Moonshiners on Discovery Channel

[Odin]

Couldn't our underlying unhapiness with this show be that it actually depicts "us" as others tend to want to see us? If I would tell (I don't, but as an example) to 10 people I do moonshining, 9 will without hesitation ask me about health hazzards. The govarment really got that message accross. We know we do better. Not just better than how we are depicted, but better than many to most legal distillers. We take pride, but don't get any.

Odin.

[eddieb]

C'mon guys,

We should all be able to have a bit of a laugh at these stereotypes - particularly if it means laughing at ourselves.

Sure...I laugh at myself all the time. Laugh at my redneck friends even more. But it's a "laughing with them" not laughing at them. Just don't care for the holier than thou attitude. I have many interests...old cars, motorcycles, old radios, woodworking, all kinds of stuff. Almost without exception, when somebody does a show or documentary about the hobby, either they are portraying the hobby wrong or they are portraying the "wrong" segment of the hobby. Truth is, a lot of the time the show is pretty darn accurate overall. just has a little drama added for TV. There is alot more to the Shinin' world than the stovetop/hotplate bokakob boys. The stovetop moonshiners have more in common with the Appalachian moonshiner than they probably want to admit. Certainly owe a lot of credit to that group. Much of the mass consumed moonshine is made in a big pot boiler. Probably in less than sterile conditions. Made from cracked corn. Possibly creek water. Probably in plastic jugs. Probably by somebody that is alot like Tim. May not be the more glorified side of Shinin' but is certainly accurate.

[rad14701]

eddieb, I think you've missed the point... Sure, we know that slather-assed crap happens out in the woods, but we aren't here to condone that at all... We are here to promote hobby scale home distillation, emphasizing on safety and not selling... I'm not sure what part of that you aren't getting... We aren't going to glorify Tim and Tickle, or Popcorn Sutton, or any of the other supposed legends... They never had the same ideals or goals as we have here...

Times have changed considerably since the whiskey rebellion and prohibition and this forum is not about selling at all so there is no comparison to be made... I'm not in this hobby because I enjoy breaking the law, I'm in it because I believe that distilling spirits for my own personal consumption should not be illegal and scoff at that portion of the current laws... The fact that it is still illegal is what we are trying to get changed by showing that we conduct ourselves in a totally different manner than those illegally profiting from sales of questionably safe moonshine... Let Johnny Law chase after those selling hastily made moonshine and leave the rest of us alone... If you want something different then perhaps this isn't the place for you to hang out...

[eddieb]

eddieb, I think you've missed the point... Sure, we know that slather-assed crap happens out in the woods, but we aren't here to condone that at all... We are here to promote hobby scale home distillation, emphasizing on safety and not selling... I'm not sure what part of that you aren't getting... We aren't going to glorify Tim and Tickle, or Popcorn Sutton, or any of the other supposed legends... They never had the same ideals or goals as we have here...

Times have changed considerably since the whiskey rebellion and prohibition and this forum is not about selling at all so there is no comparison to be made... I'm not in this hobby because I enjoy breaking the law, I'm in it because I believe that distilling spirits for my own personal consumption should not be illegal and scoff at that portion of the current laws... The fact that it is still illegal is what we are trying to get changed by showing that we conduct ourselves in a totally different manner than those illegally profiting from sales of questionably safe moonshine... Let Johnny Law chase after those selling hastily made moonshine and leave the rest of us alone... If you want something different then perhaps this isn't the place for you to hang out...

Rad, some of my comments were tongue in cheek, but I'd rather you not try to decide for me where I should hang out. I hate to tell you, but the law doesn't differentiate between you and Tim, Popcorn, me or any other maker of illegal alcohol. You just aren't worth their time to pursue. It's still just as illegal (fine and punishment may be less severe) to make it for your personal consumption. I guess it's in the way you can justify your actions. Here's the skinny..You ferment mash, you distill it. You drink it. WITHOUT paying taxes or permits or fees. In essence, selling it to yourself and cheating the Government from their precious taxes and fees. Stealing from Govco in their eyes. Not only that, it hurts the man who is trying to make a go of a Microdistillery and is paying the proper fees, permits and taxes. I can't see home distilling being ever legalized. Too muck lost revenue. Main problem is it is just too easy to do and too easy (cheap) to get started doing it. I mean really....you would have little stove top stills for sale in every Walmart in the USA. Ronco would be selling a "set it and forget it" still. Little kits for every type likker out there. Would cripple the likker business. They have big lobbyists....ain't gonna happen. For every proof gallon you made in your kitchen, Govco loses 14.50 in tax revenue. I wish it would happen too. Just don't see how it ever could. I also don't see how a group of internet forum members actively engaged in breaking the laws contributes to revising the laws. Generally, you don't get laws changed by actively breaking said laws.

[blind drunk]

I hate to tell you, but the law doesn't differentiate between you and Tim, Popcorn, me or any other maker of illegal alcohol. You just aren't worth their time to pursue.

Popcorn sold, it was worth their time to pursue him. Flagrantly breaking the law is one thing 'cause you force johnny law's hand to act legally. Making a couple of liters of artsy likker is quite another thing. At least I hope so ...

Don't you think?

[Braz]

Would cripple the likker business.

I'd argue that point. The legalizing of home beer and wine making did not seem to hurt the beer or wine business one whit. In fact, it likely enhanced it by fostering the establishment of micro breweries and boutique wineries.

[LWTCS]

Perceived losses would actually be made up ten fold in sales tax revenues levied from supplies and so forth.
The issue is that the appointed players will not be as relavent and not adequately greased.
Goberment ain't gonna loose at all.

[rad14701]

eddieb, I'm calling bullshit... I think you're either delusional, misinformed, or trolling... At this point it should be obvious that your best option is to drop your participation in this topic and move on because your views aren't in line with the majority of the membership here and I doubt you're going to sway anyone into seeing things your way... If you see what we are attempting to do here as hopeless then don't waste your time here...

[eddieb]

eddieb, I'm calling bullshit... I think you're either delusional, misinformed, or trolling... At this point it should be obvious that your best option is to drop your participation in this topic and move on because your views aren't in line with the majority of the membership here and I doubt you're going to sway anyone into seeing things your way... If you see what we are attempting to do here as hopeless then don't waste your time here...

Calling bullshit on what? I'm not trolling. Sorry my views don't fall lockstep with yours. I'm not trying to sway anyone. Get off me. I'm not doing anything to offend you or anybody else. If you want to have a logical debate, that's fine but don't start calling me names. You know nothing about me or very little about my views. If all you want is supporting views, I don't think you will get far. BTW...I am not opposed to the legalization of home distillation. Support it actually. Perhaps my views on what lawmakers would base any action on differ from yours.

[eddieb]

Perceived losses would actually be made up ten fold in sales tax revenues levied from supplies and so forth.
The issue is that the appointed players will not be as relavent and not adequately greased.
Goberment ain't gonna loose at all.

That's a good point. It is probably the only angle that would sell it. But the revenues you speak of may just possibly kill the idea. It takes a lot of tax on yeast, sugar or whatever to make up for even ONE micro-distillery license fee. It's all about the revenue. Always has been. Always will be.

[eddieb]

I hate to tell you, but the law doesn't differentiate between you and Tim, Popcorn, me or any other maker of illegal alcohol. You just aren't worth their time to pursue.

Popcorn sold, it was worth their time to pursue him. Flagrantly breaking the law is one thing 'cause you force johnny law's hand to act legally. Making a couple of liters of artsy likker is quite another thing. At least I hope so ...

Don't you think?

Again, it's a money thing. Also as you say, blatant disregard for the law. Popcorn had two 500 gallon pots and one 1000 gallon pot. Firing them with unleaded gas if I remember right. He also had hundreds of gallons of hooch jugged up ready to go and hundreds more documented by surveilence (Yes, plastic jugs). So to say he was blatant was an understatement. Sad thing is, on the show we are talking about, they talk about how his widow has apparently partnered with some folks and got a permit. Sad. After the Discovery show, he probably got the backing to go legal. He probably had the money himself as much as he was selling. I guess the lure of higher profits kept him making it illegally.

[mtdew_mn]

I also don't see how a group of internet forum members actively engaged in breaking the laws contributes to revising the laws. Generally, you don't get laws changed by actively breaking said laws.

I'm not sure I agree with this point. Often it does take some lawbreaking to get laws to change. Think back to the civil rights movement and prohibition. If everyone was careful to follow prohibition, alcohol probably would be illegal today.

But, yeah.. at the end of the day, I agree with Rad and others that shows like this aren't helping the cause. However eddieb does have a point that we are breaking many of the same laws as Popcorn did. But I think its like speeding. It is breaking the law to go 1 mph over the limit as it is to go 30 mph over.. That doesn't mean a 1 mph speeder can't criticize a 30 mph speeder from going too fast.

Though I think its a disservice to the community to try to force everyone to speak the party line. Lets allow people to voice their opinions and others chime in without accusations of being a troll. If everyone gives respectful answers, even if they don't agree with the poster, trolls won't bother posting.

[eddieb]

Would cripple the likker business.

I'd argue that point. The legalizing of home beer and wine making did not seem to hurt the beer or wine business one whit. In fact, it likely enhanced it by fostering the establishment of micro breweries and boutique wineries.

You ever make beer? It's a whole different ballgame. Much more equipment, harder and slower to do and harder to produce a good product. Even harder to make beer that compares with what some of the big companies sell. The light beers etc., are actually almost impossible to duplicate on a consistent basis. Almost complete opposite of distillation. You can actually make better stuff very cheaply most of the time. Plus Distillation has such a goverment imposed stigma about poison, blindness, nerve damage etc., the sale is gonna be a tough one. First thing everybody says when you say you make your own stuff is..."is it safe? Will I go blind?" The goverment was very effective with the propaganda.

[eddieb]

I also don't see how a group of internet forum members actively engaged in breaking the laws contributes to revising the laws. Generally, you don't get laws changed by actively breaking said laws.

I'm not sure I agree with this point. Often it does take some lawbreaking to get laws to change. Think back to the civil rights movement and prohibition. If everyone was careful to follow prohibition, alcohol probably would be illegal today.

But, yeah.. at the end of the day, I agree with Rad and others that shows like this aren't helping the cause. However eddieb does have a point that we are breaking many of the same laws as Popcorn did. But I think its like speeding. It is breaking the law to go 1 mph over the limit as it is to go 30 mph over.. That doesn't mean a 1 mph speeder can't criticize a 30 mph speeder from going too fast.

Though I think its a disservice to the community to try to force everyone to speak the party line. Lets allow people to voice their opinions and others chime in without accusations of being a troll. If everyone gives respectful answers, even if they don't agree with the poster, trolls won't bother posting.

Prohibition was lifted to get us out of The Great Depression and to pay off the huge debt that was incured during the Depression, Not to give us a freedom back. Civil disobedience is one way of forcing change. Not sure if what we do fall under that or not. Most of the time civil disobedience prevails when it calls for a "greater good." Godd point on the speeder analogy. But you don't get those speeding laws changed by everybody speeding. No, I don't think this show helps the cause. I look at it as entertainment. The good side is, since the show aired, I have seen more interest in shinin' than ever. More people mean a bigger force. So, in the long run, the show may actually help.

[Washashore]

The fact that it is still illegal is what we are trying to get changed by showing that we conduct ourselves in a totally different manner than those illegally profiting from sales of questionably safe moonshine... Let Johnny Law chase after those selling hastily made moonshine and leave the rest of us alone... If you want something different then perhaps this isn't the place for you to hang out...

Would cripple the likker business.

I'd argue that point. The legalizing of home beer and wine making did not seem to hurt the beer or wine business one whit. In fact, it likely enhanced it by fostering the establishment of micro breweries and boutique wineries.

[Washashore]

You ever make beer? It's a whole different ballgame. Much more equipment, harder and slower to do and harder to produce a good product. Even harder to make beer that compares with what some of the big companies sell. The light beers etc., are actually almost impossible to duplicate on a consistent basis. Almost complete opposite of distillation. You can actually make better stuff very cheaply most of the time. Plus Distillation has such a goverment imposed stigma about poison, blindness, nerve damage etc., the sale is gonna be a tough one. First thing everybody says when you say you make your own stuff is..."is it safe? Will I go blind?" The goverment was very effective with the propaganda.

If the government was worried about lost revenue or safety, they would require a more easily achievable license for home distilling with more realistic fees. Much like a hunter safety class is required to obtain a hunting license, the same could be so for home-distilling. The government brings in MILLIONS of dollars from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, permits, and taxes on goods.

[mtdew_mn]

The good side is, since the show aired, I have seen more interest in shinin' than ever. More people mean a bigger force. So, in the long run, the show may actually help.

You might be right.. "There is no such thing as bad publicity." Maybe the number of people who saw the show and were curious to learn more and find the truth is more than those people who are even more convinced that it should stay illegal. Its hard to say.

Though we want to make sure that people looking into home distilling don't come across as thinking that what they see on that show is what we are all about..

Perhaps the show could even be capitalized on.. and something written where it compares the the moonshiners and the home distillers..

[LWTCS]

We regular folks will likely be spending 100% of everything we make any way.......The mechanism in place at present just helps the principal players focus or direct the stream toward their direction......

[blind drunk]

It's not the government per se, it's Big Likker and their the lobbyists The government could conceivably take in more money if they let a hundred yeast bloom.

[kurgan]

Again, it's a money thing. Also as you say, blatant disregard for the law. Popcorn had two 500 gallon pots and one 1000 gallon pot. Firing them with unleaded gas if I remember right. He also had hundreds of gallons of hooch jugged up ready to go and hundreds more documented by surveilence (Yes, plastic jugs). So to say he was blatant was an understatement. Sad thing is, on the show we are talking about, they talk about how his widow has apparently partnered with some folks and got a permit. Sad. After the Discovery show, he probably got the backing to go legal. He probably had the money himself as much as he was selling. I guess the lure of higher profits kept him making it illegally.

Popcorn lined up the partnership with Jamey Grosser before he died. Why he chose Grosser, I do not know. Hank Williams Jr. (along with Grosser's LLC) fronted the money for necessary permits. He didn't get shit after the discovery show because he is dead. His widow must have been the one to provide the footage from Hutchinson's documentary, so she may have got a little something from discovery (I don't really blame her, go for it). I think the footage may have been from the first version of that film "This Is The Last Dam Run Of Likker I'm Ever Gonna Make", which Hutchinson also had a hand in. Did Popcorn have the money to go legal before he got busted in 1998, maybe, maybe not. You never knew the whole truth with him, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story". The whole deal with Grosser had been in the works for a long time, but I don't think it started as far back as 98. Yes, I think it's safe to say the lure of high profits did keep him doing it illegally for all those years.

[eddieb]

Again, it's a money thing. Also as you say, blatant disregard for the law. Popcorn had two 500 gallon pots and one 1000 gallon pot. Firing them with unleaded gas if I remember right. He also had hundreds of gallons of hooch jugged up ready to go and hundreds more documented by surveilence (Yes, plastic jugs). So to say he was blatant was an understatement. Sad thing is, on the show we are talking about, they talk about how his widow has apparently partnered with some folks and got a permit. Sad. After the Discovery show, he probably got the backing to go legal. He probably had the money himself as much as he was selling. I guess the lure of higher profits kept him making it illegally.

Popcorn lined up the partnership with Jamey Grosser before he died. Why he chose Grosser, I do not know. Hank Williams Jr. (along with Grosser's LLC) fronted the money for necessary permits. He didn't get shit after the discovery show because he is dead. His widow must have been the one to provide the footage from Hutchinson's documentary, so she may have got a little something from discovery (I don't really blame her, go for it). I think the footage may have been from the first version of that film "This Is The Last Dam Run Of Likker I'm Ever Gonna Make", which Hutchinson also had a hand in. Did Popcorn have the money to go legal before he got busted in 1998, maybe, maybe not. You never knew the whole truth with him, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story". The whole deal with Grosser had been in the works for a long time, but I don't think it started as far back as 98. Yes, I think it's safe to say the lure of high profits did keep him doing it illegally for all those years.

I thought Hank Jr. put up the money for the permits etc. after Popcorn was dead.

[goinbroke2]

Eddie, I fully support your right to say what you want. I just disagree with a lot of it.
"Prohibition was lifted to get us out of The Great Depression and to pay off the huge debt that was incured during the Depression"I completely disagree with that statement. Does not make your opinion wrong, I just disagree with it.

"You ever make beer? It's a whole different ballgame. Much more equipment, harder and slower to do and harder to produce a good product. Even harder to make beer that compares with what some of the big companies sell. The light beers etc., are actually almost impossible to duplicate on a consistent basis. i] Again I have and I disagree.

"Plus Distillation has such a goverment imposed stigma about poison, blindness, nerve damage etc., the sale is gonna be a tough one. First thing everybody says when you say you make your own stuff is..."is it safe? Will I go blind?" The goverment was very effective with the propaganda."
This I agree as to the amount of propaganda however if it was legalized it would quickly change as the gov would no longer be trying to demonise it.
As an example, there are gov ads out right now about "tax free" cigs. It is straight out of the 1920's. "Untaxed cig's have harmfull things which will kill you!!!" Really? They are cigs that are either stolen or smuggled into Canada from the States and have no taxes paid on them...but they are COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE CIGS!!! How do they become "harmfull" just because there is no taxes paid on them or they're sold in a clear plastic bag?

"eddieb wrote:
Would cripple the likker business"
This is your opinion...but the fact of the matter is, there are places where it was once illegal and then made legal and the results are opposite to what you state.
An example is NZ. After legalisation revenue actually grew due to increased interest in "specialty" or "craft" style liquor. Another example would be when they legalised beer/wine. A whole cottage industry developed to supply the new demand for various products.

There is ample proof that most people look at beer/wine and say "I can do that" then buy all the gear, make a batch or two, are not satisfied with the results or realise the amount of work involved and sell all their stuff for penny's on the dollar. Check any "buyer-flyer" as proof of this. The exact same thing would happen with distilling. "I can do that"! would be the cry and EVERYBODY would be buying tabletop stills (which are available here now, btw). After a short period of time, used stills would be on e-bay etc because...didn't turn out like I wanted/too much work/etc/etc.

My whole point of this is, your contention that no harm is being done by continually portraying moonshining/distilling as all single toothed hillbillies in the woods is wrong. Perhaps you should look into some foodie sites that have wrote columns on this. It will open your eyes. On these it is showing "the NEW face" of moonshining. Normally it's well-to-do people who want to have their own drink, not unlike showing off your own wine/etc. Or it's doctors/lawyers etc that want a hobby.
As an aside, who do you think buys Harley's? It took them a while to slowly lose the "hells angels" stigma. Now the average Harley rider is 45+ and making over $50,000 a year. Not exactly the "hoodlum" stereotype most imagined huh?
Home distilling would be the same, where "my grandma made this" or "Yeah, dad makes his own" the same as beer is viewed today.

This show is a "get-rich-quick" scheme based on stereotyping. Nothing more, nothing less. Because of that, I'm against it.
As I said before, what's next a show about blacks stealing tv's? Showing them running down a street with a gettoblaster on their shoulder?

If this show actually depicted a guy teaching his kid how to safely make a batch of his family's recipe whisky it would flop.
If it were technical, showing why you do cuts and how to do them, how to age and the million other things you need to know..there would be very little interest, might not flop but without the fake drama, little interest. (although I did watch how a golfball was made...never get that time back)LOL!

[eddieb]

Eddie, I fully support your right to say what you want. I just disagree with a lot of it.
"Prohibition was lifted to get us out of The Great Depression and to pay off the huge debt that was incured during the Depression"I completely disagree with that statement. Does not make your opinion wrong, I just disagree with it.

"You ever make beer? It's a whole different ballgame. Much more equipment, harder and slower to do and harder to produce a good product. Even harder to make beer that compares with what some of the big companies sell. The light beers etc., are actually almost impossible to duplicate on a consistent basis. i] Again I have and I disagree.

"Plus Distillation has such a goverment imposed stigma about poison, blindness, nerve damage etc., the sale is gonna be a tough one. First thing everybody says when you say you make your own stuff is..."is it safe? Will I go blind?" The goverment was very effective with the propaganda."
This I agree as to the amount of propaganda however if it was legalized it would quickly change as the gov would no longer be trying to demonise it.
As an example, there are gov ads out right now about "tax free" cigs. It is straight out of the 1920's. "Untaxed cig's have harmfull things which will kill you!!!" Really? They are cigs that are either stolen or smuggled into Canada from the States and have no taxes paid on them...but they are COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE CIGS!!! How do they become "harmfull" just because there is no taxes paid on them or they're sold in a clear plastic bag?

"eddieb wrote:
Would cripple the likker business"
This is your opinion...but the fact of the matter is, there are places where it was once illegal and then made legal and the results are opposite to what you state.
An example is NZ. After legalisation revenue actually grew due to increased interest in "specialty" or "craft" style liquor. Another example would be when they legalised beer/wine. A whole cottage industry developed to supply the new demand for various products.

There is ample proof that most people look at beer/wine and say "I can do that" then buy all the gear, make a batch or two, are not satisfied with the results or realise the amount of work involved and sell all their stuff for penny's on the dollar. Check any "buyer-flyer" as proof of this. The exact same thing would happen with distilling. "I can do that"! would be the cry and EVERYBODY would be buying tabletop stills (which are available here now, btw). After a short period of time, used stills would be on e-bay etc because...didn't turn out like I wanted/too much work/etc/etc.

My whole point of this is, your contention that no harm is being done by continually portraying moonshining/distilling as all single toothed hillbillies in the woods is wrong. Perhaps you should look into some foodie sites that have wrote columns on this. It will open your eyes. On these it is showing "the NEW face" of moonshining. Normally it's well-to-do people who want to have their own drink, not unlike showing off your own wine/etc. Or it's doctors/lawyers etc that want a hobby.
As an aside, who do you think buys Harley's? It took them a while to slowly lose the "hells angels" stigma. Now the average Harley rider is 45+ and making over $50,000 a year. Not exactly the "hoodlum" stereotype most imagined huh?
Home distilling would be the same, where "my grandma made this" or "Yeah, dad makes his own" the same as beer is viewed today.

This show is a "get-rich-quick" scheme based on stereotyping. Nothing more, nothing less. Because of that, I'm against it.
As I said before, what's next a show about blacks stealing tv's? Showing them running down a street with a gettoblaster on their shoulder?

If this show actually depicted a guy teaching his kid how to safely make a batch of his family's recipe whisky it would flop.
If it were technical, showing why you do cuts and how to do them, how to age and the million other things you need to know..there would be very little interest, might not flop but without the fake drama, little interest. (although I did watch how a golfball was made...never get that time back)LOL!

WoW! Somebody actually can argue a point without calling me names or telling me to leave! THANK YOU! I guess most everything comes down to "opinion". Different people look at the same set of facts and their mind comes up with a different answer. The world would be a boring place if that were any different.
Back to the debate...
*Show me evidence that the lifting of prohibition was anything other than a way to generate revenue.
*The beer hobby is growing, but as of yet isn't a speck on the radar when it comes to the volume sold by the big players. The beer hobby and the distillation are apples to oranges. If the beer hobby hurts the big players, the laws will be changed. You can bet your bottom dollar on it. Lobbyists my friend. Money. Lots of it. Unbelieveabke amounts of it. THAT is what drives our laws.
*I never said that "no harm" is being done. I said that while not promoting the hobby or legalization, moonshining has it's roots in Appalachia. Some like to think all these people are stupid, toothless and broke. Couldn't be further from the truth. I think it is the fantasy of some here that home distillers are "well to do". but I think they are just a cross section of all types of people. Nothing I have ever seen makes me think differently. Not sure why anyone would even think that to be the case. Maybe in a certain internet forum, the annual income may be above the mean, but not as a rule...I don't think. I mean...you can build a still for less that 150 bucks. Most people like likker. Most like saving money. Many like DIY projects. So...Why would this be attractive to only the well to do?
*Harley has never lost it's appeal to the "biker gang" type. The RUBS (Rich Urban Biker) as the old school bikers call them (see even Hell's Angel's have stereotyping and class warfare) bought into the whole "Ride to Live, Live to Ride" "Freedom of the Road" ad campaign that HD targeted them with. They went out and bought a new HD on their home equity loan or robbed their 401k. Now, the markets crashed, the 401k is gone. Many banks have cut off their equity lines and the bikes are being repossessed in droves and the used bike market is flooded. The home distillation hobby will have the same flood of people if ever legalized, but many will fall by the wayside. The people that really like the hobby will stay and the fad chasers will move on.

[eddieb]

The Beer & Wine Revenue Act was signed by Franklin Roosevelt on March 22, 1933. No fan of prohibition, President Roosevelt signed the Act in order to levy a federal tax on alcoholic beverages to raise federal revenue to get our nation out of the Great Depression. Later that year, in December 1933, the 21st Amendment ending Prohibition, was enacted.

This was BEFORE the 21st Amendment. It was ALL about money. Let's get the tax thing in order first......

[rad14701]

Prohibition was repealed because, well, it simply didn't work... People were determined to enjoy alcohol one way or another, regardless of the law... The government was spending far too much money enforcing prohibition while at the same time not making any new revenues to offset that expense... Putting systems in place before repealing prohibition was simply preemptive governmental administration... Prohibition was about as effective as pissing up a rope...

And with regard to current laws I can guarantee that there are more Americans participating in hobby scale home distillation, for personal consumption not profit, than there are legal distilleries in the US... And that probably holds true for virtually every country where home distillation is deemed illegal by those countries governments...

[eddieb]

Prohibition was repealed because, well, it simply didn't work... People were determined to enjoy alcohol one way or another, regardless of the law... The government was spending far too much money enforcing prohibition while at the same time not making any new revenues to offset that expense... Putting systems in place before repealing prohibition was simply preemptive governmental administration... Prohibition was about as effective as pissing up a rope...

And with regard to current laws I can guarantee that there are more Americans participating in hobby scale home distillation, for personal consumption not profit, than there are legal distilleries in the US... And that probably holds true for virtually every country where home distillation is deemed illegal by those countries governments...

Using that logic, do you think pot, meth, cocaine and the entire laundry list of drugs should be legalized because "people are determined to enjoy them?" No kind of prohibition works. No kind of prohibition is profitable. If people want to do something, they do it. Sometimes it makes it even more inviting. I think the Federal Government has zero business in our daily lives. The States and local laws should rule. It's all about money. Plain and simple.

[Tater]

Reckin that's why fellas that use to chase after my kin fokes were called revenuers. After the governments revenue tax

[eddieb]

Reckin that's why fellas that use to chase after my kin fokes were called revenuers. After the governments revenue tax

xactly.

[eddieb]

Just for info purposes. The STATE fee for a microdistillery in South Carolina is 5600.00 every two years, plus application fees blah blah. next step up is a honest to goodness big time distillery... 50,000.00. That is a LOT of Revenue for the States. We ain't even talking about the Feds. The Microdistillery can produce up to 125000 cases of booze a year. That is 12 750ml bottles x 125000k. That is 15000 proof gallons at 100 proof. 15000x14.50=217000 in Federal tax on the likker made in ONE Microdistillery if it maxed out the production. If you want to get home distillation legalized, you are gonna have to find a way to replace the lost revenue. The needs and desires of the people only matter if the math works. The example I gave is for a MICROdistillery. revenue generated by a big name distiller is unbelievable. Every gallon that home distillers make is lost revenue. I don't have a good answer. Taxing yeast and sugar ain't gonna cut it. In this day of looking to cut the deficit and debt and increasing costs of the handout programs, you are gonna have to show how legalizing home distillation makes more money for the Fed.

[Husker]

That is 12 750ml bottles x 125000k. That is 15000 proof gallons at 100 proof. 15000x14.50=217000 in.

Nice numbers, but if you want to go to that detail, at least do it right (right makes your point stronger).

12*750ml*125000 gives you 1.125 million Liters of 40%. So that is 450,000 L of 100% ethanol, or 900,000 proof liters. 900KL is 237754.85 gallons.

So, it is 237755 * 13.50 (not $14.50 proof gallon), or $3,209,692.50 of fed excise taxes per year.

I also believe you have to have a BOND that covers 100% of your expected production, BEFORE you produce it. So, if you were going to make that 125k cases, then you would have to have a 3.2 million dollar bond to cover the taxes. Gets even worse, if you are planning on aging for 5 years. Multiply that bond times 5, prior to being able to ship product out.

It is a fukin RIGGED game.

H.