Another Brew-On-Premise Article

[redoubt]

As a recent switcher from buyer to producer, I am following this with interest. It cost me more in taxes then ingredients to brew, in a fully regulated environment. And the brew for you??? Are they insured properly? Are they registered with CFIA? Why can't I have 20 people pitch yeast and have a bigger brew on premise? I'm not whining just curious where the line is drawn.

Holy crap. Craft brew on premise? Fan-fucking-tastic idea, Jeff!

If that's a direction you wanted to take with BAB, I don't see why you couldn't do so. Unless there are or will be volume limits for U-vints, though I'm sure you could come up with a clever way around this in your sleep.

You know this already so forgive me for repeating common knowledge but it helps for us all to be on the same page. As I understand it, U-vint customers have to do three things. First, obviously, they have to pay for the beer/wine juice. Second, they have to sprinkle the yeast. Third, and I suspect most importantly as the law is concerned, they have to sign a winery card. I always thought these cards were just for organizational purposes, but they're much more than that. They're essentially a signed statement declaring that the product belongs to the customer, not the store, which is just storage and babysitting service for the customer's product. This card is one of the keys to the whole operation and is what inspectors look for when they visit brew on premise stores. I'd bet it has a lot to do with the differing requirements between U-vints and breweries/wineries in terms of licensing, insurance, etc. U-vints simply aren't responsible for the finished product in the same way a brewery or winery is. The U-vint customer is as responsible for the product they produce in store as one of us homebrewers is for what he produces at home.

So... As long as you made sure BAB brew-on-premise customers satisfied all three conditions -- pay, sprinkle, sign -- I don't see why you couldn't do this. There may be licensing issues since you also sell the final fermented product but maybe something as simple as walling off an area with a U-brew fermenter or two and/or having separate U-brew hours (for example) would satisfy the lawman.

We all know I ain't no lawyer, so take this with a few dozen boxes of salt! I wonder where the line in the sand is drawn on these sorts of issues, too. All of our liquor laws seem so damn arbitrary. You can make but not sell, sell but not serve samples, sell but only on the other side of the door, etc. Utter nonsense. I wonder if the changing laws will clarify things or just make them sillier. In any case, you could probably make a case to the appropriate authorities for a BAB craft brew on premise if you wanted to do that sort of thing. There's no doubt a market for it, so trailblaze away!

-Kirsten

[redoubt]

maybe something as simple as walling off an area with a U-brew fermenter or two and/or having separate U-brew hours (for example) would satisfy the lawman.

Come to think of it, isn't this pretty much exactly how the Pharmasave in Kingston managed to swing having a pharmacy and a U-vint together? IIRC, the on-site winery is in a separate building but purchases and all that are still done in the main store. Surely, if a pharmacy can have a U-vint, a microbrewery can have a U-brew! That is, if the laws make any real sense...

-Kirsten

[bluenose]

As long as you made sure BAB brew-on-premise customers satisfied all three conditions -- pay, sprinkle, sign -- I don't see why you couldn't do this. There may be licensing issues since you also sell the final fermented product but maybe something as simple as walling off an area with a U-brew fermenter or two and/or having separate U-brew hours (for example) would satisfy the lawman.

Interesting take on it... maybe have separate locations for storing/fermenting the u-vint batches and retail batches

[GuingesRock]

Not wanting to put a damper on things, but it sounds like a bit of a headache for a small profit margin.

All those people, not showing up when they say they will, thinking that because you are making $10 off them, they own you, your premises, and your subservience.

There are lots of nice people in the world, but the one or two that aren't, can really piss a person off.

With a customer buying beer it's less of an involvement, the contractual arrangement is much simpler.

There's a mnemonic KISS. It stands for "Keep It Simple Stupid". Good one for dealing with people in general. They aren't all like the Brewnosers out there.

[redoubt]

Not wanting to put a damper on things, but it sounds like a bit of a headache for a small profit margin.

Let's fight about it!

I'm just pondering aloud, trying to figure out where the legal limits would be (and why) if a microbrewer wanted to offer such a service. Mostly just using BAB as an example since Jeff brought it up and he's easy.

I have no doubt that it would be an organizational nightmare. But I do wonder if the profit margins really would be too low to justify it. How much does a brewer pay in taxes to produce and sell, say, 500L? If he U-brewed that 500L, he'd save all that tax and save on packaging -- both the time and bottles/kegs required, which he could possibly make money on -- as well as gaining a U-brew fee. Sounds to me like a bigger profit margin than selling the finished product. I don't run my own business though, let alone a brewery, so I'm open to being completely and entirely wrong about all of this.

-Kirsten

[GAM]

I'd avoid public participation at all cost, (BrewNosers not included) but 100l of fresh wort available at 2:00pm show up or shut up would work for me.

Its not beer till you pitch.

Sandy

[GuingesRock]

I think Kirsten wants a job/partnership at BAB running this. I can just see it happening. She's a dab hand with the forklift.

[mr x]

Steve Haynes was on CBC news tonight. Not happy about the proposed .75 cents per litre tax, nor can I imagine is anyone else.

[LeafMan66_67]

Steve Haynes was on CBC news tonight. Not happy about the proposed .75 cents per litre tax, nor can I imagine is anyone else.

Heard that highlight it missed the story. Seems like a fairly steep tax grab, considering they are already collecting HST on the service fee that uvints charge. And with NSLC making increased profits, I find it highly unlikely that this will cut into their sales.

I heard a doctor recently stating that u-vints will cause an increase in binge drinking.

Just when you think things are moving forward - BaM!

[GAM]

Poorly edited at best.

An interview with Q&A with Russ (best spoken of the group I've hears) or one of the others.

Sandy

[mr x]

Our Chief Medical Officer has no intention of moving forward. It's crazed rhetoric that is governed by revenue, not health. His e-cigarette babble was equally bizarre....

[mr x]

U-vint proposed tax would mean $17.50 price jump per kit

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.2528251" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The owners of Nova Scotia's U-vint stores have until Monday to tell the provincial government what they think of a new tax the government is considering.

Nova Scotia's U-vints may have to charge $0.75 per litre if the Nova Scotia government adopts the P.E.I. regulations currently under consideration.

On a typical 23-litre kit that amounts to an extra $17.50 in tax — that’s on top of the $7.50 per cent HST for a total of $25 extra in tax.

P.E.I. is the only province to levy a tax and the proposal came as a surprise to some in Nova Scotia’s U-vint business where there are only 16 to 20 stores.

Stephen Haynes, owner of the chain of seven Noble Grape stores that sell wine kits and provides on-site winemaking, said the tax would hurt his business.

“We felt quite confident at the time that there wouldn’t be prohibitive taxes just the way the government — when they were in opposition — was so for this industry,” said Haynes.

“We’re hopeful that we can come up with some solutions with the government.”

Haynes says he recently spent $100,000 dollars upgrading his operations, which charge customers $50 to rent space to make wine.

Nova Scotia Finance Minister Diana Whalen was non-committal on the tax.

“Whether or not we put a levy on it is really going to depend upon the kind of consultations and what we hear back from stakeholders,” she said.

Haynes said when he and others in the industry sit down with Whalen later this month, they'll explain to her why they feel this tax will be damaging to their business.

The government plans to move quickly, with new U-vint regulations to be passed in the spring.

The right to make beer and wine in so-called U-vint stores flared up a year ago, when the province's Crown-owned liquor agency sought a court order to prevent the owners of Wine Kitz Halifax and Water 'n' Wine in New Glasgow from producing wine and beer in their shops.

The previous New Democratic government later ordered the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation to drop the case in the face of a growing public backlash.

[CorneliusAlphonse]

http://www.dianawhalen.com/contact/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HPhunter]

Let them pay the same tax as producers. It only seems fair.
Equal playing field.

[canuck]

Let them pay the same tax as producers. It only seems fair.
Equal playing field.

Jeff, just curious on how much you pay on Provincial tax in NS. For me here in NB, I pay a shade more than 27% tax when I sell a keg. It sucks that the freakin' tax is more the the raw materials that go into the actual product. Just curious how much diffe
rent it is in NS.

[HPhunter]

NS
50 cents plus tax per liter.
Plus federal tax Too drunk to remember.
Equals 60cent per Liter!
You???

[CorneliusAlphonse]

I disagree jeff. Let's try to lower the tax you pay per litre rather than charge these guys the same and try to lower it all at once.

[GuingesRock]

Liam, I think you were talking about Shane's idea. In the UK, small real ale breweries get large tax breaks: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... ewers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Are these places in competition with, or any kind of a threat to, small breweries? I suspect no more than a shop selling home brew supplies, but I don't know.

I wonder if there might be more mileage to what Kirsten was saying than I gave her credit for. The public tend to be better humoured when they are engaging in a hobby they enjoy. Also I'm a bit scared of Kirsten

Not wanting to put a damper on things, but it sounds like a bit of a headache for a small profit margin.

Let's fight about it!

-Kirsten

I was thinking that people might pay more to brew real craft beer under the guidance of a master brewer and in a real brewery, rather than brewing a kit in the back room of a shop.

[mr x]

I disagree jeff. Let's try to lower the tax you pay per litre rather than charge these guys the same and try to lower it all at once.

Agreed. I think a harmonization is the better option. Lower taxes on small beer producers, and put a smaller increase on the uvints. Also limit store size and density, as well as look as how wine is taxed for comparison.

[GAM]

The BOP is all wine as far as I have seen.

I mentioned in another thread that If a group could use BAB or other brew system and take home to pitch we could make a day of it, have some fun and play with some big boy toys.

Sandy

[chalmers]

And that's not even beer at that point, so shouldn't have to pay any excise or other taxes.
Though I believe the last time we tried a big group brew on a commercial system, there were some "issues".

[Jimmy]

Adding any type of a tax-per-liter would really suck. Becky does the BOP with Ross, and right now it costs her about $150 for 23 liters of wine (and that's not one of the expensive kits). If they apply the $.75 per liter charge, she'd be approaching $170 to make 23 liters of wine..

[GAM]

And that's not even beer at that point, so shouldn't have to pay any excise or other taxes.
Though I believe the last time we tried a big group brew on a commercial system, there were some "issues".

The tax thing is what I was poking at but it wasn't obvious in my post.

Issues are part of the adventure.

Sandy

[HPhunter]

It all boils down to the facts
-that everybody wants a deal.
-nobody likes to pay taxes
-taxes very rarely go down

I'm all for less taxes. But that's not going to fly.
As for the "it's not beer until the customer pitches the yeast" I asked if I could do this and the NSLC person I spoke with said "No" but couldn't explain we're the cutoff was. Said they would be making some rules soon. I would have never guessed they would have taxed it that high though.

[Jimmy]

BOP is already being taxed on the service fee, and that's all it should be, as it's the only extra thing you're getting out of BOP.