Bottle Conditioned

The nation has already seen how ridiculous Tennessee can be when crafting laws related to the purchase and consumption of beer.  The mandatory ID law that was passed earlier this year solidified this state into the hall of fame of legislative craziness.

However…they’ve one-upped themselves now.  And this time, it’s far more broad and dangerous.

First, a little background. 

Recently, in a move of state idiocy, law enforcement agents have been monitoring the borders to arrest people buying cigarettes from across state lines and bringing them back into Tennessee.  2 cartons of cigarettes brought back into the state counts as a misdemeanor, with over 25 cases being noted as a felony.  A felony?  Geez.

Now…it’s on to beer.

An article printed in today’s Knoxville News Sentinel points out that this enforcement is now reaching to cover beer as well, with beer being bought from out of state being considered a criminal act.  Wow.  As if you didn’t think it could get worse (yeah right, never think that when it comes to government).

Currently, the enforcement is only applied to beer bought concurrently with cigarettes, and the beer is confiscated at the time that the cigarettes are.  However, it appears that it’s very likely that that could change.  The law is aimed an preventing cross-border purchasing that is rampant due to insanely high taxes on beer in the state.  Hey, Tennessee…what about lowering taxes as a solution, eh? 

In Tennessee, taxes levied on beer are done in several ways.  First, two taxes are levied at the wholesale level:  a $4.29 tax per barrel(collected by the State Dept of Revenue), and then a 17% tax on value(collected by local city governments where the beer is sold).  In addition, the beer is then taxed at the retail level.  A state sales tax of 7% is added, in addition to a local sales tax that can go as far as an added 2.75%.  These sales taxes are levied on retail price which includes the barrellage tax and the wholesale tax, which means that the tax is a tax on taxes…get it?  Further past that, an $18 per barrel federal tax is applied. 

Convoluted, eh?  Welcome to bureaucracy.

So, all of this brings up an interesting discussion, and one that is exacerbated by the lack of knowledge by the legislators about how beer works in this country.

The most pressing issue is this: comparing the cigarette distribution trade with the beer distribution trade is not equal comparison - akin to apples and oranges.

The biggest example of this has to do with craft beer varieties and manufacturers.  In Tennessee, because of the ridiculous taxes, we don’t get much craft beer.  Sure, we’re getting more and more, but compared with other states around us, our selection is pretty pitiful. This is fundamentally different that the cigarette trade where almost all manufacturers are sold in every state - a much more homogeneous distribution network nationally.

So, what do we do?  We go up to Kentucky, over to South Carolina, down to Georgia, etc… to get the beer we can’t get here.  Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING, to do with taxes.  This begs the question, how will the state deal with this difference?

If I drive to Bowling Green, KY to buy some beer that isn’t distributed in this state, and I am then arrested for bringing it back across state lines, I have indeed been arrested for a reason that doesn’t even fit with my motive for buying beer in another state.  There is zero logic for this scenario to play out, as it has nothing to do with taxes, which is purportedly the reason behind the enforcement of the law.  However, it’s going to happen this way, I promise.

So, what to do?  I suppose you could only arrest people buying beer that is also sold in the state, but then that would have to be broken down by region, city, municipality, etc…  For instance, if I live in Nashville and drive to Kentucky to buy anything made by Duck-Rabbit, should I be arrested because I can actually get it in Knoxville (which, incidentally is twice as far away)?

This is a major problem that represents a lack of Tennessee government’s ability to take cues from the marketplace and fix a broken system. 

How about this Tennessee - lower your damn taxes and stop wasting taxpayer money on enforcing laws that amount to nothing more than a 3 year old throwing a fit because they can’t get their way. Don’t treat the symptoms - cure the illness here - fix the damn system.

Powered by ScribeFire.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to get automatic updates of new posts!

• Comments (2)

I feel like this blog is becoming one giant rant.  Sorry about that.  I’ll try to curb my future tirades and present more information here that is actually useful…not simply me spouting off

But, until that time, here’s another interesting discussion I’d like to begin, and would really love some input from others out there in the beer community.

I’ve noticed an interesting trend in tastings (be it beer, wine, liquor, whatever) - they attract the wrong crowd. 

Well, at least, sometimes.

Case in point:  Last night, we attended a tasting at a local beer/cigar shop here in Nashville.  Aside from the fact that there was zero glassware (see the previous rant on this blog), I was excited to try some new beer, learn about the brewery, and engage in beer conversation with like-minded individuals.

I realized, about halfway through the tasting, that the conversation I was interested in wasn’t really going to happen.  Why?  Wrong crowd.  Completely.

I’ve noticed this at other events.  For example, earlier this summer, Nashville played host to a very large beer tasting event called the Music City Brewer’s Festival.  We were lucky enough to have a booth at the event and represent the craft beer industry and our charge to educate more people about craft beer.  I noticed, however, that the vast majority of the people in attendance didn’t care about learning about or tasting craft beer - they simply wanted to get drunk.

Now, I realize that drinking large amounts of alcohol could potentially hamper your ability to think logically…but come on…this doesn’t make any sense at all.

Let’s look at the logic.  If someone’s goal is simply to drink as much as possible in order to get drunk, then they’re firstly not interested in taste.  For them, it’s alcohol delivery that is key.  So, to be as efficient as possible, they ought to either drink liquor or drink cheap mass market beer.  Remember, for the vast majority of these folks, getting drunk for cheap represents the epitome of the mission. 

So, this is where the math starts to break down.  The average 12-pack of swill costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $10-$12.  This provides the user with 12 cans of easily drinkable (I realize that this characterization is a sliding scale, but go with me here) alcohol water in 12 oz doses.  Generally speaking, the drinker (depending on their level of “experience”) will achieve their goal before finishing this 12-pack of beer, giving them an estimated drunk/dollar ratio of 1 dU (drunk unit) to approx. $10.

Why then, do these people choose to attend a festival with tickets that start at $30 and result in the same output of 1 dU?  The cost analysis here is mind-boggling.

Seriously though, I don’t understand it.  How does one organize a tasting and attract the correct clientèle?  Attracting the wrong crowd can undoubtedly ruin the experience for those interested in pursuing an educational opportunity.  One thought is to simply price the event out of reach of those simply interested in drinking, not tasting.  However, this seems to unfairly punish those who are interested in tasting by putting the burden on them.  Smart marketing could achieve the goal, but how clever would you need to be?

Has anyone had a good experience in setting up tastings at reasonable prices while attracting the correct group of customers?  Or are we simply relegated to always having to deal with the drunks?  Should we start setting up events called “drinkings” instead of “tastings” and see if the public starts to discern the difference?

I’d love to hear your thoughts and experiences on this.  I don’t want to come off as a “tasting snob”.  Certainly there are times where I simply just drink beer.  But I want to preserve the opportunities for tasting beer as well.

Powered by ScribeFire.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to get automatic updates of new posts!

• Comments (1)

Thanks Tennessee. Way to ruin an otherwise great beer tasting event.

Mollie and I attended a tasting tonight, hosted by a distributor here in Nashville, that was spotlighting Appalachian Beer Company. We arrived early at the beer store hosting the tasting, and decided to grab a beer while we waited. We grabbed a couple beers (mine was the Harviestoun Brewery Old Engine Oil and hers the Chocolate Stout by Fort Collins Brewery), paid for them, and proceeded to the lounge to grab a seat and enjoy our apertif before the tasting. We walked up and stopped at the spot where we normally grab a glass and pour the beer.

No glasses. Anywhere.

A quick inquiry to one of the employees revealed the truth: the health department had come by earlier and demanded they stop serving beer in glasses until they purchase a separate license. No pouring a beer from a bottle to a glass. Customer can’t pour their own; customer can’t bring their own serving vessel. Nothing. No glassware. Period. (In fact, this goes for not just glassware, but plastic, etc… ANY container whatsoever.)

Dismayed, I pressed further for an explanation. Evidently, according to the state law, beer cannot be transferred from one vessel (a bottle) to another (a glass) without proper licensing. Sure, you can serve it to patrons in a bottle, but god forbid you put it in a glass.

Say it with me….”What?!”

Yeah. Ridiculous. As I continued through the tasting, drinking beer from a bottle like a college frat kid, the gravity of the situation stewed on me. What kind of logic dictates this type of law?

I’ll answer that…none.

This, to me, is about nothing but money. Money to fill the state coffers by taxing alcohol in a backhanded and unfounded manner. Enter the neo-prohibitionists.

I’ll blog more about the tasting later, but I don’t feel like I can give an accurate review of the beer, as I was relegated to drinking out of a 1″ glass hole. I don’t blame the shop necessarily, as they are working hard to get the proper permits in place so that they will have glassware for their next tasting (a Sam Adams tasting in two weeks). I applaud them for the quick action to correct this problem.

What really irks me is the gall of the state lawmakers to craft laws that have absolutely zero basis in logic, but then, I suppose that’s the mantra of most government workings.

I realize this is a pretty scattered rant, but it’s getting late and I haven’t had much time to put this together in my head in a nice organized manner. Suffice to say, it bothered me enough that I wanted to write something tonight in order to assure I sleep a bit better.

Here’s what I want from you, the reader of this blog (all 2 of you): Tell me, under what line of logic can you base a law that requires a special permit in order to transfer beer from a bottle to a glass? Are we honestly that caught up in legislative red tape that our beer stores can’t even serve a beer correctly? This is where politics starts to really affect beer, and we’ve got to make sure it doesn’t get any more ridiculous than this.

So, tell me… how does this law make sense? I’m eager to read the responses.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to get automatic updates of new posts!

• Comments (0)