Gnomebrewer
Well-Known Member
I brew more than 200 gallons per year (and give more than half of it away/share it). There, I said it publicly.
200gal limit
- Thread starter bahomebrew
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
I brew more than 200 gallons per year (and give more than half of it away/share it). There, I said it publicly.
madscientist451
Well-Known Member
I've been brewing for 15+ years (all the alcohol makes my memory foggy)
Anyway, the law doesn't say you have to CONSUME all the booze you make in a year. (or maybe it does?) So I could have 1500 gallons of home brew stockpiled, waiting for the zombie apocalypse. Basically, the 100 gallon yearly limit isn't enforceable.
Anyway, the law doesn't say you have to CONSUME all the booze you make in a year. (or maybe it does?) So I could have 1500 gallons of home brew stockpiled, waiting for the zombie apocalypse. Basically, the 100 gallon yearly limit isn't enforceable.
jack13
Well-Known Member
In all the posts for this topic, I haven't yet seen one that implies anyone is worried about getting caught. Rather, it's simply a discussion of homebrewing laws since we're, you know, homebrewers.
Just felt like a good time to say that.
But now I'm picturing the coppers smashing my glass fermenters with sledgehammers, burning my grains, and dumping by hops and yeast down the toilet, prohibition-style.
Just felt like a good time to say that.
But now I'm picturing the coppers smashing my glass fermenters with sledgehammers, burning my grains, and dumping by hops and yeast down the toilet, prohibition-style.
I think the cops will make the assumption that whatever you have stockpiled will have been produced within the last 12 months and there's a good chance any court will consider this assumption to be reasonable.
On a side note (apropo getting caught with illegal liquor) in Germany it's quite easy to get a license to run your own still, which might explain while there's a lot of low quality liquor going around as any incompetent idiot can and will easily get licensed.
But, if you were to be caught with an unlicensed still, you will be taxed on the presumption that you have run it once per day at nominal capacity 365 days/year. It doesn't matter even if you could prove that the still had never actually been fired up and just sat in your living room, you'll be charged the maximum amount and there is no chance of appeal whatsoever.
jack13
Well-Known Member
The law is about production, so they'd have to prove you produced more than the legal limit.
If they found 300 gallons they cannot simply make the assumption it was all produced in the last year; they'd have to prove it.
That's assuming you can affored a lawyer. If not, all bets are off. OK, I'm exaggerating, but not nearly as much as I wish I were.
If they found 300 gallons they cannot simply make the assumption it was all produced in the last year; they'd have to prove it.
That's assuming you can affored a lawyer. If not, all bets are off. OK, I'm exaggerating, but not nearly as much as I wish I were.
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
While it's true that all of the authorities, at every level, have bigger fish to fry than an individual homebrewer's annual output, one shouldn't underestimate the headache which could be created by the combination of a nosy neighbor and a local cop who was the kid who got the soap shoved up his ass in the shower after 7th grade gym class.
Just sayin'...
Just sayin'...
Ok, I am also a Lawyer. I practice Criminal Defense at the State and Federal Level. Here are the realities. the words "or" and "and" are taken literally. Or means either, and means both.
Reality, there is no AUSA or ASA that I know that would waste there time over the 200 gallon limit. in fact most would be more interested in drinking your beer. In Fact many of them would not admit it here, but many are home-brewers.
I believe the purpose of the Statute is prevent a professional brewer to claim he is a home-brewer and therefore exempt from the Taxes and regulations.
As stated above, proving the quantity would be difficult and expensive. The ATF agents I know would laugh at this debate.
Relax and brew my friend, if the ATF shows up at the house offer him/her some good beer.
in no way should this be considered legal advice.
Reality, there is no AUSA or ASA that I know that would waste there time over the 200 gallon limit. in fact most would be more interested in drinking your beer. In Fact many of them would not admit it here, but many are home-brewers.
I believe the purpose of the Statute is prevent a professional brewer to claim he is a home-brewer and therefore exempt from the Taxes and regulations.
As stated above, proving the quantity would be difficult and expensive. The ATF agents I know would laugh at this debate.
Relax and brew my friend, if the ATF shows up at the house offer him/her some good beer.
in no way should this be considered legal advice.
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2008
- Messages
- 65,431
- Reaction score
- 10,794
Beer or Wine is inclusive to the words aggregate of. Thus intends no more than 200 gallons of the combination.
As to what is meant to be included as beer or wine, you have to go back to the definitions. For example, there is usually an upper limit to alcohol content in the definition of beer, after which if exceed it therefore becomes defined as either a wine, or a spirit.
As to what is meant to be included as beer or wine, you have to go back to the definitions. For example, there is usually an upper limit to alcohol content in the definition of beer, after which if exceed it therefore becomes defined as either a wine, or a spirit.
Last edited:
I would think the actual act of selling the beer would qualify a brewer as "professional" (i.e. brewing to make a profit) as opposed to "amateur" (i.e. for the fun of it and, of course, for the beer you get to drink at the end of the process, even if sharing with family and friends) irrespective of quantity.
bracconiere
Jolly Alcoholic - In Remembrance 2023
I'm up to 440 this year. got about 4-5 more batches to go before next year comes along.....
And yes i drink it all too!
(i'm kidding of course, i'm single. And would never consider brewing more than 100 gals. i actually measure my tap, and as soon as it read 100 gal's. i start drinking bud light)
I believe there is a state that also puts a limit on how many gallons you can have on hand, I think it is something about 50 gallons. Not a problem for most people but I see people with 6 or more taps, guessing that could be an issue for their pipeline.
It might be hard to prove how much someone actually brews but a bit easier to prove how much someone has on hand.
It might be hard to prove how much someone actually brews but a bit easier to prove how much someone has on hand.
I don't drink enough in a year to come close to the 200 gallon limit. I brew about 50 gallons a year max (approximately 10 5 gallon batches). Even at that rate I struggle to keep up with drinking what I brew.
TwistedGray
El Jefe Brewing Company
Well, the federal law also prohibits cannabis growing and consumption yet in many states it is legal to grow, consume, and make a profitable business venture from it. What protection do you have within your state when it goes against federal laws?
Do your caps or labels delineate when it was brewed? May caps all have the date; although, not the year in many cases. However, if I was planning to stock pile for the apocalypse I'd add the year for sure.
I am going to go ahead and print this out and put a copy in my wallet, thanks.
I forgot to factor in if you have kids.
Bimmster
Kajun Grain Brewing
I guess it's the same for Louisiana law ..... is distilling allowed?
you sure about that? breweries arent allowed to do this, my understanding was that it exceeds our permitted "fermentation" license and becomes refining/distilling, a different license.
maybe thats also a CA issue, but i thought that was federal law
Distilling is still a no no as far as I know but from what I have read is that if you do little here and there you are not worth going after but if you are running truck loads of 'shine that is a different story. I have a done a few gallons of not rum and it turned out decent but the cost was not worth it for me to do it more often like beer other than the challenge of doing it.
Last edited:
BrewInspector
Well-Known Member
I think we are in agreement so I don't understand the post except that you are a licensed fermenter and distillation is another process.
Distillation is not permitted including personal use. Freezing and separating the water is also considered distillation was what I was alluding to. Many think only of the typical still distillation as being distillation.
Last edited:
BrewInspector
Well-Known Member
Sure. It might not be worth pursuing by legal enforcement but then the same can be said about video/audio piracy. Generally not worth prosecuting the occasional pirating of a show or movie by an individual but we often here about someone accruing huge fines for downloading a few songs or movies for personal use.
You take your chances doing either.
Why take the additional risk by providing evidence online of that potentially illegal activity, no matter how minor it may seem to you at the time.
Someone has as a quote at the bottom of their post something like "post what you want on HBT the feds only monitor facebook"
I figured since we have a distilling section it would be ok. I will change my original post to say Not Rum
jack13
Well-Known Member
So, if or is taken literally and means either, then "The aggregate amount of beer or wine with respect to any household shall not exceed..." would mean you can't make both beer and wine?
Where in the statutes for personal production of wine and beer does it state "aggregate of" in terms of both beverages? The beer statute does not use the term at all; the wine statute (subsection B) uses it only in reference to aggregate amount of wine. Production of one does not limit the other. Unless there is something else I'm missing in Title 27 that further defines this application of "aggregate" of the two beverages, then the language of the two separate statutes should allow for 200g/year for each.
bahomebrew
Member
As I have maintained throughout the thread, I think the point is moot, other than a debate of legal terms, but I do love a good debate of legal terms.
I think as others have stated, a 200gal limit is peanuts compared to what is professionally produced, so even 300 or 400 wouldn't raise the alarms.
I appreciate all the responses, and have enjoyed this thoroughly, though I haven't seen a post that really made me think that "or" and "and" are the same or that the total of both shouldn't be 400gal.
Thanks, @MaxStout for the Federal statute references. That seems very clearcut that beer and wine can both be produced in the amounts of 200gal per product for a total of 400gal. After reading that, it seems clear that the CA statute is just a poor wording of the Federal. Now to up my brewing by about 400%/year.
It's good to hear a few admit to going over, because realistically, if you aren't selling it, you should be able to produce as much as you want and dispense it however you choose. I've already paid tax on all the ingredients, the shop I got it at paid tax on all the ingredients, and the middle men and distributors paid tax on all the ingredients, so it seems like enough tax has been collected at this stage of the game.
I think as others have stated, a 200gal limit is peanuts compared to what is professionally produced, so even 300 or 400 wouldn't raise the alarms. I appreciate all the responses, and have enjoyed this thoroughly, though I haven't seen a post that really made me think that "or" and "and" are the same or that the total of both shouldn't be 400gal.
Thanks, @MaxStout for the Federal statute references. That seems very clearcut that beer and wine can both be produced in the amounts of 200gal per product for a total of 400gal. After reading that, it seems clear that the CA statute is just a poor wording of the Federal. Now to up my brewing by about 400%/year.
It's good to hear a few admit to going over, because realistically, if you aren't selling it, you should be able to produce as much as you want and dispense it however you choose. I've already paid tax on all the ingredients, the shop I got it at paid tax on all the ingredients, and the middle men and distributors paid tax on all the ingredients, so it seems like enough tax has been collected at this stage of the game.
madscientist451
Well-Known Member
I'm skeptical about the above assertion. In the US, you have to be proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the government. Citizens have a right to be free from unreasonable searches. The police can't even search your house unless they have ACTUAL proof or reasonable suspicion that laws are being violated.
Here's the text of the actual law in Pennsylvania:
Malt or brewed beverages may be produced by any person without a license if such malt or brewed beverages are produced not for sale and total production does not exceed two hundred gallons per calendar year. Malt or brewed beverages produced in accordance with this paragraph may be used at organized affairs, exhibitions, competitions, contests, tastings or judging provided it is not sold or offered for sale.
So "total production" is 200 gallons, it doesn't say I have to actually drink any of it. Any violations of the 200 gallon limit would be difficult to prove unless a witness ratted you out.
These days, the police in my area are overwhelmed by drug overdoses, gang bangers, domestic violence, along with the everyday murders rapes and general mayhem that always occurs....people brewing beer and not causing any trouble are not going to catch the attention of anyone.
I
Last edited:
TwistedGray
El Jefe Brewing Company
Oh, I was just bragging to Bob. His beer choice is piss water, no offense Judge. I was just trying to sound bigger than I am ... yes, I lied; I probably brew maybeeeeeeeee 50 gallons a year for myself, friends, and family.
Gnomebrewer
Well-Known Member
This thread has lead me to an interesting find (well, interesting to me, I'm sure nobody else will think so). I've always wondered why the standard batch size in Australia is different to the US......
In Australia, there is no limit on production (hence why I can openly say I brew more than 200 gallons per year), which I already knew, but I found during some reading that the limit used to be 22 litres per week (a law bought in in 1972, when homebrewing first became legal in Australia). I can't find when that limit ended, but the standard batch size in Australia is 23L (not the standard US 5 gallons, which is presumably to fit corny kegs). This batch size is listed for nearly all kits, and fermenting vessels are sold to accommodate this batch size. Of course, 23L into the fermenter would give a final volume of about 22L - which I assume is to give the maximum permissible under the old law!
In Australia, there is no limit on production (hence why I can openly say I brew more than 200 gallons per year), which I already knew, but I found during some reading that the limit used to be 22 litres per week (a law bought in in 1972, when homebrewing first became legal in Australia). I can't find when that limit ended, but the standard batch size in Australia is 23L (not the standard US 5 gallons, which is presumably to fit corny kegs). This batch size is listed for nearly all kits, and fermenting vessels are sold to accommodate this batch size. Of course, 23L into the fermenter would give a final volume of about 22L - which I assume is to give the maximum permissible under the old law!
