Hmmm... (unimportant) legal question

[DaleHair]

no. all beer 5%+ has to be labeled ale here. more or less the same thing ( and retarded, though ). you can add whiskey to it. we call that a boilermaker, as in "take a shot of whiskey, add it to a beer"

In Texas if a beer is over 5% it cannot be labeled BEER, it can be ale or malt liquor or something else the TABC accepts when approving the label.

Adding liquor to homebrew is legal as long as the tax has been paid on the liquor, ie store bought whisky.

Freeze concentration is considered distilling and prohibited under federal law without a permit.

 

[woozy]

It doesn't spell out that we can't make mead.

"*Only* wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other *fruits* may be produced under this section."

I think that *does* spell out that you can not make mead.

Where's the ambiguity? One could argue that they assumed all wine was made from fruit and simply didn't realize that mean isn't technically made from a fruit. But they *specifically* defined wine as possibly made from honey and not fruit and then later claimed that *only* fruit wine is allowed to be made at home.

I think that's pretty specific and clear. But I'd ignore it anyway.

 

[celticdevildog]

Sec. 109.21. HOME PRODUCTION OF WINE, ALE, MALT LIQUOR, OR BEER.
(a) The head of a family or an unmarried adult may produce for the use of his family or himself

Just to add some fun interpretation here....so married women who don't claim head of house status can't brew beer in Texas?? :smack:

 

[LabRatBrewer]

Just to add some fun interpretation here....so married women who don't claim head of house status can't brew beer in Texas?? :smack:

There is likely a definition section of the code that says he, him, himself is generic and not gender specific, and includes women throughout the code.

 

[celticdevildog]

There is likely a definition section of the code that says he, him, himself is generic and not gender specific, and includes women throughout the code.

I figured as much, but I thought the interesting part was the explicit call out of "head of a family". Either way, if I ever live in Texas I don't really think I would let this stop me from brewing.

 

[woozy]

Sec. 109.21. HOME PRODUCTION OF WINE, ALE, MALT LIQUOR, OR BEER.
(a) The head of a family or an unmarried adult may produce for the use of his family or himself not more than 200 gallons of wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer, per year. No license or permit is required.

Wow, that *is* weird. So a married non-head of household (whatever gender) can't brew beer. i.e. my wife makes more money than I do and files our income tax (or does whatever it is that a "head of household" does) than *I* can't brew beer. It *really* does sound like that and it might have been the original intent but I honestly can't see this "head of household" stipulation holding up in court. Perhaps the way to interpret it is a family has the same exception, and no more, than a single individual.

Ha! maybe the "head of household" is the person who brews the beer! I'd go for that. Forget winning bread and filing taxes; the person with the keys to the fermenter runs the show.

 

[Beernik]

Along with honey being out, so is potato, corn, & sorghum. They aren't fruit.

No GF beers for you!

 

[MyNameIsPaul]

You cant file as head of household if both spouses are living.

 

[woozy]

You cant file as head of household if both spouses are living.

Huh?

 

[Zuljin]

State of Texas
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE
TITLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec 1.04
(7) "Wine and vinous liquor" means the product obtained from the alcoholic
fermentation of juice of sound ripe grapes, fruits, berries, or honey, and includes wine coolers.

Case closed.

 

[LabRatBrewer]

State of Texas
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE
TITLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec 1.04
(7) "Wine and vinous liquor" means the product obtained from the alcoholic
fermentation of juice of sound ripe grapes, fruits, berries, or honey, and includes wine coolers.

Case closed.

Crap, what to do with all these unsound ripe grapes?

 

[mysteryshrimp]

"Only wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the
juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other fruits may be produced under this section. Only ale, malt liquor, or beer made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of malted barley with hops, or their products, and with or without other malted or unmalted cereals, may be produced under this section. The possession of wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer produced under this section is not an offense if the person making it complies with all provisions of this section and the wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer is not distilled, fortified, or otherwise altered to increase its alcohol content."

Case not closed. What this means is that you can make wine from honey, but not under this section. In other words, by the letter of the law, you need a license.

What I find interesting is this:

"The possession of wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer produced under this section is not an offense if the person making it complies with all provisions of this section and the wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer is not distilled, fortified, or otherwise altered to increase its alcohol content."

Nowhere in this section does it mention an age limitation. Head of household can be under the age of 21. But it does say that as long as the wine/beer is made in compliance to this section, it's not illegal to to possess.

 

[LabRatBrewer]

"Only wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the
juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other fruits may be produced under this section. Only ale, malt liquor, or beer made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of malted barley with hops, or their products, and with or without other malted or unmalted cereals, may be produced under this section. The possession of wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer produced under this section is not an offense if the person making it complies with all provisions of this section and the wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer is not distilled, fortified, or otherwise altered to increase its alcohol content."

Case not closed. What this means is that you can make wine from honey, but not under this section. In other words, by the letter of the law, you need a license.

What I find interesting is this:

"The possession of wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer produced under this section is not an offense if the person making it complies with all provisions of this section and the wine, ale, malt liquor, or beer is not distilled, fortified, or otherwise altered to increase its alcohol content."

Nowhere in this section does it mention an age limitation. Head of household can be under the age of 21. But it does say that as long as the wine/beer is made in compliance to this section, it's not illegal to to possess.

TABC 106.05 has this covered.

 

[Zuljin]

Home making mead is legal in Texas. The law says so. It says home making wine is legal and it defines wine as may be from fermented honey. No two ways about it. Even if one plays the abv and abw angle, there are still clear laws that make home making mead legal.

Appeal denied.

 

[MyNameIsPaul]

Huh?

Sorry, posted from mobile so didn't get too much into it, but as far as the IRS is concerned with filing statuses (HoH, Single, Married filing jointly, etc...) the only way someone can file as HoH is if they have a deceased spouse and eligible dependent (child) It's the most advantageous way to file, with the most deductions.

It doesn't matter who makes more $, the term Head Of Household with the IRS has to do with filing status.

I brew the beer in our house, so I'm definitely the HoH here. I also wear the pants around here, though she picks them out for me =)

 

[woozy]

Home making mead is not legal in Texas (without a license). The law says so. It says only home making wine from fruit is legal and it defines wine as may be from fermented honey. Nxoxtxwxoxwxaxyxsxaxbxoxuxtxixtx. It's a little ambiguous and strange.

There. I fixed your post for you.

you're welcome.

 

[woozy]

State of Texas
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE
TITLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec 1.04
(7) "Wine and vinous liquor" means the product obtained from the alcoholic
fermentation of juice of sound ripe grapes, fruits, berries, or honey, and includes wine coolers.

Right! That defines what wine is; *not* whether wine is legal or not to make at home. Mead, whether commercially or at home, is considered wine. Dandelion wine is not, by the way.

Then the law says:

Only wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the
juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other fruits may be produced under this section

Honey is very specifically *not* mentioned. Thus mead, which has been defined as wine, is specifically not covered in this section. In other words it can not be made at home without a license. Interestingly (mildly) dandelion wine, which had been defined *not* to be wine, is covered in the section.

 

[woozy]

as far as the IRS is concerned with filing statuses the only way someone can file as HoH is if they have a deceased spouse and eligible dependent (child)

Which is clearly not what the Texas law means by "Head of Household". Otherwise married people can't make beer.

 

[Zuljin]

Yall are getting high on something other than life. The Texas Bluebonnet Brew Off has three, 1, 2, 3, categories for home brewed mead. The Knights of the Brown Bottle, a local DFW club, won a medal in the 2012 competition. The Cap and Hare gives lectures on home brewing mead. I assure you, it is legal to home brew mead in Texas, without any special license.

 

[MyNameIsPaul]

Yall are getting high on something other than life. The Texas Bluebonnet Brew Off has three, 1, 2, 3, categories for home brewed mead. The Knights of the Brown Bottle, a local DFW club, won a medal in the 2012 competition. The Cap and Hare gives lectures on home brewing mead. I assure you, it is legal to home brew mead in Texas, without any special license.

I've seen state signs on the side of the road (similar to mile markers, street signs, etc) That say "Brand XYZ Meadery" just like they do for Wineries. I know that's a commercial business, but they had to start somewhere, so I assume mead is for sure legal in Texas. It's not like it would stop anyone anyways, kind of like the 200 gallon rule...

 

[woozy]

Yall are getting high on something other than life. The Texas Bluebonnet Brew Off has three, 1, 2, 3, categories for home brewed mead. The Knights of the Brown Bottle, a local DFW club, won a medal in the 2012 competition. The Cap and Hare gives lectures on home brewing mead. I assure you, it is legal to home brew mead in Texas, without any special license.

All I'm saying is that the law, as it is written on the snippets cut and pasted and presented here, is clear and unambiguous that home-brewing mead is *not* specified in the wines one is allowed to brew for personal use without a permit.

I'm not saying *anything* about whether The Texas Bluebonnet Brew Off is familiar with the law nor whether it gives a rats ass about it. Nor am I saying anything about whether the law is ever enforced. And I'm not saying anything about how the law enforcement, courts, and public have interpreted and obeyed those laws for the last 70 years. I'm sure in all practicality and all recent interpretations of the law home-made mead is legal in Texas but as that law is written it is not. They might want to do something about that.

After all, Ohio wasn't a legal state for nearly one hundred and fifty years without anyone realizing it. By all recognition, observance, and practice Ohio appeared to be a legal state at the time and everyone accepted it as such. But it wasn't.

And while they are at it, they might want to do something about married people not being able to make beer.

 

[Zuljin]

Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Still legal.

Think about it. Bluebonnet is a huge competition. They hold their events at big name breweries. They, and thereby the breweries who host them, get attention from TABC. Are you really going to sit there and say that's going on illegally?

And then there is, of course, the actual law which defines what wine is.

I see what you're trying to do. It ain't working. Playing word games with the law doesn't change the law. Ohio was a state, slavery was illegal in Mississippi and homemade mead is legal in Texas.

If you want to revise your position to say that one day someone might word the law differently in a way you'll better understand it, that's fine. That happens. The fact remains though, it's legal in Texas.

 

[motobrewer]

so, Zil, you could go that way, the direction you're currently headed-

or you can take what we're pointing out and do more investigation. I know you're aware of things that happened in Oregon and Wisconsin over the last few years.

In wisconsin, it was "illegal", by the book definition, to remove homebrew from the place where it was made. Nobody paid any attention to it, especially since the Wisconsin State Fair hosts one of the largest homebrew comp in the state.

Then, some politician got some bug up his a$$ (namely, the BMC distributors) about a Racine beerfest where homebrew was served. Suddenly, the law was a huge deal, and all comps that year (except the Wisconsin State Fair.....go figure) were cancelled.

We eventually got the law changed.

All I'm saying is, don't underestimate the stupidity of a politician with a lobbyist up his ass.

 

[woozy]

Look, I've read the law. And you've read the law. And the law says only wine made from fruit juice is legal. And mead is not made from fruit juices. I'm not playing any word games. The texas law defines wine as a fermented beverage made from fruit juice or honey and then specifically states only wines made from fruit juice or dandelion leaves can be made without a license. No word game.

So yes, huge events go on against the law and no-one knows the law? Yeah, that happens sometimes. Take a look at this. Opium poppy seeds are being sold FOR THE PURPOSE OF CULTIVATION ("Grows 4 feet high", "Plant in Spring or Fall", No need to buy a LARGER quantity of these! A few plants will get you gazillions of seeds! FUN TO GROW!!!") on amazon! Amazon! Am I telling you that amazon is breaking the law. Yes. yes, I am.

Also, you seem to have this weird idea that the Texas law defines wine as being made from honey *helps* your argument. It doesn't. It just makes the fruit juice and dandelion leaf stipulation that much more specific.

 

[CreamyGoodness]

Unless of course LabRat is correct (not entirely unlikely as he is a lawyer) that it is likely that definitions are spelled out more neatly in other parts of the law...

 

[woozy]

Unless of course LabRat is correct (not entirely unlikely as he is a lawyer) that it is likely that definitions are spelled out more neatly in other parts of the law...

That might be the intent. But That's all the more reason one should clean up a sloppy law. Once the term "wine" is defined you should pretty much use the term "wine" and only the term "wine" thereafter if indeed the law was intended to mean wine in general.

If you use phrases like "wine made from fruit juices" *after* you've specified by definition that wine need not be made from fruit, then the lawmakers are just shooting themselves (and the good folks who are obligated to obey the law) in the foot.

They should simply have said ""Only wine as defined above may be produced under this section" if that was their intent. ***********

So maybe the intent of the Texas law was to allow home-making of mead. Maybe we are the first to notice this discrepency (ha!). But by carelessly putting in a "only wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other fruits" phrase *after* wine had been nicely and neatly *defined* as "the product obtained from the alcoholic fermentation of juice of sound ripe grapes, fruits, berries, or honey, and includes wine coolers" they have, whatever their intent, shot the law in the foot and Texas now has a law "on the books" making it illegal to home-brew mead.

Even if no-one intended that law and no-one noticed that law and no-one obeys that law and no-one ever interpreted the law to exclude mead, the law is still there on the books.

 

[CreamyGoodness]

When you put it that way I would tend to agree.

 

[Zuljin]

All these words said, and it's still legal.

I can agree that the law could be worded better, but not that it's worded to make home made mead illegal. That's the biggie here. Whether it's legal or illegal, and I maintain that it is legal.

I got an example too, as well. We had a design proposal at work changed to replace HOA switches with LOR switches. We also changed Computer to Auto on the graphics. Making these changes didn't change any functionality. The devices would function exactly the same no matter what the text was. We knew it. Everyone knew it. We only wanted the change so they would conform with our standard. That was it. No change to any function at all. It was totally cosmetic. This is all there is to the great mead law debate of 2013. Is it pink or pink? Either way, it's still legal.

So riddle me this, Batmen. Why would it be illegal? What's the precedent? The back story? Show why it would be intended. Demonstrate it in the spirit of the law.

Now I must take my leave, so that I may degas my Texas home made mead. Run tell that!

 

[mattd2]

They should simply have said ""Only wine as defined above may be produced under this section" if that was their intent. ***********

So riddle me this, Batmen. Why would it be illegal? What's the precedent? The back story? Show why it would be intended. Demonstrate it in the spirit of the law.

Has the Latest debates to get the Alabama homebrewing laws change not shown that sometimes laws actually do not make sense (especially once those debates are long forgotten). Sometimes those pushing the bill have to make comprimising ammendments to get the bills passed.
I can see someone that was opposed to this bill make the argument that mead made from unpasturised honey could lead to botulism, if the guy(s) argued enough it might have been the easy fix to get the bill past to say "ok then, you can make it from anything but honey" and therefore the specific wording of the section was changed to reflect that intent.

 

[woozy]

I can agree that the law could be worded better, but not that it's worded to make home made mead illegal.

"only wine made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the juices of dandelions or grapes, raisins, or other fruits"

How can that be interpreted in any way but that home making of mead is not allowed under the written law?

That's the biggie here. Whether it's legal or illegal, and I maintain that it is legal.

If by legal you mean allowed by public consent, unprosecuted by law or court, and even deemed legal and acceptable by a court of law. Then sure, it's legal. (Although I don't know if any court ever spoke on the issue.)

But if be legal you mean compatible with written laws and statutes and not expressly forbidden in written law and statutes. Then no, it is not legal.

I got an example too, as well. We had a design proposal at work changed to replace HOA switches with LOR switches. We also changed Computer to Auto on the graphics. Making these changes didn't change any functionality. The devices would function exactly the same no matter what the text was. We knew it. Everyone knew it. We only wanted the change so they would conform with our standard. That was it. No change to any function at all. It was totally cosmetic.

So, are you claiming that you *didn't* change the logo? Who claimed anything about functionality? What relevance does that have with written law? I'm only claiming what the written law said. I'm not making any claim about what people do with it.

So riddle me this, Batmen. Why would it be illegal?

Because the law says only wine made from fruit juice is legal.

What's the precedent? The back story? Show why it would be intended. Demonstrate it in the spirit of the law.

Why on earth would I need to do any of those? Why would I *want* to? I don't know why they did it. And since reading what CreamyGoodness had to say, I'm not at all sure they ever intended to do it. And as for the spirit of the law... well, you and I both know that there is *absolutely* none. Other than selling of homebrew and the Wisconsin state fair debacle I don't know of any one federally or state level prosecuted by these statutes. Certainly not for brewing mead.

Now I must take my leave, so that I may degas my Texas home made mead. Run tell that!

I won't tell your state about your Texas mead if you don't tell my state about my picking California poppies. {which actually isn't, and never was, against the law but every Californian grew up hearing stories that it was}