Proposed Increase of Federal Excise Tax a Serious Threat to Small Brewers Part1

[PortageeExpress]

Emailed Sen. Cornyn (TX)

 

[mrkristofo]

Fired in my email to the ranking member of the committee. Not that there's any chance Orrin Hatch will favor anything relating to beer or the brewing industry, especially with the LDS church's strong stake in Coors...

 

[weirdboy]

I have to imagine that the large commercial brewers, distillers, and soft-drink manufacturers are all up in arms about the proposed changes as much as, if not more so, than craft brewers. I also suspect BUD and KO pull quite a bit of weight on capitol hill. So, hopefully this proposal will be subsequently shot down.

That's not to say that I haven't contacted my local representatives about this.

 

[Beerrific]

I also suspect BUD and KO pull quite a bit of weight on capitol hill.

I am all but sure that AB-InBev retains the best, highest priced suits on K Street.

 

[MaynardX]

I just emailed Senator Carper from Delaware.

 

[BrewN00b]

What makes you think the big brew corporations aren't the ones PUSHING this additional tax? I mean, I understand it sounds silly, but what better way to remove the competition they are finding in smaller, higher alcohol-content, microbreweries? 4.5% was chosen for a reason, and it bet it lies in the fact that most pisswater macro brews are just under that. If you can't beat them, have them taxed into extinction.

I

 

[KYB]

Emailed Jim Bunning in KY.

 

[Gremlyn]

What makes you think the big brew corporations aren't the ones PUSHING this additional tax? I mean, I understand it sounds silly, but what better way to remove the competition they are finding in smaller, higher alcohol-content, microbreweries? 4.5% was chosen for a reason, and it bet it lies in the fact that most pisswater macro brews are just under that. If you can't beat them, have them taxed into extinction.

I

+1 on that. This is exactly what I put in my letter to my Senators (who are unfortunately not on the SFC), but I made it very clear that I felt that was what was being done by InBev lobbyists. I also proposed that if the government felt they NEEDED to pass an excise tax of this nature to reach their goals, that it should be based on volume produced so the tax is more evenly distributed and doesn't hurt the small businesses.

 

[Splangy]

Just emailed Maria Cantwell of Washington.

 

[tarheels]

another email to Maria Cantwell of Washington

 

[BobOscarBob]

Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham just got emails...

 

[Rhoobarb]

Just contacted senator Durbin.

 

[the_Roqk]

Senator Nelson just got his email for the opposition.

 

[ohiobrewtus]

I just shipped off 3 emails.

 

[conpewter]

Just contacted senator Durbin.

Same here, and my Representative.

 

[weirdboy]

What makes you think the big brew corporations aren't the ones PUSHING this additional tax? I mean, I understand it sounds silly, but what better way to remove the competition they are finding in smaller, higher alcohol-content, microbreweries? 4.5% was chosen for a reason, and it bet it lies in the fact that most pisswater macro brews are just under that. If you can't beat them, have them taxed into extinction.

Did anyone here actually read the damn proposal?

They are proposing a flat tax rate per proof gallon of all alcohol including distilled spirits, wine, and beer. The 4.5% is just a metric they used to estimate the current tax rate per proof gallon.

They also have proactively addressed small brewers' concerns by proposing a threshold of production, below which a lower tax rate would be used:

In a manner similar to present law, for domestic brewers producing less than two million barrels of beer during the calendar year, the proposal imposes a reduced rate of tax on the first 60,000 barrels of beer removed each year.

It really bothers me when I see people spreading FUD without actually checking the facts.


For reference Here's a PDF of the proposal

 

[Socrates_the_Dog]

Just sent an email to Senator Lincoln (AR).

 

[AstroBrew]

Email sent to Sen. John Cornyn (TX), member of Senate Finance Com. I feel engaged in the democratic process.

BTW, weirdboy makes a good point, the proposal does mention a tax credit for the first 60,000 barrels produced by a brewery that produces less than 2 million barrels a year. The same sort of structure is used for the present beer excise tax. It's not clear if the excise tax on that first 60,000 barrels would remain the same as it is now, or would still go up, just by a smaller amount.

 

[Beerrific]

Hmm....got a response from my Senator (aide): "Thank you for contacting me regarding a possible tax on soft drinks. It is good to hear from you."

UGH.

But, he is opposed to an increase tax on soft drinks, so that is good to hear.

 

[beerkrump]

Response I got from Lamar Alexander

Thanks for getting in touch with me and letting me know what's on your mind.



I'm grateful you took the time to send me information on proposed excise taxes on high alcohol beers. These are serious times, and there are many important issues to discuss. I'm always glad to take a look at additional information that could help me as I review this issue, and I'll be sure to keep your comments in mind.

Sincerely,



Lamar

 

[conpewter]

I'm not for raising any taxes, we don't need to be taxed more, we need to spend less and spend more wisely, even if there are provisions to tax the smaller breweries less than the large

 

[user 30639]

Thanks for the heads up, I will email Senator Cornyn tomorrow morning.

 

[olllllo]

What makes you think the big brew corporations aren't the ones PUSHING this additional tax?

Well there is this.

Chicago Business notes, accurately, that any federal tax bump would give Anheuser-Busch InBev the opportunity to slash costs. As a condition to Belgium-based InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser-Busch last year, it agreed not to close any of its 12 U.S. breweries - as long as there were no increased federal or state excise taxes or “other unforeseen extraordinary events” that hurt Anheuser-Busch’s business.

Source: Higher beer taxes “on life support,” says key senator. Can brewers relax? | Lager Heads | STLtoday

InBev do love to wield the ax.

 

[GearBeer]

Huh... so they're going to move their rice beer production closer to the rice fields? That sounds typical of American manufacturing.

I shot an email off to Debbie Stabenow yesterday. I'm considering calling her, too.

 

[justinh85]

Heehee...the gov't makes me laugh. They tell the people to do more with less money, but when times get tight for the gov't, what do ya do? Raise taxes! So why can't we tell them to do more with less...after all: by the people, of the people, for the people right? Everybody loves bloated gov't.....

 

[rico567]

I'm not for raising any taxes, we don't need to be taxed more, we need to spend less and spend more wisely, even if there are provisions to tax the smaller breweries less than the large

AGREED. Totally. Despite the apparent conviction of those in control inside the Beltway, we cannot spend our way out of this recession....or to the New Jerusalem once it's over.

 

[olllllo]

This isn't a political thread. Topic is fighting the excise tax.

 

[pompeiisneaks]

I got the email too and sent email to the two utah senators...

~Phil

 

[Arkador]

we should all gather in DC and pour Keg after Keg of Busch beer in the Potomic river if they are truly supporting this....

 

[BeerFan21]

I sent an email to Bill Nelson (FL). I'm a big fan of Orlando Brewing Co, but down in SWFL there are no local breweries, just a few decent beer bars. The three tier system already limits too many quality beers from making it to my area, we don't need another hurdle. I fear that if this tax increase proposal does go through - it will prevent other potential breweries from starting up as well.

Cheers