to California licenses.

* May I Obtain a Temporary Permit? Provided that you are transferring an existing license at an already licensed premises, the California ABC may grant a temporary permit so you may operate your business while the license transfer application is being processed. A temporary permit is not available in connection with applications for new licenses or applications to transfer existing licenses to a premises that has not been previously licensed.

* What Are the Costs Involved? Depending on what type(s) of license(s) applied for, the cost can vary considerably. A schedule of license costs is available here. Some retail licenses are limited in numbers and must be purchased on the open market. Prices for these licenses vary greatly by type and location. For instance, a Type-47 (On-sale general eating place) may sell for $200,000 in San Francisco, whereas the same type of license in Fresno County currently only costs $12,000.

In conjunction with your ABC application, you may also need to obtain other federal, state or local licenses/permits. In California this may include, for example: federal licenses through the TTB; a certification from the Secretary of State that you are qualified to do business in the state; and a sales tax permit from the State Board of Equalization.

Contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have questions about applying for a license to get started in the alcohol beverage business.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Wine Growlers From a Keg

October 29, 2013

Keg wine is a growing trend. Packaging and selling wine in kegs has a lot of advantages. Wine kegs are refillable and reusable. Wineries save on packaging costs, and restaurants enjoy the convenience of serving many customers without constantly uncorking bottles.

Alcohol laws dictating permissible containers and packaging for wine are expanding in concert with retailer and consumer interest in keg wine. For example:

- Effective July 1, 2013, Florida allows the sale of wine in 5.16 gallon canisters, which can be tapped like kegs, to restaurants and bars.

- Effective April 1, 2013, Oregon allows any wine shop, grocery store, wine bar or restaurant to buy wine by the keg and resell it to consumers by the glass, or in some establishments, consumers can fill their own containers in a size that is 2 gallons or less.

Most states continue to have restrictions on this “growler” type of service by a wine shop. Those restrictions comport with federal rules saying that packages cannot be filled with wine except at a winery or at a “tax paid bottling house.”

We expect to see more legislation in the coming months and years if this trend continues.

If you have any questions about keg wine, feel free to consult one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Clarifications from the ABC on Sweepstakes and Contests in California

October 10, 2013

On June 13, 2013, guests attending ShipCompliant’s “Direct 2013” conference heard from Matthew Botting, General Counsel to the California ABC, on supplier participation in sweepstakes and contests under California’s new law. We’ve previously blogged about the new law here and here.

California Code of Regulations Title 4, Section 106 (“Rule 106”) has always allowed suppliers to “sponsor” a contest, meaning suppliers could give money or otherwise participate when the contest was organized by “bona fide amateur or professional organizations.” Previously, the privilege was limited. Now, the privileges are broader: suppliers (including wineries) can now “conduct” a contest under recently enacted Business and Professions Code Section 25600.1, and conduct or sponsor a sweepstakes under 25600.2. Mr. Botting discussed the different available privileges and their limitations:

* “Conduct” means the promotion is managed and organized by the supplier.

* “Sponsor” means it is someone else’s sweepstakes or contest and the supplier is providing a prize or other sponsorship of the promotion.

* For the time being, suppliers can only sponsor a contest in accordance with the existing Rule 106, which means sponsorship is limited to a contest conducted by bona fide amateur or professional organizations.

Sponsoring a sweepstakes and conducting a sweepstakes or contest is now covered by Business and Professions Code Section 25600.1 and 25600.2Sweepstakes or contests cannot require a visit to a licensed premises of any kind, so there must be an alternate method of entry (“AMOE”) if entry forms are available at a licensee.

* Sweepstakes and contests cannot be conducted on retail premises (e.g., a grocery store, liquor store, bar or restaurant). A “retail premise” includes some locations you might not think of, such as: an unlicensed premises if a licensed caterer is present, or at an event held by a nonprofit under a one-day permit. The ABC considers events held with a caterer’s license or a nonprofit one-day permit to occur “at the premises of a retail licensee,” and therefore a supplier may only provide a means of entry at either of these types of events.

* While suppliers may provide a means of entry for the contest or sweepstakes, the contest or sweepstakes may not be conducted at a winery or brewery’s duplicate tasting room.

* A contest or sweepstakes can only be advertised at a retailer if it is advertised at a minimum of three different retailers, and winners shouldn’t be picked at a licensed retail event nor in a tasting room.

The full presentation by Mr. Botting can be seen here (starting at the 5:00 minute mark).

Before conducting or sponsoring any contest or sweepstakes, be sure to consult the relevant laws, Business & Professions Code Sections 25600.1, 25600.2, and, if applicable, Rule 106 (regarding contests), and pay particular attention to whether the supplier involved holds a license that allows it to participate.

Contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have questions about contests and sweepstakes in California or other states.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Federal Department of the Treasury Alcohol and Tobacco and Tax and Trade Bureau (‘TTB’) Shut Down

October 01, 2013

Effective October 1, 2013 TTB has suspended operations as part of the federal government shutdown. TTB.gov remains operable and industry members can continue to file electronic payments and returns for federal excise taxes online. However, all E-applications including Permits Online, Formulas Online and COLAs Online are unavailable. Please refer to the TTB’s cessation notice here.

What does this mean for Industry Members? The short answer is that processing times will slow or stop until funding has been restored. It is still too soon to tell what the long term impacts will be, but in the short term we anticipate significant delays in the issuance of basic permits, label approvals and formula approvals. We’ll keep you posted as the situation develops.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Winery Direct Shipping Coming Soon to Montana

August 26, 2013

Starting October 1, 2013, Montana will allow the direct shipment of wine to Montana residents by wineries that hold a Direct Shipment Endorsement. Holders of a Direct Shipment Endorsement may sell and directly ship up to 18 nine-liter cases of wine annually to an individual in Montana who is at least 21 years of age. Any in-state or out-of-state winery that is already registered with the Montana Department of Revenue must pay $50 and file associated paperwork to receive a Direct Shipment Endorsement, and wineries not already registered with the state will be able to simultaneously register with the state and apply for a Direct Shipper Endorsement. Applicants must submit a signed affidavit that they will contract only with common carriers that agree that wine will be delivered only to an individual in Montana who is at least 21 years old and who signs upon receipt of the wine. Records may be due every month and every quarter, and must be held for state inspection for up to three years. All taxes must be paid quarterly and tax records submitted monthly (by the 15th date of the following month) to the Department of Revenue. If a holder of a Direct Shipment Endorsement uses a bonded wine warehouse for fulfillment purposes, the endorsement holder must file a written notice that includes the name and address of the warehouse. The state also requires pre-approval of all wine labels to be shipped into the state. Stay tuned as Montana will likely issue regulations and step-by-step instructions in the coming months.

If you have any questions about shipping wine directly to Montana residents, or residents of any other state, contact one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Kentucky Changes Alcohol Beverage Laws – Requires Out of State Shipper’s Licenses for Wine and Spiri

August 14, 2013

With the passage of Senate Bill 13 (“SB 13”), effective June 25, 2013, Kentucky modernized its alcoholic beverage laws in an effort to make them more effective and efficient for manufacturers, distributors and retailers alike. This modernization included consolidating licenses, simplifying the licensing process, and most importantly for out of state wine and spirits suppliers, it created an out of state shipper permit. Prior to the revisions, beer suppliers were required to hold a license to ship to Kentucky distributors but suppliers of distilled spirits and wine were not.

The new Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producers/Supplier license application is available here: http://abc.ky.gov/License%20Applications%202013/outofstate.pdf

Three classes of the new Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producers/Supplier license are available:

- Out of State Producer/Supplier for 50,000 gallons or more ($1,550 a year/$3,100 for 2 years);
- Limited Producer/Supplier for 2,001 to 49,999 gallons ($260 a year/$520 for 2 years); and
- Micro-Producer/Supplier for 2,000 gallons or less ($10 a year/$20 for 2 years).

Below are some of the other key changes ushered in by the passage of SB 13:

- Consolidates 88 different license types into 44, changing the names of the licenses and fees associated with each, but keeping unchanged the privileges afforded to the licensees. A few examples: A “Vintner” license is now a “Winery” license, a “Blender’s” license was eliminated and its privileges consolidated into the “Rectifier’s” license.
- Allows a two-year license term renewal for manufacturers and wholesalers, in addition to a one-year license option.
- Bundles together several non-quota retail-drink licenses.
- Creates a Transporter license, consolidating six former transportation-related licenses into one.
- Eliminates bond requirements for many license types
- Changes the licensing structure for microbreweries.

For more information on the changes to Kentucky’s alcohol beverage laws, visit the Kentucky Liquor Control’s information page at http://www.klc.org/UserFiles/files/KACOinfosheet.pdf

And of course, you can always call one of the attorneys at Strike & Techel if you have any questions about any of the changes to Kentucky’s alcohol beverage laws, or if you have any general questions about shipping to distributors in any state.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


California ABC Announces New License Authorizations

August 08, 2013

Looking for a California ABC retail license for a county in which none are available? You may be in luck! Every year, the California ABC issues a list of the counties in which new licenses – called “Priority” licenses—will be made available based on population growth in those counties. ABC Headquarters has just announced the authorization for the issuance of new on-sale general and off-sale general licenses for 2013 and new licenses are available in many California counties.

What is a Priority application?

California “General” retail licenses authorize the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits. The number of General licenses that the ABC can issue in a county is restricted based on county population. If your county is already at its maximum, you can’t get a new General license from the ABC and instead must buy one from an existing licensee in your county, typically at a significant premium. However, in counties where growth has occurred, the ABC permits new General licenses within the county once per year during a ‘priority’ application period by allowing both new issuances of licenses in the county and intercounty transfers of licenses. An intercounty transfer means a business owner in the priority county can buy a General license on the open market anywhere in the state and transfer it in to the priority county. A person can apply for one of the priority General license spots in the county, or for one of the priority intercounty General license transfer spots, or for both.

Anyone that anticipates the need for an Off-Sale General Package Store License (Type 21), an On-Sale General Eating Place Restaurant License (Type 47), or a Special On-Sale General Club License (Type 57) within the next year in a county with licenses available should apply.

Licenses Available by County:

For a complete listing of licenses available by county, click http://www.abc.ca.gov/press/PR2013/PR13-23.pdf

2013 Filing Period:

ABC District Offices will accept in-person or mail-in priority applications from September 9-20, 2013. Mail-in applications must be postmarked September 20 or earlier in order to be accepted. If the Department receives more applications than licenses available (which it typically does), a public drawing is held. Applicants are typically notified two weeks later of their priority status. Once approved for priority, the applicant has 90 days to complete the full formal license application for the identified premises.

Fees:

Priority application fees are $13,800 for new general licenses and $6,000 for intercounty transfers. Only a certified check, cashier’s check or money order will be accepted, and it must be submitted with the priority application. Unsuccessful applicants’ fees will be refunded, less a $100 service charge, within 45 days of the drawing.

Residency requirements:

Every applicant must be a resident of California for at least 90 days prior to the drawing. The 90 day clock starts ticking upon registration with the California Secretary of State for corporations, limited partnerships, and limited liability companies. Individuals and partners must submit proof of California residency.

If you are interested in applying for a new on or off-sale general priority license, please feel free to contact the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Taking Advantage of the California Sweepstakes and Contests Laws

May 14, 2013

As most alcohol suppliers are now aware, California added two new statutes this year permitting alcohol suppliers to conduct contests and sweepstakes that are open to California residents. California had long been the only U.S. state that prohibited alcohol suppliers from including its residents in these kinds of promotions, but that changed in January. We previously blogged about these new laws here. The new laws offer suppliers new avenues to conduct promotions in California but it’s important to note that only specifically listed types of supplier licensees are authorized to conduct contests and sweepstakes in California. Authorized licensees are: winegrower (Type 2 License), beer and wine importer general (Type 10 License), beer manufacturer (Type 1 License), out-of-state beer manufacturer certificate holder (Type 26 License), distilled spirits manufacturer (Type 4 License), distilled spirits manufacturer’s agent (Type 5 License), distilled spirits importer general (Type 13 License), distilled spirits general rectifier (Type 24 License), rectifier (Type 7 License), out-of-state distilled spirits shipper’s certificate holder (Type 28 License), brandy manufacturer (Type 3 License), and brandy importer (Type 11 License).

The statutes specifically exclude wholesalers (Type 17 and 18 Licenses) and retailers of all types. They also exclude beer and wine importer general (Type 10 License) and distilled spirits importer general (Type 13 License) licensees that hold “only a wholesaler’s or retailer’s license as an additional license.” So, although the laws include Type 10 and Type 13 importers, those licensees would be excluded if they also hold a wholesaler’s license and no other supplier license. Accordingly, holders of the popular 9/17/20 license combination, and holders of 10/17 and 13/18 combinations are not eligible to conduct contests or sweepstakes under the new provisions. The exception to this would be if they hold another specifically included license type, such as a winegrower’s license.

We received a number of calls from suppliers unclear on whether they are included in the new laws so we hope this post helps to clarify. If you have any questions about the contest/sweepstakes laws or other promotional activities, in California or elsewhere, contact an attorney at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


California Senate Bill Could Extend the Last Call for Alcohol

March 20, 2013

On March 11th, Senator Mark Leno introduced Senate Bill 635 which would allow California businesses to serve alcohol between the hours of 2 and 4 am. These extended hours would apply solely to on-sale premises such as restaurants, entertainment venues and nightclubs, and not to off-sale premises such as liquor stores or gas stations. SB 635 would allow California cities to join the ranks of other major U.S. cities such as New York City, Las Vegas, Chicago, Miami and Washington D.C., as well as numerous international cities and countries which permit late or continuous beverage service. At least nine other states have similar legislation in place.

Supporters of the bill argue the extended hours will increase tourism, tax revenue and jobs, and provide relief to law enforcement agencies and public transportation systems currently burdened by uniform closing times. Critics cite noise and various other public safety concerns that may arise from an additional two hours of boozing.

If SB 635 passes, cities and counties that want to extend their hours will be required to apply to the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) for approval. Under the bill, the ABC is required to conduct a “thorough investigation into whether the additional hours would serve the public convenience or necessity.” Similar to the process of obtaining an alcoholic beverage license, the city or county would be required to notify residents, law enforcement agencies and other interested parties of their application. Interested parties would then have a 30-day period from the date of notice to file protests. The ABC would reject protests it deems unreasonable. For those with protests deemed acceptable, the ABC would provide an opportunity to address their concerns in a hearing.

Even if the bill becomes law, our experience with “public convenience or necessity” determinations and neighbor protests tends to suggest an uphill battle for many licensees who would like to obtain a 4 a.m. closing time. We will see how the bill fairs in policy committee hearings this spring.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2013 · All Rights Reserved ·


Strike & Techel Welcomes Dan Kramer, Linda Gago-Seco and Manny Diaz

December 12, 2012

Strike & Techel is pleased to announce three recent additions to its alcoholic beverage licensing practice.

Daniel Kramer joins Strike & Techel as a partner. Mr. Kramer represents local and national hotel, restaurant and general retail companies in all aspects of alcoholic beverage licensing, including license acquisitions and transfers, entity structuring, and the preparation of concession agreements, interim management agreements, and restaurant purchase and sale agreements.

Linda Gago-Seco joins Strike & Techel as a paralegal. Ms. Gago-Seco has spent the last 14 years as an alcoholic beverage licensing specialist and previously worked for the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Manny Diaz joins Strike & Techel as a consultant. Mr. Diaz previously worked for the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control for over 30 years, including as Assistant Director of the Northern Division, before becoming a licensing consultant.

We are thrilled to have Dan, Linda and Manny join us.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2012 · All Rights Reserved ·


Do You Have a License to Play That Song?  Appeals Court Affirms Win for Record Companies Against Cop

March 26, 2012

Restaurant and bar licensees that play music in their establishments should take notice of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Range Road Music, Inc. et al. v. East Coast Foods, Inc. et al., 2012 WL 502510 (9th Cir. 2012). In the opinion, which can be found here, the Court affirmed a lower court decision finding that East Coast engaged in copyright infringement through its unauthorized use of copyrighted songs in its southern California restaurant, Roscoe’s House of Chicken and Waffles, and the accompanying jazz club, the Sea Bird Jazz Lounge.

The plaintiffs in Range Road were several record companies, each members of the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (“ASCAP”). The court found that after East Coast opened Roscoe’s and the Sea Bird in 2001, the record companies repeatedly offered East Coast a license to play music owned by ASCAP members. East Coast failed to purchase a license for several years, and in 2008 the record companies independently investigated whether copyright infringement was occurring at Roscoe’s and the Sea Bird Lounge. The investigator discovered that the two establishments were playing CDs that included the record companies’ copyrighted songs and the record companies brought suit for copyright infringement. The court granted their motion for summary judgment, finding eight counts of copyright infringement, and assessing damages of $4,500 for each infringed work. The court also awarded the music companies attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $162,728.22. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed both the finding of copyright infringement and the attorneys’ fees award, finding that East Coast “could have avoided liability by purchasing a valid license at any point during the seven years in which ASCAP importuned them to do so.”

Under the Copyright Act, copyright owners have the exclusive right, among other things, to perform the copyrighted work publicly. A plaintiff can establish a case for copyright infringement by showing 1) ownership of a valid copyright, and 2) copying of original elements of the copyrighted work, which includes performing a copyrighted work publicly. Statutory damages for copyright infringement range from $750 to $30,000 for each infringement.

Restaurant and bar owners who play recorded music or feature performances of live music should take notice of the Range Road decision and be aware of the basics of the Copyright Act. Letters from ASCAP or similar recording companies should not be ignored.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2012 · All Rights Reserved ·


California’s New Limited Off-Sale Wine License Now Available!

January 30, 2012

California Business and Professions Code Section 23393.5 went into effect on January 1, 2012, authorizing the state’s new limited off-sale wine license. The new “Type 85” license, which we first discussed here, will allow licensees to make direct sales of wine to consumers over the internet and via direct mail and telephone, without requiring the licensee to maintain a brick and mortar retail location or to hold a beer and wine wholesaler license. Up until now, businesses looking to focus on internet wine sales have been required to obtain both an off-sale beer and wine retail license and a beer and wine wholesaler license, commonly referred to as a 17/20 license combination. With a 17/20 combination, licensees are able to sell wine via the internet, but also must meet the requirements of a wholesaler licensee, including selling wine to other retailers.

The California ABC recently posted an Industry Advisory on the new off-sale wine license. The advisory makes clear that Type 85 license holders may not maintain a brick and mortar store that is open to the public, and all sales must be made via direct mail, telephone or the internet. Additionally, the ABC confirmed that the new license alleviates the need for a beer and wine wholesaler license for retailers focused on selling wine via the internet, but the ABC will continue to process applications for 17/20 license combinations. If you would like more information about the license, please feel free to contact any of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2012 · All Rights Reserved ·


San Francisco ABC Office Temporarily Moving in January

January 03, 2012

The San Francisco ABC office will be moving to Oakland this month to allow for remodeling efforts at the San Francisco office. The current San Francisco office, located at 71 Stevenson St. will be closed beginning at 5 p.m. on Friday, January 20, 2012. They will re-open at their temporary Oakland location on Monday, January 23, 2012. The temporary office contact information is:

Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control

1515 Clay Street, Suite 2208

Oakland, CA 94612

(510) 622-4970

Be sure to update your records and plan accordingly if you need to contact the San Francisco ABC office. It is anticipated that the office will move back into San Francisco in March 2012, but construction delays may extend the moving date. We will keep you posted as new information arises.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2012 · All Rights Reserved ·


California ABC Announces New License Authorizations

September 01, 2011

Priority application season is upon us, beginning September 12th. ABC Headquarters recently announced the authorization for the issuance of new on-sale general and off-sale general licenses in certain counties. What this means: General licenses authorize the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits. They are restricted based upon county population. If your county is already at its maximum, you can’t get a new general license from the ABC and instead must buy one from an existing licensee in your county, typically at a significant premium. However, in counties where growth has occurred, the ABC permits new general licenses within the county once per year during a ‘priority’ application period by allowing both new issuances of licenses in the county and intercounty transfers of licenses. An intercounty transfer means a business owner in the priority county can buy a general license on the open market anywhere in the state and transfer it in to the priority county. A person can apply for one of the priority general license spots in the county, or for one of the priority intercounty general license transfer spots, or for both. Anyone that anticipates the need for an Off-Sale General Package Store License (Type 21), an On-Sale General Eating Place Restaurant License (Type 47), or a Special On-Sale General Club License (Type 57) within the next year in a county with licenses available should apply. Licenses Available by County: For a complete listing of licenses available by county, click here. 2011 Filing Period: ABC District Offices will accept in-person or mail-in priority applications from September 12-23, 2011. Mail-in applications must be postmarked September 23 or earlier in order to be accepted. If the Department receives more applications than licenses available (which it will), a public drawing is held. Applicants are typically notified two weeks later of their priority status. Once approved for priority, the applicant has 90 days to complete the full formal license application for the identified premises. Fees: Priority application fees are $13,800 for new general licenses and $6,000 for intercounty transfers. Only a certified check, cashier’s check or money order will be accepted, and it must be submitted with the priority application. Unsuccessful applicants’ fees will be refunded, less a $100 service charge, within 45 days of the drawing. Residency requirements: Every applicant must be a resident of California for at least 90 days prior to the drawing. The 90 day clock starts ticking upon registration with the CA Secretary of State for corporations, limited partnerships, and limited liability companies. Individuals and partners must submit proof of California residency. If you are interested in applying for a new on or off-sale general priority license, please feel free to contact the attorneys at Strike & Techel. Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2011 · All Rights Reserved ·


TTB Bonded Wine Premises Audits

July 29, 2011

Nobody hopes for an audit, but like cold cloudy summers in San Francisco, they’re bound to happen. Ideally, if you’re selected for an audit by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (“TTB”), you will have already been following the federal requirements. To aid in compliance, last March the TTB issued a tutorial about the common issues found during TTB audits, which is available here. As the ramp up to harvest begins, this is a good resource to circle back with to ensure compliance. Within the tutorial the TTB listed the most common compliance issues by area, and within that by frequency of occurrence. Further, they provided helpful tips on how to avoid problems in those areas. The issues most frequently seen by the TTB’s Tax Audit Division are:

Records:

General record keeping;

Transfer in bond record;

Tax paid removal records; and

Export documentations.

Inventory:

Inventory timing, records and signature;

Inventory losses and loss limits; and

Records of bottled or packed wine.

Reporting and Tax Payment:

Timely filing the Report of Wine Premises Operations and correctly completing the form;

Calculating and paying tax on wine;

Filing claims for wine or spirits lost or destroyed while in bond;

Tax payment and filing TTB F5000.24 Excise Tax Returns; and

Signature authority.

Basic Permit, Registration and Bond:

Filing amended applications to report changes; and

Maintaining adequate bond coverage.

If you would like assistance with a TTB audit or help with TTB compliance matters, please feel free to contact the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2010-2011 · All Rights Reserved ·


Winery Licensing in California

March 03, 2011

The typical license for a winery in California is a Type 02 Winegrower license, but many businesses interested more in marketing wine, or having wine custom crushed to their specifications, instead of actually producing the wine on a bonded wine premises, obtain a combination Type 17/20 license instead. The Type 17 license is a wine and beer wholesaler license, and the type 20 is a retail license for the sale of wine and beer for consumption off the licensed premises. When the licenses are held together, they allow the sale to retailers and consumers of wine only. The combination license does not allow the holder to produce wine. Significantly, California law was changed in 2009 to permit these 17/20 license holders (sometimes called “virtual wineries”) to donate their wines to non-profit organizations. This privilege, previously reserved to licensed producers and importers, enables virtual wineries to participate in wine tastings and other events held by non-profit organizations. The 17/20 license structure and abundance of wineries that do custom crush production in California have made it relatively easy for virtual wineries to succeed and, as a result, we have seen tremendous increases in the 17/20 license model over the last several years.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2010-2011 · All Rights Reserved ·


TTB’s Permits Online System Up and Running; Expedited Review a Thing of the Past

February 14, 2011

Today the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) launched their Permits Online system, which is available here. The system is a counterpart to the Formulas Online and COLAs Online systems. The Permits Online system allows the application procedure for federal alcohol and tobacco business permits to be completed entirely online. The system allows one to prepare, submit and track applications through the TTB’s online portal, available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. But as with many technology innovations and advances, there is often a corresponding down side. A few weeks ago, the TTB announced that they are no longer accepting “Expedite Requests” or “Informal Reviews” for certificate of label approvals (COLAs) and formula approvals. The former expedite option allowed for rapid turnaround of approvals that was especially helpful for the industry at large.

With a dramatic increase in approval requests over the years, coupled with shrinking governmental budgets, the TTB decided that all applications will be reviewed on a first-come, first-served basis, without any expedite availability. Further, the TTB stated that applicants should plan for a full 90-day review period, which does not include any additional time that could be necessary if label or formula changes are requested. The TTB did note that online applications are processed about twice as fast as paper applications, so there is a real incentive to using the online portals. If you have an upcoming formula approval or COLA, be sure to factor in enough time for the TTB’s review given that the expedite option is no longer available. If you have questions about formula or label approvals, please feel free to call any of the attorneys at Strike & Techel.

Imbiblog is published for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. Copyright © 2010-2011 · All Rights Reserved ·


IMBIBE+BLOG

May 30, 2010

Welcome to IMBIBLOG, the blog of Strike & Techel. We are attorneys specializing in the laws and regulations governing alcoholic beverages, also known as liquor law or alcohol law. Liquor law is a specialized area of legal practice. Compared to other areas of legal specialization, there are relatively few lawyers specializing in alcoholic beverage law. If you are considering starting a business related to alcohol, you will benefit from working with a competent liquor lawyer.

The team at Strike & Techel is experienced and can serve as your TTB lawyer, ABC lawyer, beer lawyer, wine lawyer or distilled spirits lawyer. We are familiar with TTB law as well as state ABC law in California and across the country. Preparing and applying for the necessary alcohol beverage licenses is a big part of the alcohol beverage practice and Strike & Techel is highly experienced with ABC license applications and TTB license applications.

We are based in San Francisco and are particularly familiar with the alcohol laws and regulations of our city. The attorneys at our firm practice alcoholic beverage law exclusively. This blog is our place to tell you about current issues of interest for those in the business of making, promoting, and selling alcoholic beverages.


CLOSE

Browse posts by category: