An End-of-Year Review of TTB Tax Audits and Enforcement

We have updated and republished this March 2024 blog post for a year-end summary.

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s (TTB) Office of Field Operations is responsible for ensuring industry members comply with the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, the Internal Revenue Code, and all related regulations. It is divided into three groups: the Trade Investigations Division (TID), the Tax Audit Division (TAD), and the Intelligence Division.

Many industry members are most familiar with the TID, as it is comprises investigators who are responsible for enforcing compliance with the trade practice laws and maintaining a level playing field. The TAD may be less familiar, however, as it is comprises auditors who are responsible for ensuring payments of excise taxes and compliance with the laws and regulations in a manner that protects revenue and prevents unlawful activity in the commodities that the TTB regulates. The TAD works with other areas of the TTB and has the resources to assist in the investigations of underpayment of tax or other financial areas that relate to the laws and regulations enforced by the TTB. The TAD also performs random audits, which means that every industry member is susceptible to an audit.

Over the past year, the TAD has issued a number of tax-related citations for failure to timely file and/or pay taxes, use of inappropriate tax rates, largely stemming from the improper use of reduced tax rates under the Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA) and late payments, among other violations. TTB routinely resolved these violations by accepting offer-in-compromise (OIC) settlement payments from the targeted industry members, collectively, to the tune of approximately $11,000,000 since the beginning of 2023.

Based on a review of the OICs, which are published on the TTB website, there were a wide range of tax-related violations over the past year, including:

  • Failure to timely file and/or pay taxes and reports. These failures accounted for nearly 70% of all OIC violations and have been a source of increasing scrutiny by TTB in 2024. In these common infringements, the permittee submits their reports or taxes late. The causes for a violation can range from (1) a simple late submission, even 1-2 days late; (2) filing the tax return without paying the taxes; (3) late payments due to processing times; or (4) a change in filing frequency. It is important to ensure that industry members’ reports are filed on time (even a day late is sufficient to warrant a violation) and that the taxes are paid promptly.
  • Use of inappropriate tax rates. There are two main categories of tax rate violations: (1) inappropriate use of reduced tax rates or credits, largely through improper use of the CBMA, and (2) inappropriate categorization of the product (commonly wine). An accurate determination of the product’s tax class is crucial to avoiding these violations, as is consideration of your eligibility (and continued eligibility) for CBMA-reduced rates or credits, including your status in a single taxpayer designation or a controlled group. We saw a significant increase in tax-related enforcement due to violations from [...]

    Continue Reading



The Value of Data and Artificial Intelligence in the Alcohol Industry

Members in the ever-evolving alcohol industry are leveraging data and artificial intelligence (AI) to drive innovation, enhance customer experiences, and optimize operations, all in an effort to increase efficiency and profitability in the market. There are several ways AI is being used to transform this industry:

  • Marketing and Insights

Data is highly valuable and can provide a better understanding of consumer behavior, allowing companies to design their consumer approach in a more targeted manner. Purchase and demographic data allow companies to clearly identify trends and performance to improve their products and the way they communicate with consumers. This information is sometimes shared between suppliers and wholesalers to identify the best market opportunities for particular products. AI can also help track customer orders and provide recommendations for future ordering processes.

This same information can be used in an analysis to highlight emerging customer preferences, providing data-based feedback to companies to help them plan their production schedules, purchases, marketing plans, and innovation projects.

  • Customer Interaction

Industry members are increasingly turning to chatbots to answer frequently asked questions, shorten customer wait times, and reduce company workload. Virtual programs are also being used to provide personalized recommendations. For example, Diageo’s What’s Your Whisky program analyzes responses to specific questions and uses the data to make a whisky recommendation that is likely to match customer preferences.

Regulatory Compliance

While it may seem counterintuitive to use AI in the alcohol industry due to the large volume of varying regulations and industry guidelines, it can still be a useful tool, particularly for complying with reporting and payment deadlines, which may reduce the burden on your compliance team. However, there are key considerations when using, selling, or purchasing these tools:

  • Data Protection

With US states increasingly passing more comprehensive data privacy laws, it is vital to work with your information technology team and data specialists to maintain the security and anonymity of the data your company uses. For your convenience, McDermott’s global privacy and cybersecurity team has developed an interactive map tracking the rapidly changing state consumer privacy laws.

  • Value

Data and AI undoubtedly have and will continue to have intrinsic value; however, it is difficult to quantify this value given the intricacies and varying degrees of use. It is important to consider how the value of data should be accounted for particularly when sharing, purchasing, or selling data or AI tools across tiers to avoid running afoul of tied house restrictions.

  • Transparency

Finally, once you have clear goals for using AI or data, make sure you understand the rules and responsibilities, particularly regarding the use of personally identifiable information. Always be transparent about your collection, use, and disclosure of AI or data, and ensure your privacy policies are up to date.

We expect to see more industry guidelines develop [...]

Continue Reading




Understanding How the New HSR Regime Impacts Your Business

During a recent webinar, Jon DubrowGreg HeltzerLisa Rumin, and Ryan Tisch provided a comprehensive introduction to the new Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) rules and their impact on the US premerger notification filing process. The program concluded with a Q&A moderated by Reese Poncia and featuring Ty Carson, a former Federal Trade Commission Premerger Notification Office lawyer, who shared his insider’s perspective from six years with the agency.

Access the recording and slides here.




Navigating the Buzz: How State Agencies Are Addressing Confusion Around Hemp and Low-Dose THC Beverages

Hemp and low-dose delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) beverages continue to flood the marketplace. Depending on the state, these products can be purchased in liquor stores, gas stations, grocery stores, bars, restaurants, and/or online. Despite their rise in popularity and presumed legality under the 2018 Farm Bill, some state agencies have recently made headlines with decisions to ban these products from being sold by alcohol-licensees in their states.

In this blog post, we walk through some recent examples of how different state alcohol agencies are handling the regulation of hemp and low-dose THC beverages.

Understanding Hemp and Low-Dose THC Beverages

As we mentioned in our previous blog post on this topic, hemp and low-dose THC beverages are nonalcoholic beverages infused with delta-9 THC derived from hemp, distinguishing them from traditional marijuana products. The 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp and its derivatives, provided they contain no more than 0.3% THC on a dry weight basis. This legal gray area has led to a surge in products that can deliver psychoactive effects while being marketed alongside or as alternatives to alcohol.

State-by-State Overview

The rise of hemp and low-dose THC beverages in the market has prompted state alcohol, health, agriculture, and cannabis agencies to review their regulatory frameworks regarding the sale and distribution of these products. Each state approaches the issue differently, which has resulted in a patchwork of regulations across the country.

  • California: The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) has taken a strict stance on hemp beverages containing THC. On October 3, 2024, the ABC issued an industry advisory stating that alcohol licensed businesses may not carry, market, offer for sale, or sell any industrial hemp products intended for human consumption (including food, beverages, and dietary supplements) that contain a detectable amount of total THC or other intoxicating cannabinoids. Any businesses that do not comply will subject the licensee to disciplinary action. To date, the ABC has already begun enforcement efforts. Recently, ABC agents have been reported visiting licensed locations across the state and seizing hundreds of products from several licensees, removing them from shelves and preventing them from being sold.
  • Massachusetts: On May 30, 2024, the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission (ABCC) issued an advisory in connection with the joint notice issued by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) and the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR) regarding the sale of beverages and food with hemp-derived cannabinoid extracts (CBD) or THC. The ABCC made clear that it is unlawful to manufacture and/or sell food or beverages containing CBD and/or THC. This applies to alcoholic and nonalcoholic beverages. Under the advisory, the ABCC directed that products need to be removed immediately, and anyone found in violation faces potential revocation or suspension of its license. The joint notice and advisory each make clear that they only apply to hemp-derived CBD and THC products and are separate from marijuana products regulated by the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission.
  • Minnesota: In contrast to California and Massachusetts, Minnesota explicitly [...]

    Continue Reading



Contract Manufacturing Versus an Alternating Proprietorship: What Is the Difference?

We frequently receive questions about the differences between contract brewing and alternating proprietorships, as well as questions concerning the key details the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) and other regulators will be looking for in either approving the proposed structure or, more importantly, during a company audit. Here we discuss the primary considerations for businesses utilizing other premises for production.

Alternating Proprietorship. The TTB allows two or more proprietors with different federal employer identification numbers (FEINs) to operate their respective businesses at the same premises by alternating and sharing space and/or equipment. How does it work? Typically, each proprietor obtains its own federal and state licenses and permits and operates and produces on its own behalf; these latter tasks include maintaining its own reports, records, excise tax payments, label approvals, and bond changes once approved. One proprietor is the “host,” and another is a “tenant” paying rent to the host. The rent can be a fixed monthly rate or based on equipment-hour usage. Other shared-cost arrangements are possible, as well.

During its review of an alternating proprietor’s application for a federal basic permit, the TTB will evaluate the written agreement between the alternating proprietor and the host. The TTB’s primary concern is to ensure the protection of each proprietor’s revenue. As such, the separation and movement of each proprietor’s products, payment of taxes, etc., will likely face the most scrutiny by TTB in an alternating proprietorship agreement. Accordingly, the alternating proprietorship agreement should expressly state that the alternating proprietor is responsible for its own production, recordkeeping, reporting, labeling, and payment of taxes. The agreement should provide that the alternating proprietor will pay the host directly for its floor space, equipment use, and, where applicable, personnel time and material consumed if the host is to provide additional services or materials. Payment to the host should not be based on volume rates (e.g., tons, gallons, or cases). The TTB reviews all of these factors to determine if the arrangement is a true alternating proprietorship and not a contract manufacturing relationship in disguise.

Entities engaging in alternating proprietorships frequently use a combination of direct employees and independent contractors to maintain their operations. In this highly specialized industry, independent contractors are in high demand due to their extensive knowledge and experience. Utilizing these workers enables producers to meet higher production targets with a shorter learning curve, while allowing direct employees to learn the process with limited downtime. However, it should be clear in the alternating proprietorship agreement that these employees are acting solely at the alternating proprietor’s direction, or they should be hired directly by the alternating proprietor.

Contract Manufacturing. Also known as co-packing, contract manufacturing is an operational methodology that differs from an alternating proprietorship. With contract packaging, a co-packer entity produces and/or packages product(s) on behalf of their customers, with all operations occurring under the co-packer’s license or permit and often under the customer’s trade name. In a co-packing situation, the co-packer also may be producing or packaging for [...]

Continue Reading




BLOG EDITOR

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES