Where is it legal now??

[goinbroke2]

Well I just found out/ heard that it is legal to distill for personal consumption in Missouri.
1) Is this actually true?
2) Any other places legal now?
3) If it is, why and how did whoever do it, get it legalized??

[olddog]

New Zealand

[goinbroke2]

Yeah, I know NZ. I got a PM from a guy in Missouri and have been looking into it.
From "Coppermoonshinestills" site it lists Alaska, Missouri, and Nevada as not requiring a license.

[Hawke]

The biggest problem here, is that although the states have decided to look the other way, it is still a federal crime to distill or own an aparatus to distill. Same as with the medicinal weed use.

[Husker]

I do not believe it is illegal to own a still in the US. However, it is illegal to run the thing, unless it is properly serialized, and it has been properly licensed, and taxes have been paid in advance on the expected production of said still.

However, simple 'ownership' is not illegal. However, if you do have ownership of a still, and get caught with untaxed booze, then the still and ANY mash you are producing will be used to show manufacture.

H.

[Dnderhead]

Missourians over 21 may manufacture up to 100 gallons of any liquor per year for personal use, without any further state limitation, state taxation, or state license.[16] (Obtaining a permit from the Federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau and meeting other requirements under federal law . federal permit is still is required for private citizens to manufacture distilled alcohol - but not wine or beer - for personal use.

[Husker]

I figured there was a 'catch'. Note, you can NOT use one of the 'free' fuel licensing permits, since those specifically list fuel only, and also list regs on how the fuel must be denatured.

So it sounds like you could get setup to produce, fill out the paperwork, and get a fed license and pay your pre-taxes (obtain a tax bond), and be set to produce home spirit for NON sale in MO.

[Husker]

Would be nice to get fed law changed to remove the unconstitutional stipulation it is putting into law, trumping the states rights on this issue.. Would be nice to see the fed law re-done, to allow it to be the way it is, unless the law of the state specifically allowed legal distlllation. Thus, state law would be the law of the land, and fed law would only kick in, if the state did not have it's own legal requirements.

H.

[tolona]

With the new law in Missouri the Feds aint going to bother you. They got better things to do catching big operations in other states. Keep the gate locked to keep out snoopers and game wardens.

[goinbroke2]

So it sounds like you could get setup to produce, fill out the paperwork, and get a fed license and pay your pre-taxes (obtain a tax bond), and be set to produce home spirit for NON sale in MO.

I wonder how much the pre-taxes are?

Get a permit, pay taxes and your legal? Unless the taxes equalled what you would pay anyway, I would gladly go that way and be legal. (I think most others would too)

I find this interesting because I've been going through the channels to get legal but here in NS there is no provisions for micro-distilleries. (and I don't have a million bucks to start up a rival to seagrams ) Perhaps shifting to working on politicians to get it legalized and using this as a precedent might be another idea.

I realize the laws of another country probably wouldn't hold any weight and Canada is less open to entreprenours, but anything would help. I'd love to do this without having to hide, I would really rather be legal even if I do have to pay a few dollars to the taxman.

Anybody know of anyone currently working on the laws in Canada? I know in BC they are trying to legalize [the thing that can't be mentioned], how about distilling?

[Ugly]

GB2,
I'm somewhat aware of the political situation in Canada and I can tell you that barring an election of the Marijuana Party who does have this in their platform (this is a REAL political party in Canada with a reference used in context to alcohol, don't censor me) we aren't going to see changes to the provisions of the excise act that enables us to still legally. The pressure from the large distillers and brewers is enormous - they fight every single measure to the last tooth and nail and have whole sub companies devoted to fighting things like U Brews and legislation that makes any home production of anything easier.

We suck .

[Dnderhead]

what I came up with is federal tax ---------13.50 $ proof gal. state tax very at a low of 1.50$ to a high of 16.50$

[Husker]

Those are the raw taxes dunder, but the hoops and paperwork you have to jump through to be able to do it 'legally', is still daunting. It took UJ a year or more IIRC. Then, since this is a direct tax the govt takes (do ppl here believe that 'income' tax it taken by the fed govt, they are grossly wrong, but that is another thread), and the taxes are at production time, the govt makes you draw up a bond on X gallons, and then pay monthly or quarterly on your production, and if your 'stock' gets too large, you have to take out a larger bond (i.e. prepaid taxes).

All in all, it is a HELL of a lot of hoops. Now, if they had something, like you could buy 100 proof gallon of stamps (at say $600 for personal use ONLY), and then produce, and bring in the hooch to some place (even the sheriff office), to have it officially stamped, and be able to do this without the onerous paperwork and overhead of a commercial distillery, THEN I think there would be MANY on this board (and others), who would fork over a few tax dollars to avoid the illegal act. If this were possible, then things like insurance would pay out (they WILL NEVER pay if you have a fire now, because you are doing 'illegal' acts). Also, you avoid arrest.

Yes, paying taxes on something freely being done, is MUCH against many folks here on the boards also. That is their personal belief. I fall somewhat on the fence. I certainly think that having this taxed at all (for HOME USE ONLY), is something which simply should be stopped, BUT I would be willing to meet 1/2 way there at least for a while, to be able to come out of the bushes (or be able to open the garage door without worry.)

It took a leftist like jimma carter to legalize beer/wine 'home use' production. Possibly the leftist we have put up to 1600 penn ave will legalize distillation for 'home use'. We can certainly hope (and try to push bills through). Time will tell.

H.

[Dnderhead]

according to US constitution (10amendment?) it is up to the states to make there own laws-----but--------- sense alcohol can be transported between states,, feds say they can tax and regulate.?????????????????????????

[xbrehw]

according to US constitution (10amendment?) it is up to the states to make there own laws-----but--------- sense alcohol can be transported between states,, feds say they can tax and regulate.?????????????????????????

ah yes, the ol' "assumption of interstate commerce" trick, they use that an awefull lot.

[Zippo]

From talking to a local law enforcement friend of mine, In FL Its never been Illegal to own a still, As long as its for personal use only. And he said that after 15 years of law enforcement in FL he has never once even heard of any onw getting busted for having a still. But I guess we could get away with saying that we use it to distill water in case of Hurricanes.

[Husker]

From talking to a local law enforcement friend of mine, In FL Its never been Illegal to own a still, As long as its for personal use only.

I am not not up on the laws of FL, but I bet there is part of that statement which is simply untrue. Keep in mind, that police are not the final source of information about laws, it is the courts that are.

I believe ownership of a still in the US is legal. However, running any wash through it to produce booze, is illegal without having proper TTB licensing.

H.

[HookLine]

I will bet that federal law trumps state law on this issue.

[gsmedia]

In Australia the distillation of alcohol is illegal, however, A friend of a friend of mine was talking with a state prosecutor or similar, and his exact words were:
"We don't care what the f#*k you put in your still, just don't sell it and don't blow yourself up."

[HookLine]

I will bet that we hobby distillers are literally at the bottom of the list of law enforcement's priorities in Australia.

[blanikdog]

Agreed Hook. Certainly in a small town anyway.

blanik

[Husker]

It may be on the 'bottom of the list' in most places. However, if you get a neighbor complain to authorities about it (or an X-wife, X-gf, etc), then no matter how much they want not to waste their time looking you up, they certainly will. As long as you are safe, and do not sell, and do not burn down your house/shed, it probably is the complaining neighbor that is the most to fear in this hobby (in most countries at least).

NO one should kid themselves about it. In most places it IS illegal to do. If someone WANTS to, they can pursue you with charges. It is best to keep what you are doing quiet, especially in mixed company, or when others in public can overhear what is being said.

H.

[HookLine]

No argument there, Husker. Certainly wasn't suggesting people should be careless and blatant about their hobby. Just saying that the police are not interested unless they are forced to be, they gotta gazillion much more important things they have to do.

[snuffy]

I'd strongly advise ignoring any legal advice or interpretation of the law on the Colonel's web sit. http://www.coppermoonshinestills.com/id53.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

This sort of nonsense is pure grief for anybody that tries it. Likewise, I'm now disregarding what's he's saying about the state laws. He's basically saying he's ignorant of the situation and he's dealing in double-talk.

Dunno what the facts are for the various states, but roll-your-own-lawyering is a game for the reckless. I'm a layman, not a lawyer, but I do know that laws mean what the courts have interpreted them to mean. Reading the legislation without checking on the case law is a losing proposition.

This is particularly true of Constitutional law like the Commerce Clause. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_clause" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

The long term solution is reforming the federal law. It could be done with a little organizing, some savvy and a lot of time.

[Hillbilly Rebel]

gsmedia wrote:

"We don't care what the f#*k you put in your still, just don't sell it and don't blow yourself up."

Sounds like a great by line for a T shirt, but a bad philosophy by which to live. Unfortunately, such statements are personal statements and are not official statements. To be honest, much of enforcement comes down to how bad do they want to get you. Is there a recent event that brings personal distilling into the public limelight? Such as when bad liquor poisoned people in Atlanta; or when Popcorn's stills caught on fire; or maybe a fatal accident where someone was intoxicated and moonshine was found or at least blamed. Both law enforcement and prosecutors tend to respond to publicity, either negative, (what laws they are not enforcing), or positive, (what law they could be enforcing that will put them into a positive light, such as when running for office or when trying to divert attention from other things). They also tend to focus resources on a particular individual when the individual is perceived as rubbing their illegal activities in law enforcement's face or when their illegal activities are considered an affront to the law enforcement community. Popcorn Sutton's arrest and prosecution was a good example of this. It was his still catching on fire, his state charges and the resultant publicity that got the feds interested in investigating him. I would think that they knew about his activities for years but didn't think it was worth their efforts until all the publicity hit the press.

Unless you are one of the people on this site who are legalling distilling, keep a low profile, don't tell, don't sell.

[Husker]

HR, thanks for the new sig

H.

[Hillbilly Rebel]

Husker,You are welcome and I am honored.

While home distilling is not legal in Michigan, (I think), things may be looking up in the next couple of years. This is not meant to be a political ad or endorsement, but United States Representative Bart Stupak is rumored to be a possible candidate for Michigan Governor in 2010. Stupak is 57, a democrat, former Michigan Trooper and Attorney. Why this would be good news is that Stupak is the representative that introduced House Bill 3249 in 2001, (the 107th Congress, First Session). H.R. 3249 was the bill that attempted to amend the U.S. Internal Revenue Code to make home distilling legal in the United States the same as wine and beer. It failed but if Stupak thought it was good enough idea to put his name on it in Congress, as a Governor may be he would push it on the state level with better results. If any of the readers are from Michigan, maybe they can give more insight?

[absinthe]

we do have it pretty easy in AUS not as easy as in NZ lol but you can still go down to your local brew shop and by a still that is of "illegal" 25 litre capacity (it is illegal to OWN a still in AUS with a boiler with a capacity of more than 5 ltrs and it is also illegal to run said still for anything other than essential oils and/or water) along side yeasts distilling books and flavouring essences. but i suppose the same could be said for apparatus used to smoke illegal substances..

[gsmedia]

Sounds like a great by line for a T shirt

You think there's a market for these shirts?

I agree with your point - Unless your name's Jim Beam, probably best not to tell the world about the still in your back yard.

[MuleKicker]

Has anyone here been caught/prosecuted, or know someone who has for home distillation? My wife is scared about me being caught and wants me to shut my operation down. I have too much invested and am finally getting the hang of this (not to mention love doing it). I need to put her at ease somehow. I know it aint legal but i aint hurtin no one and dont want to give this hobby up. I dont really know what the max penalty for small time use is but i couldnt see more than a fine and a "dont do it again" unless neg attention is drawn to me, i think they just dont care.