Yes it is legal

Cliff · Post by **Cliff** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:26 pm

There are a few hurdles and you might get a bit turned around trying to educate your state representatives and bureaucrats (the ones who don't read the laws they purport to administer), but it is legal with one caveat: If your state has specific laws prohibiting liquor and spirit production like Mississippi's laws against home brewing beer - unless your state has a prohibition against distilling, it is legal.

Think money. That's what it is all about. TAX.
You have to comply with the taxing laws. Once you do that, you are no longer a Moonshiner.
For example NJ has a law that requires you to get a permit to brew beer, yearly cost is $20.00
The best place for a layperson to start their search for state specific laws is your AG's office. Call them and start asking questions. Tell them what you want to do - be direct. This will not bring the local cops or Fed down on you.

In most states you will have to find a liquor bottler or manufacturer who has the ability to affix a tax stamp (or your state's equivalent) to your bottles and make sure that you pay the required tax per volume of liquor. They'll prolly charge you a nominal fee. More telephone work.
And that's it. Once you pay the taxes you are golden.

This does not entitle you to sell it or even give it away though. That's a licensing process.

Giving booze away can lead to questions about quid pro quo which is a form of payment not involving cash. So be careful.

Post by **rad14701** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:56 pm

Greetings, Cliff...

Quite the hot topic of debate for an initial post...

This sounds to be based more on opinion than on fact... Federal law always has the option to over-ride any state law... The federal judicial system can opt to enter into a gentleman's agreement with a state to not actively pursue violators within a state for a specific law, but can void that agreement at any time without prior notice... A states not having a law in no way means that a federal law is non-binding... For example, states do not need anti-terrorism laws as they are handled through the federal government... The fact that they don't have them in no way indicates that terrorism within a state is legal... If it falls under the guise of federal law, it can be enforced from the federal level, regardless of whether a state agrees or disagrees... This also holds true for such gray areas as the current medical marijuana legal issue...

loneswinger · Post by **loneswinger** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:01 pm

Rad is right,

Though you may be less likely to be caught if there is no state law prohibiting, it is illegal under federal law. This next quote is straight from the TTB website:

"You cannot produce spirits for beverage purposes without paying taxes and without prior approval of paperwork to operate a distilled spirits plant. [See 26 U.S.C. 5601 & 5602 for some of the criminal penalties.] There are numerous requirements that must be met that make it impractical to produce spirits for personal or beverage use. Some of these requirements are paying special tax, filing an extensive application, filing a bond, providing adequate equipment to measure spirits, providing suitable tanks and pipelines, providing a separate building (other than a dwelling) and maintaining detailed records, and filing reports. All of these requirements are listed in 27 CFR Part 19.

Spirits may be produced for non-beverage purposes for fuel use only without payment of tax, but you also must file an application, receive TTB's approval, and follow requirements, such as construction, use, records and reports."

Cheers,

-Loneswinger

Cliff · Post by **Cliff** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:57 pm

The entity that can collect your taxes weigh your product and record your volume will also be handling the federal taxation issues.
Ya gotta start with the AG in your home state. Each state regulates liquor differently.
Plus someone there, should be able to direct you to the local TTB (ATF) office where they will answer all your questions.
If you are lucky they'll have a person's name.

If you want to make your eyes fall out reading:
At the federal level start here:
http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Federal law on point
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/5602.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/5601.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

you could read 27 CFR part 19
http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/regs/27cfrpart019.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
Or Fed Regulation 19.231?
http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/regs/19_231.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Some of the requirements designed for commercial production may be waived for hobby home distillation so long as the government is getting the tax funds they demand. you local TTB office people will have some discretion to make those determinations.

It's all just a little effort and time on the phone.

There are more than a few restaurants that have gotten into making their own spirits (rum & vodka are popular) and they are just independent little owner operated businesses run by people no more sophisticated or savvy in the law than you.

loneswinger: your post from the ttb site is all about how to do it lawfully. they even link you to the things you might need to read - but you don't really have to , just go to the local ATF office and let them steer you. They will hand you a stack of forms and instructions on how to comply with the law.

Their business is not to make things so obscure and impossible that you will fail so they can pounce on you and send you to prison. They just want the taxes.

loneswinger · Post by **loneswinger** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 3:31 pm

Ok, I think I see what you are getting at.

Yes, of course anyone can open a distillery, and yes it can be very small and not profitable if you want it to be. You would nonetheless have to be a licensed and bonded distillery, through both the federal and the state government. It is not just a little effort and time on the phone, it is real money. You would be required to have all types of expensive measuring equipment, safety equipment, registration of your stills, permits, a devoted building which could pass multiple inspections, etc. Here in the state of WA, the license is relatively cheap at about $100 per year, but the restrictions are many.

All a big pain in the ass for something that I do for free anyway. If I am going to go through the effort of getting licensed, it would be for a business not for personal use.

Go for it and report back when you have your license and are legally distilling. Lead us by example, not by unverified words.

-Loneswinger

Post by **rad14701** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:04 pm

Cliff, the short version is that you're new here...

You're not the first person here to consider opening a legal distillery... Several here even have... Others are in the legal process... That is not what this site is about as there are sites for legal distillers, such as ADI and others... This site is about promoting safe "home distillation" and efforts to decriminalize it - hopefully free of permits or licensing... Our governments already require too much of that, thank you... We are aware of the links you have posted and some of us have, in fact, read until our eyes almost fell out...

We really don't need yet another topic like this at this point in time...

You are welcome to discuss "home distillation", however, as well as its decriminalization...

Post by **blanikdog** » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:20 pm

I have this strange feeling of deja vu. Or do I feel stunned like a bandicoot on a burnt ridge?

Post by **Bayou-Ruler** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:01 am

blanikdog wrote:I have this strange feeling of deja vu. Or do I feel stunned like a bandicoot on a burnt ridge?

Post by **rubber duck** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:14 am

Figured I would also take the opportunity to bump my post count.

Post by **Bayou-Ruler** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:42 am

rubber duck wrote:

Figured I would also take the opportunity to bump my post count.

Good lookin out

Post by **rad14701** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 1:01 pm

I see a little X in everyones posts that can very easily reduce their post counts...

Some folks might want to consider that a subtle hint to start contributing a bit more substance in their posts...

Post by **Dnderhead** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:31 pm

as I know,there is the federal law, this holds no mater what,next the state can add more to these.
so the law can be equal to or more than the federal law but not less.so if they do not make a state law
then they are using the federal law. so all states have alcohol laws some just agreed to the federal laws
with nothing added.

Cliff · Post by **Cliff** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:36 pm

Over the last few years I've contemplated building a still for liquor. This has led me to investigate not merely the laws on point but to learn what others have done to bridge the hurdles. The ones I've spoken to are restaurateurs. They see a financial return on investment and prolly wouldn't have tried if they didn't see it. I've also spoken to a few who distill sans permits. I can not do that as I have way far too much to lose.

Seems to me that a bill ought to be drafted that if passed into law will allow home distillers the freedom to produce a certain volume of spirits for personal consumption. It's not like trying to legalize weed.
Such an effort would of course have to include certain things like limits on quantum.
Quantum could be spoken to in plain measurable volumes (X gallons per year) and possibly include throughput constituents such as the volume of grains mashed.
Maybe a record keeping requirement to document the grains and equipment purchased built or harvested (I disfavor this preferring a simple X Gallons per year approach).
Possibly equipment capacity limitations could be included, such as size of mash vessel and throughput capacity of a still etc., however this seems to me to be a very awkward approach.
A sop in the form of a yearly fee for registration or something like that might sweeten the pie for the Fed.

The problem with governmentregulations is usually that they are too heavy handed and sweep little hobbyists up with the huge commercial operations. This same thing happened recently with lead from China in toys. They wrote a law to solve the problem and suddenly every single craftsman who sells wood hand made toys at flea markets was subject to enormous burdens suitable only to large commercial operations.

The only solution I know is to organize (for the power of many voices petitioning) and to have some person who knows how to write legislation do the work of Congress for them and then us those many voices to petition the congress to present the work done for them by the interested parties.

Hobby distillers ought not to be exposed to criminal penalties that were created to stop unlawful transactions and tax evasion.

Post by **Smokehouse Shiner** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:10 pm

rad14701 wrote:I see a little X in everyones posts that can very easily reduce their post counts...

Some folks might want to consider that a subtle hint to start contributing a bit more substance in their posts...

I seem to remember someone mentioning this......

Post by **Husker** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:20 pm

Dnderhead wrote:as I know,there is the federal law, this holds no mater what,next the state can add more to these.
so the law can be equal to or more than the federal law but not less.so if they do not make a state law
then they are using the federal law. so all states have alcohol laws some just agreed to the federal laws
with nothing added.

does the 10th play a part here?

10th wrote:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

22nd wrote:Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission here of to the States by the Congress.

Clause 2 of #22 may give the fed gov the power it needs, since it is in the constitution as being controlled.

Post by **Dnderhead** » Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:29 pm

I remember reading once,if it is made and stays in state then just state law applies but if it becomes interstate or transported interstate or can be transported interstate then it can becomes federal.
so if your in one of the states that does not have alcohol laws and figure some way that alcohol could not be transported then just the state laws would apply?. it seems this could cover most everything.but maybe trees,witch are exempt until cut or shipped.
buildings that are on foundations,

Post by **Braz** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:34 am

Not quite true, Dnderhead. As a former Fed I used to prepare cases for trial. In order meet the threshold jurisdiction we had to prove that whatever the activity was it involved interstate commerce. That is a pretty easy case to make.

1. The still is copper. Where was the copper made? Mined? Chances are pretty good it crossed a state line somewhere in the process.
2. Where did the corn/rye/barley/sugar come from? Bet something crossed a state line somewhere.
3. You haul supplies home in your truck. Your truck is thus a tool used in furtherance of an illegal activity. Where was your truck made?

You get the idea. You can't win.

ozone39 · Post by **ozone39** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:05 am

So I did some research, our state does not address home distilling/brewing. It only addresses taxes on ethanol fuel. They leave it to up to the feds for any thing else. As well, medical marijuana is legal in our state. Both of these are completely against federal law. It's just a matter weather the federal government wants to run around and enforce/bust people. Marijuana is addressed in our state law referring to the quantity a person my have on them at any given time and there are laws addressing violations. As well, I looked to see how many federal enforcement agents are running around our area, one...for four a four state region....I'm along the lines thinking the local cops won't take ya to jail (being they enforce state law), but rather turn it over to the feds and then they have to decide if it's worth the time to prosecute under federal statue....As well I make it a point to keep all my stuff on our side of state lines (do not take it with me when I travel). I know the general consensus around here , but step over the line and now that all changes.

Cliff · Post by **Cliff** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:52 am

I love 10th amendment arguments.
If you want to see how far the US government has been willing to go to seize an absolute granular level of control you need go no further than the SCOTUS holding in Wickard v Filburn 317 U.S. 111 (1942) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... &invol=111" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
In '38 the Congress adopted and the president signed into law the Agriculture Adjustment Act. This law purportedly gave the Fed the power to regulate what you grew in your backyard ( for your own consumption) under the Commerce clause by the theory that every thing you might grow is also an item of interstate commerce.

So poor Farmer Filburn who only raised a little grain to feed his pigs, which only his family ate, was swept up into the ambit of this law.
So when they gt wind of his seditious wheat crop the US Ag' Dept' fined his ass because they claimed he was not allowed to grow that wheat because they needed to regulate wheat production to control prices. FDR's communist advisers ( and he had lots of them) were helping him remake America in the Bolshevik Progressive image (yes, the Bolsheviks used the world progressive to describe themselves just like the communists here do today).

Anyway Farmer Filburn refused to pay and sued for injunctive relief. He lost
Justice Jackson ( an FDR appointment) and also a progressive, held that, under the commerce clause, the US could regulate every microscopic amount of wheat you might grow in your flower pot.

And they did it all under the rubric of the commerce clause.

Read the commerce clause sometime and ask yourself if the founders could possibly have imagined that the Fed would use it to regulate and control every single thing in the country? They even want to use it to force you to buy things now.

But the What abut that pesky Tenth Amendment?
Justice Rehnquist said (as dicta) in Hodel v. Virginia Surface Min. and Reclamation Association, 452 U.S. 264 (1981)(page 307), “It is illuminating for purposes of reflection, if not for argument, to note that one of the greatest fictions of our federal system is that the Congress exercises only those powers delegated to it, while the remainder are reserved to the States or to the people. The manner in which this Court has construed the Commerce Clause amply illustrates the extent of this fiction.”

Sounds pretty damn dreary yes?

It gets worse.
In Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824), Chief Justice Marshall stated that the commerce clause “acknowledges no limitations,other than are prescribed in the Constitution,”
Now that's downright horrifying.

But, there has of late been a resurgence of Tenth Amendment interest.
Here is an example http://www.constitution.org/lrev/bork-troy.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
All is not lost, the SCOTUS can reverse itself. But no appointment of any progressive president is ever likely to do so on these matters.

I think the better course is not to rail against the tide, but rather to sim0ply agitate for a new law one that exempts the hobby distiller and established some livable regulations that the home distiller can live with.

Post by **rad14701** » Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:12 pm

Decriminalization with the fewest direct regulations is by far the best course of action if any amount of compliance is to be expected... The current laws are excessive in constraints as they are so merely opening an opportunity for legally distilling for personal use, with limits similar to those for beer and wine, would suffice...

No licenses, permits, or other forms of documented information should be required... Leaving all burden of proof to the government relieves citizens from being entrapped by accidentally violating any form of contractual agreement with the government if they were to sign one...

But, back on topic, the way the laws are in the USA today, home distillation is illegal in all 50 states at the federal oversight level... They can initiate an investigation, be invited into an ongoing local investigation, or step into and take over any ongoing local investigation at will... Any argument of federal intervention would have to be done at state supreme vs federal court level... At least that is my understanding of such an event...

toolmaker · Post by **toolmaker** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:36 pm

In reading this post several weeks after it was written,I would like to add something .Anything done illegally at home,of any illegal many can jeopardize more than just breaking the law.I have seen pics and video's of members distilling in a room with gas operated equipment within arms length of a propane burner going full blast and gas cans in close quarters also.In situations like this, if there was a fire your insurance company could contest paying damages to the dwelling place and any human injury that might occur.You could also be prosecuted for injury to another person if they were effected by an accident.If a child were injured it could be a stiffer penalty.

proofed · Post by **proofed** » Thu Apr 21, 2011 8:56 am

rad14701 wrote:Greetings, Cliff...

Quite the hot topic of debate for an initial post...

This sounds to be based more on opinion than on fact... Federal law always has the option to over-ride any state law... The federal judicial system can opt to enter into a gentleman's agreement with a state to not actively pursue violators within a state for a specific law, but can void that agreement at any time without prior notice... A states not having a law in no way means that a federal law is non-binding... For example, states do not need anti-terrorism laws as they are handled through the federal government... The fact that they don't have them in no way indicates that terrorism within a state is legal... If it falls under the guise of federal law, it can be enforced from the federal level, regardless of whether a state agrees or disagrees... This also holds true for such gray areas as the current medical marijuana legal issue...

Tenth amendment can nullify the feds actions, give the power back to the states that it was stlen from by the federal government.

pumpman · Post by **pumpman** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:29 pm

I don't pay taxes on my home made beer or wine and I don't wont t pay taxes on my liquor. So I will not be asking anyone for permission to do so. If you do then they have you in their data base and if they decide to revoke your permission then they can call you a criminal and round you up. I do not trust our goverment on this issue. Full legalization without taxes is the only acceptable option.

Post by **rad14701** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:53 pm

proofed wrote:Tenth amendment can nullify the feds actions, give the power back to the states that it was stlen from by the federal government.

Not if the state has ratified the federal law the federal government is enforcing... A federally ratified law, nor one that is in place at the federal level in lieu of a state level law being ratified, can be considered stolen power... And, not being a lawyer, I'm not even sure a state can secede from a previous ratification... Hence, federal law trumps state law...

Anyone with more legal education is welcome to interject here... I'm just a hick whose toilet is on the front porch of his trailer...

Post by **Mr.Spooky** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:58 pm

rad14701 wrote:Cliff, the short version is that you're new here...

You're not the first person here to consider opening a legal distillery... Several here even have... Others are in the legal process... That is not what this site is about as there are sites for legal distillers, such as ADI and others... This site is about promoting safe "home distillation" and efforts to decriminalize it - hopefully free of permits or licensing... Our governments already require too much of that, thank you... We are aware of the links you have posted and some of us have, in fact, read until our eyes almost fell out...

We really don't need yet another topic like this at this point in time...

You are welcome to discuss "home distillation", however, as well as its decriminalization...

what efforts are we puting together to decriminalize?
spooky

Post by **rad14701** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:21 pm

Mr.Spooky wrote:what efforts are we puting together to decriminalize?
spooky

For the moment, documenting responsible home distilling practices, as well as public interest, should be helpful for more than incriminating evidence against the act... Perhaps a bit unorthodox compared to common practice, but stranger methods have proven successful... I can't comment on whether any official movement is underway in any countries at this point...

Post by **Braz** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:58 pm

This pertains to the USA only. Some years ago there was a bill introduced in congress to legalize home distilling, following the wine/beer making model. I think it was sponsored by a congressman from Wisconsin. I know I have read the text of the bill somewhere on the internet but can't find it now.

If we could locate the text of that bill we might be able to find another congressman to re-introduce it, or maybe just start a mail campaign by sending a copy to to every legislator with a suggestion that they sponsor or support passage.

Of course, being somewhat cynical on the matter, I doubt they'd pay any attention unless the letter also contained a large campaign donation. That is just the way it works. They are all c**k s*****g mother f*****g money grubbing b******s.

Was I too harsh?

Post by **Bull Rider** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:09 pm

Here's a link to an older post. The sponsor was Bart Stupak, a representative from Michigan. Stupak resigned in January 2011.

http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... 49&t=13785

Post by **blanikdog** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:15 pm

Gotta love these youngins and their enthusiasm, but a warning to any new distillers. Home distilling is legal in very few countries. Don't get sucked in by lawyer bullshit.

sparkmaster · Post by **sparkmaster** » Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:54 pm

blanikdog wrote:Gotta love these youngins and their enthusiasm, but a warning to any new distillers. Home distilling is legal in very few countries. Don't get sucked in by lawyer bullshit.

I read a few years back that the only country in the world in which home distillers can make what they wish is New Zealand. How true I do not know, but fed laws trump everything and they say it is illegal, unless you get a permit file plans (complete distillery site plans . expected through put , and of course are ready to be inspected. Even if you want to make meths for your oil burner or auto or whatever you can run on it, they are allowed to come by and set a spell, and check you out. W/O an invitation. Makeing enough beer to sell or even wine is hard, but hooch is easy (comparatively) so Hooch will never be allowed. :-( When I used to make my own suds It was so labour intensive (and tasty) it was a way to keep trim. I could never make it as fast as I could drink it. And my friends and I made beers like DinkleAcker and Becks, things that benefitted from aging. The best beer I made was a 21 gallon batch of pilsner malts and an ale yeast (john Bull,(hopped), 6-8 cans plus 5-6 pounds invert sugar and Hallentauer hops) it fermented for 7 days anerobically, then we primed and let it set 6 months, we left a few cases in the back of a closet for 2 years. Absolutely the best we ever brewed. Made over 9 cases I believe. But that is not a lot of brew for 3 adult guys who could swill the stuff. It was dry and light and not kickapoo joy juice. Then I gave awy all my brewery supplies cause I was married and had an apartment, not a house :-(

if they ever legalize it I will ferment again and distill. I will not loose my house for the stuff. I will try making some of the Grand Marnier knock offs from the recipes shown here using brandy and distilled (street legal) vodka.

ttfn

Home Distiller

Yes it is legal

Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal

Re: Yes it is legal