• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Alabama Homebrew Legislation 2013

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Yeah, another example would be a guy with two 5-gal kegs in his kegerator, two 5-plus-gal batches of wine in secondary, a 5-gal batch of Apfelwein bulk aging, 5 gals of RIS and 4 of barleywine fermenting, 3 gals of mead nearly ready to bottle, and dozens of bottles of wine, mead and beer of various ages. Guy typically drinks 1-to-2 per day, typically.

This hypothetical guy would be in violation under even the proposed AL legalization bill, but at least he'd only be under misdemeanor threat instead of felony.

Well done, MS. Here's hoping you set an example we can follow here.

-Rich
 
What are the limits on amounts that are being proposed? And is beer still in the fermenter/carboy counted as a finished product?
 
That's crazy! Good on your rep! You can buy beer legally from huge corporations but you can't make it for yourself at home??! Ludicrous.
 
What are the limits on amounts that are being proposed? And is beer still in the fermenter/carboy counted as a finished product?

If I remember correctly the limit is 15 gallons per calendar quarter. Well below the national standard, but hey, that's how we like it in Alabama. At least it is better than the current limit.

That is in any stage...fermenting, bottled, aging, etc.
 
If I remember correctly the limit is 15 gallons per calendar quarter. Well below the national standard, but hey, that's how we like it in Alabama. At least it is better than the current limit.

That is in any stage...fermenting, bottled, aging, etc.

You remember correct.

The current bill would limit POSSESSION to 15 gallons at any 1 time and would limit PRODUCTION to 15 gallons per quarter.

Yes, that is well below the federal limits. In the many years of working the bill, there have been some compromises made in an attempt to get it passed. The bill this year, both HB9 and SB171, are identical to the bill that passed the House last year.
 
We have a bill that the beer distributors and the ABC board signed off on. We get that passed first, so we aren't practicing felons, then we can work on reducing limits in the coming years.
 
What are you hearing, Huff? Are we going to get a vote?

Mac continues to say "Be patient"

At this point, it is a huge timing issue. With all the recent stalling by the Dems as payback for the Flex Bill, we don't want to waste our chances of getting on the SOC on days where we know we won't make it to the floor. So it's kinda up to Mac to judge when is the right time to place it on the SOC.

Continue to drum up support where you can. Ask your friends who like your beer to call their Legislators. If you facebook, make a post about it. Let folks know. If you use twitter, get to tweeting! Write an editorial and send it to your local paper and tv station. The news outlets have been very receptive of Right to Brew articles. If you don't want to quote yourself or offer yourself as a contact person, get in touch with the guys at http://www.alahomebrewing.org/contact-us and they can provide info!
 
That's crazy! Good on your rep! You can buy beer legally from huge corporations but you can't make it for yourself at home??! Ludicrous.

Let me apologize in advance if I misssed this. I've been trying to keep up on this thread, but will admit, I haven't seen every page.

This made me wonder, does any of the anti-bill sentiment have to do with people worrying about lost taxes?

I'm sure it's not a dent that anyone would realy notice, but Illinois has definitely lost alcohol tax revenue from me, once I started homebrewing. I wonder if anyone put together numbers on lost revenue, via estimated increase in sudden jump to homebrewing, once it were legalized.
 
Let me apologize in advance if I misssed this. I've been trying to keep up on this thread, but will admit, I haven't seen every page.

This made me wonder, does any of the anti-bill sentiment have to do with people worrying about lost taxes?

I'm sure it's not a dent that anyone would realy notice, but Illinois has definitely lost alcohol tax revenue from me, once I started homebrewing. I wonder if anyone put together numbers on lost revenue, via estimated increase in sudden jump to homebrewing, once it were legalized.

Not really. The opposition is almost 100% based in morality. As in, brewing beer in our homes will lead to increased alcoholism and plus, beer is just plain evil.
 
someone did mention taxes in mississippis debate but really I feel like you pay just as much or more considering you pay taxes on all ingredients, equipment(but just once) and fuel source be it electricity or propane. you could save there by farming yeast and trees for fuel I suppose...
 
Quick question, everyone is saying that the proposed bills would limit possession of home brew to only 15 gallons? The language of the bill only specifically mentions a production limit (which admittedly would be difficult to enforce). Is everyone just assuming the same interpretation of the law?
 
someone did mention taxes in mississippis debate but really I feel like you pay just as much or more considering you pay taxes on all ingredients, equipment(but just once) and fuel source be it electricity or propane. you could save there by farming yeast and trees for fuel I suppose...

Just wondering. I know in Illinois the beer tax is pretty big. 23 cents/gallon. Yeah, I pay the normal sales tax on equipment, but grains are taxed as food, so that's less than normal sales tax, which buying a keg, I'd pay the full 10%ish sales tax, plus the $3.50 beer excise tax on 15.5 gallons. Considering I brew on average twice a month, the tax they are losing is adding up. And since our state is all up in arms about their crap situation with funds, it just made me think about it. I have a feeling if this debate were happening in Illinois right now, taxes would be at the forefront.

I do understand though that morality trumps all when it comes to the alcohol debate, especially in the south. so that makes sense. Obviously, morality isn't a big deal with politicians in Illinois.:mug:
 
Quick question, everyone is saying that the proposed bills would limit possession of home brew to only 15 gallons? The language of the bill only specifically mentions a production limit (which admittedly would be difficult to enforce). Is everyone just assuming the same interpretation of the law?

There were some problems with HB9 when it was originally assigned back prior to the session. They pulled the wrong bill.

Take a look at SB171 Here

That is the actual bill that is being worked. The text of HB9 as posted on the Legislature Website is not correct.
 
Just wondering. I know in Illinois the beer tax is pretty big. 23 cents/gallon. Yeah, I pay the normal sales tax on equipment, but grains are taxed as food, so that's less than normal sales tax, which buying a keg, I'd pay the full 10%ish sales tax, plus the $3.50 beer excise tax on 15.5 gallons. Considering I brew on average twice a month, the tax they are losing is adding up. And since our state is all up in arms about their crap situation with funds, it just made me think about it. I have a feeling if this debate were happening in Illinois right now, taxes would be at the forefront.

I do understand though that morality trumps all when it comes to the alcohol debate, especially in the south. so that makes sense. Obviously, morality isn't a big deal with politicians in Illinois.:mug:
geez. I feel like I've heard somewhere the beer tax here is something like .24 per 12ounce beer. just hearsay though never bothered to really care. I just know no matter what my tax dollars are never spent how I want them to be.
 
Just wondering. I know in Illinois the beer tax is pretty big. 23 cents/gallon. Yeah, I pay the normal sales tax on equipment, but grains are taxed as food, so that's less than normal sales tax, which buying a keg, I'd pay the full 10%ish sales tax, plus the $3.50 beer excise tax on 15.5 gallons. Considering I brew on average twice a month, the tax they are losing is adding up. And since our state is all up in arms about their crap situation with funds, it just made me think about it. I have a feeling if this debate were happening in Illinois right now, taxes would be at the forefront.

I do understand though that morality trumps all when it comes to the alcohol debate, especially in the south. so that makes sense. Obviously, morality isn't a big deal with politicians in Illinois.:mug:

Food is taxed the same as any other good in our backward state, so not as big of a concern here.

Also, for the record, politicians only care about morality when it applies to other people (or helps them win votes).
 
Mac continues to say "Be patient"

At this point, it is a huge timing issue. With all the recent stalling by the Dems as payback for the Flex Bill, we don't want to waste our chances of getting on the SOC on days where we know we won't make it to the floor. So it's kinda up to Mac to judge when is the right time to place it on the SOC.

I have felt like that is what was going on. I trust Mac.
 
Typical ridiculous hillbilly Alabama politics. As usual.

The party in power ALWAYS rams its bills through (Obamacare, anyone?). That's the nature of having an unblockable majority. Pouting about it and refusing to do your job should ensure that you are defeated come election season.

Sadly, most are so ignorant of what goes on that this kind of shennanigans goes on pretty much unchecked.
 
homebrewdad said:
Food is taxed the same as any other good in our backward state, so not as big of a concern here.

Also, for the record, politicians only care about morality when it applies to other people (or helps them win votes).

As I said, in Illinois. Morality is the last concern of our politicians. So, I was just asking.
 
Even though it'll be a while before this sees a vote, I got a reply from Rep. Steve Clouse saying that he plans on supporting the bill as it is written. Take that however you want, but I'm leaning towards a positive thing.
 
Back
Top