Please Oppose Alcohol Tax Increase!

Folks, to meet our state budget shortfalls, our legislators on Tuesday will unveil a plan to substantially increase taxes on alcoholic beverages. These taxes will be levied at the wholesale level and will substantially increase the price you pay at the store, bar, and restaurant. I have also heard that some of our most beloved distillers are threatening to move their operations out of Kentucky if these bills become law.

I would like to enlist your help in calling or emailing your legislator and voice opposition to HB 166 and HB 237 please.

As background:

Alcohol Tax - HB 166 (Nelson) would increase the alcoholic beverages wholesale tax from 11 percent to 20 percent. HB 237 (Collins) would provide for a 4 percent increase in the distilled spirits tax and a 148 percent(!) tax increase on malt beverages.

Unlike cigarettes, Kentucky's taxes on alcoholic beverages are already very high! Please let your elected officials know you oppose any additional tax increases that will hurt your already hurting pocketbook, ultimately decrease revenues, and put us out of step with our competitor states. Please contact your legislator ASAP this week and urge them to oppose increases on the alcoholic beverage tax. Call 1-800-372-7181 to leave a message for your legislators or click here http://kycc.harvestmanager.net/mx/hm.asp?id=home&t=emz/emzofficials1 to email your legislators. Thank you.

I don't have an opinion formed yet on the alcohol tax increase. It helps me if someone opposes a tax increase that he/she provide an alternative. The state must increase revenue and decrease costs at this point. Every particular tax increase is opposed by those who have to pay it (which is why taxes on rental cars at airports are so popular for municipalities--tax people who don't have a say).

Where should this revenue be made up?

I have also heard that some of our most beloved distillers are threatening to move their operations out of Kentucky if these bills become law.

How could this possibly be true? Moving a bourbon distillery out of Kentucky would essentially destroy a brand's reputation, tax increase or not, I'd think.

Liquor tax rates by state

Beer tax rates by state

Not sure what to make of it.

I don't have an opinion formed yet on the alcohol tax increase. It helps me if someone opposes a tax increase that he/she provide an alternative. The state must increase revenue and decrease costs at this point. Every particular tax increase is opposed by those who have to pay it (which is why taxes on rental cars at airports are so popular for municipalities--tax people who don't have a say).

Where should this revenue be made up?

Kentucky already has the seventh highest levied taxes on alcohol in the nation, while Kentucky taxes on cigarettes are some of the lowest in the nation.

Bourbon is a Kentucky core business and we should not endanger this business with a tax that could impact a global brand for Kentucky.

How could this possibly be true? Moving a bourbon distillery out of Kentucky would essentially destroy a brand's reputation, tax increase or not, I'd think.

I agree with you to a certain extent, but I think it is the case that people are more brand loyal than geographically loyal. Many producers have had success with production facilities in different locations (i.e. Chandon), even with geographic appellation requirements (of which Bourbon hasn't one). I also worry about some of the smaller distillers, micro-distillers, and microbreweries that these bills could harm or do in for good.

Where should this revenue be made up?

In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the professor character suggested a possibility of legislators paying for spending out of their own pockets. If it was that important, and all, they should be more than willing. I dont have an argument against that.

Somewhat more seriously (I was partially serious with the suggestion above), this is a sales tax, effectively. Actually, even worse, a production tax - which could encourage the producers to leave the state. Anyway, my point is between a targeted tax like this and raising the sales tax to 7% or whatever, I would prefer the general. More honest, in my opinion. In fact, other that for paying for the ABC, I see know reason that taxes on alcohol should be any different than any other product (excluding things that arent sales taxed).

Liquor tax rates by state

Beer tax rates by state

Not sure what to make of it.

Note, it is the 11% across the board wholesale tax (compounded by additional taxes) that sets us apart as having some of the highest alcohol taxes in the country already. One challenge is that lawmakers in dry counties naturally have no qualms about raising state taxes on alcohol.

I'm fine with the taxes on alcohol, tobacco and junk food all being raised. No one has to have them, they are simply indulgences.

I'm fine with the taxes on alcohol, tobacco and junk food all being raised. No one has to have them, they are simply indulgences.

I suggest a 20% restaurant tax. After all, no one has to eat out, its simply an indulgence. No one here would possibly object to that, right?

I'm fine with the taxes on alcohol, tobacco and junk food all being raised. No one has to have them, they are simply indulgences.

Would you consider shipping items overnight an indulgence? Would you be OK with UPS leaving the community?

Also, moderate consumption of alcohol has been proven to be part of a healthy lifestyle. So, would you consider medicine an indulgence, as well?

How could this possibly be true? Moving a bourbon distillery out of Kentucky would essentially destroy a brand's reputation, tax increase or not, I'd think.

I thought that it had to be made in Kentucky to be called Bourbon, as well being aged in new white oak barrel and have a certain percent of corn in the mix.

I'm fine with the taxes on alcohol, tobacco and junk food all being raised. No one has to have them, they are simply indulgences.

We should also all wear the same color clothes too, Im thinking grey or a drab green.

How could this possibly be true? Moving a bourbon distillery out of Kentucky would essentially destroy a brand's reputation, tax increase or not, I'd think.

I thought that it had to be made in Kentucky to be called Bourbon, as well being aged in new white oak barrel and have a certain percent of corn in the mix.

There is no geographical requirement to be called Bourbon.
Bourbon must be made of a grain mixture that is at least 51% corn.[1]
Bourbon must be distilled to no more than 160 (U.S.) proof (80% alcohol by volume).
Bourbon must be 100% natural (nothing other than water added to the mixture).
Bourbon must be aged in new, charred oak barrels.[1]
Bourbon may not be introduced to the barrel at higher than 125 proof (62.5% alcohol by volume).
Bourbon which meets the above requirements and has been aged for a minimum of two years, may (but is not required to) be called Straight Bourbon.[2]
Bourbon aged for a period less than four years must be labeled with the duration of its aging.

I thought that it had to be made in Kentucky to be called Bourbon, as well being aged in new white oak barrel and have a certain percent of corn in the mix.

I'm not sure that this is the case, I could be wrong but I think Jim Beam (ugh) has some production facilities that aren't in Kentucky. That said, any distillery who moved production out of Kentucky would surely suffer a big hit image-wise.

Kentucky, however is the only state that can call it's bourbon a singular appelation ie: "Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey." You're not a allowed to designate a "Wisconsin Straight Bourbon Whiskey," for example.