Alcohol Excise Taxes Archives - ALCOHOL LAW ADVISOR

Alcohol Excise Taxes

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

by Alva C. Mather, Christine Dower and Michelle Draper | Dec 20, 2024 | Alcohol Excise Taxes, Enforcement, Licensing

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

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

by Alva C. Mather, Christine Dower and Michelle Draper | Sep 26, 2024 | Alcohol Excise Taxes, Audits, Commercial Agreements, Craft Beverage Modernization Act, Licensing

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

TTB Ramps Up Tax Audits and Enforcement

by Alva C. Mather, Christine Dower and Michelle Draper | Mar 19, 2024 | Alcohol Excise Taxes, Enforcement, Licensing

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 comprised of 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 comprised of 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 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 failure to maintain adequate records, among other violations. In 2023, the TTB resolved these violations by accepting offer-in-compromise (OIC) settlement payments from the targeted industry members, collectively, to the tune of approximately $850,000.

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

Failure to timely file and/or pay taxes and reports. These failures accounted for nearly 70% of all OIC violations. 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. We saw a significant increase in tax-related enforcement due to violations from acquisitions completed in the first half of 2023 which impacted eligibility of the reduced tax rates for the entity as a new member [...]

Continue Reading

The Tax Implications of Purchasing Craft Producers in the First Half of 2024

by Alva C. Mather | Dec 19, 2023 | Alcohol Excise Taxes, Transactions

We have republished this August 2023 blog post ahead of the start of 2024.

If a large beverage company is considering purchasing or selling a craft beverage producer, it’s essential to understand how the craft producer may lose its earlier eligibility for reduced tax rates under the Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA) in the first half of a calendar year once it becomes a member of the purchaser’s larger controlled group.

The CBMA provides for certain reduced tax rates on the initial quantities of production and/or removal of beer, wine and spirits. More specifically, it permits a reduced rate of $16 per barrel of beer on the first six million barrels brewed and removed by a domestic brewer, a reduced rate of $2.70 per proof gallon on the first 100,000 proof gallons of distilled spirits removed from bond and different, but reduced, tax credits on domestically produced wine credits.

However, to protect against larger manufacturers unjustly benefiting from these reduced tax rates through ownership in different corporate entities, the CBMA made permanent certain controlled group rules. These rules apply the availability of the reduced rates across the overall quantity limitations associated with the greater corporate structure of controlled groups of distilled spirits plants, wine premises and breweries.

The industry has understood the application of these rules for several years. Yet, pursuant to 26 US Code § 1563, it is the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s (TTB) position that if a company (whether that be a corporation or an LLC) is a member of a controlled group of companies for more than six months (one-half) of any calendar year, that such member is then a component member of the controlled group for the entirety of the calendar year.

So, if a large beverage company purchases a smaller producer in the first two quarters of the year, the reduced tax rates the smaller producer took in the first six months prior to the acquisition may be forfeited based on the larger company’s rates of removal.

Consider this example:

Company A is a craft distiller. From January 1 to May 1 of any calendar year, it was eligible for and paid the reduced tax rate of $2.70 on its spirit removals under the CBMA.
Company B is a larger distiller. It exhausted its eligibility for the reduced rates within the first two weeks of the same calendar year.
If Company B were to purchase Company A on May 1, the two companies would be treated as members of the same controlled group from May 1 to the end of the year. Company A’s eligibility for the reduced rates it lawfully took for the first four months of the year would be forfeited and subjected to either the $13.34 or $13.50 per proof gallon rates for which the combined controlled group would have been eligible depending on the controlled group’s removals.
In other words, following a TTB audit, Company A would have underpaid its tax liability to TTB prior to its [...]

Continue Reading

TTB Issues Updated Guidance on Transfers of Beer Between Breweries Under Separate Ownership

by Alva C. Mather | Aug 28, 2023 | Alcohol Excise Taxes

On July 13, 2023, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) published Procedure Number 2023-1, providing brewers with updated guidance on the transfer of beer without tax payment between breweries not of the same ownership.

The Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 temporarily permitted the transfer of beer between breweries under different ownership without the payment of tax (previously, transfers of beer in bond were limited to breweries under the same ownership). TTB issued Procedure 2018-1 to provide brewers with guidance on how to effectuate these newly approved transfers; however, it stated it was effective only through December 31, 2019.

Although the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 made a brewer’s right to transfer beer without the payment of tax to a brewer of different ownership permanent, TTB did not update the Procedure issued in 2018. TTB informally communicated that brewers could continue to rely on Procedure 2018-1 even though it was no longer “effective,” but it has now published updated guidance on such transfers.

Recording and Reporting Transfers

As set forth in Procedure 2021-1, a shipping brewer must prepare an invoice covering the transfer. The invoice must show that the brewer transferred the beer without the payment of tax. It must also feature the following:

The name and address of the shipping brewer;
The date of shipment;
The name and address of the receiving brewer; and
For cases, the number and size of cases and the total barrels; for kegs, the number and size of kegs and the total barrels; for shipments in bulk containers, the type of container, the identity of the container and total barrels.

A shipping brewer should use the transfer invoice to prepare its required daily records and monthly Brewer’s Report of Operations (BROP) or Quarterly Brewer’s Report of Operations (QBROP). A receiving brewer should use the transfer invoice showing beer received from another brewery without the payment of tax in preparing its required daily records and the BROP or QBROP.

Permissible Containers and Labeling Requirements for Transferred Beer

Transfers of beer without the payment of tax may be made in a brewer’s packages or in bulk containers.

Beer transferred in a brewer’s packages from one brewery to another brewery under separate ownership must meet the marking, branding and labeling requirements set forth in 27 CFR § 25.141–25.143. Beer transferred in bulk containers (containers with a capacity larger than one barrel of 31 gallons) from one brewery to another brewery under separate ownership must meet the marking, branding and labeling requirements set forth in 27 CFR § 25.145.

Taking Advantage of Reduced Tax Rates for Transferred Beer

The CBMA establishes a reduced excise tax rate of $16 per barrel on the first 6,000,000 barrels of US-produced beer brewed by a brewer and removed during the calendar year. For brewers producing 2,000,000 barrels or less, an excise tax rate of $3.50 per barrel applies on the first 60,000 [...]

Continue Reading

The Tax Implications of Purchasing Craft Producers in the First Half of a Year

by Alva C. Mather | Aug 10, 2023 | Alcohol Excise Taxes, Transactions

Consider this example:

Company A is a craft distiller. From January 1 to May 1 of any calendar year, it was eligible for and paid the reduced tax rate of $2.70 on its spirit removals under the CBMA.
Company B is a larger distiller. It exhausted its eligibility for the reduced rates within the first two weeks of the same calendar year.
If Company B were to purchase Company A on May 1, the two companies would be treated as members of the same controlled group from May 1 to the end of the year. Company A’s eligibility for the reduced rates it lawfully took for the first four months of the year would be forfeited and subjected to either the $13.34 or $13.50 per proof gallon rates for which the combined controlled group would have been eligible depending on the controlled group’s removals.
In other words, following a TTB audit, Company A would have underpaid its tax liability to TTB prior to its acquisition by Company B and exceeded the quantity limitations for which the [...]

Continue Reading

2022 TTB Industry Circular 1: Consignment Sales

by Alva C. Mather | Jan 5, 2023 | Advertising and Marketing, Alcohol Excise Taxes, Import/Export, Legislation, Trade Practices, Transactions

Each year the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) issues “Industry Circulars” that apply statutory or regulatory requirements to a “specific circumstance or set of facts” or restate existing requirements. TTB also uses Industry Circulars to announce new statutory requirements or to discuss certain corrective actions. The last few years have been relatively quiet in terms of TTB Industry Circulars, with only seven released in the last three years. Industry Circulars are an incredibly useful tool for a range of industry members and can provide clarity and direction on complicated regulatory issues.

In 2022, TTB issued three Industry Circulars. The first, released March 4, 2022, provided clarity on TTB’s views on the Federal Alcohol Administration Act’s (FAA Act) consignment sales provisions. The second, released November 16, 2022, reminded industry members of certain advertising rules, as well as clarified how those rules apply in the world of social media advertising. The third and final Industry Circular, released December 29, 2022, provided guidance for distilled spirits plants and importers on how to calculate certain reduced or effective tax rates under the Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA).

As we gear up for 2023, the following is our take on how TTB’s guidance may be useful for you and your business.

Industry Circular 1: Consignment Sales

TTB issued its first Industry Circular of the year to clarify how it views extended payment terms under the consignment sales provisions of the FAA Act. The FAA Act makes it unlawful for an industry member (supplier or wholesaler) to sell, offer for sale, or contract to sell to any trade buyer (wholesaler or retailer), or for a trade buyer to purchase, offer to purchase or contract to purchase any products:

On consignment
Under conditional sale
With the privilege of return
On any basis other than a bona fide sale, or
Where any part of the sale involves, directly or indirectly, the acquisition by the industry member of other products from the trade buyer or the agreement to accept other products form the trade buyer.

See 27 USC § 205(d). Sales “on consignment” are arrangements where a trade buyer is under no obligation to pay for product until they have been sold by the trade buyer. See 27 CFR § 11.22.

This Industry Circular reminds industry members that although TTB generally prohibits consignment sales, the regulations do not specifically impose payment term limitations for sales between industry members and trade buyers. That does not mean, however, that all payment terms are “beyond scrutiny as potential sales on consignment.”

In particular, TTB advised that “in the absence of explicit terms that violate the consignment sale regulations, payment terms of up to 30 days are unlikely to constitute consignment sales.” Conversely, payment terms exceeding 30 days may invite scrutiny from TTB to determine whether those payment terms were “merely a subterfuge” to sell goods on consignment because the buyer is effectively under no obligation to pay for product until the trade buyer has sold [...]

Continue Reading

2022 TTB Industry Circular 2: Social Media Advertising

by Alva C. Mather | Jan 5, 2023 | Advertising and Marketing, Alcohol Excise Taxes, Import/Export, Legislation, Trade Practices, Transactions

Due to the uptick in alcohol advertisement on social media platforms, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) issued guidance on advertising via social media and how TTB’s rules on advertising generally apply in this new and important context, as summarized below.

TTB views an entire page or site as a single advertisement, so mandatory statements need only appear once on the page, but they should be conspicuous and readily apparent to the viewer.
- This includes Facebook, LinkedIn, your brand’s Instagram or YouTube, TikTok, etc.
On social networking sites where providing all the mandatory information may be difficult because of space restrictions, TTB allows you to provide a link to another webpage that contains the mandatory information.
- You must clearly name or mark it to indicate that the mandatory company and/or product information can be found by clicking the link.
- The link should take users directly to the mandatory information and not to a “general website” that would require additional action to find the information.
TTB also considers content created by another party that is reposted or “liked” by an industry member or other similar action that would cause the content to show up in the feed of their page followers to be “advertising” and therefore subject to the advertising rules.
Your brand’s Instagram, for example, is considered a single advertisement by TTB but if a photo or video is posted to a site and is not associated with a profile section that bears mandatory information about the product, the industry member must include the mandatory statements within the photos/videos themselves.
- Influencer marketing, for example, requires the same mandatory advertising statements that are required for industry members’ social media sites. This requirement may also be satisfied with the influencer including a clearly marked link to another website that contains all the mandatory information

SeeTTB Industry Circular 2022-2.

As a reminder, below are the basic TTB requirements for mandatory information that must appear on all alcohol advertisements:

Basics of Alcohol Advertising

TTB requires certain mandatory statements appear in advertising for a malt beverage, wine and distilled spirits products:

For malt beverages and distilled spirits: the name, city, and state OR the name and other contact information (phone number, website or email address) where the responsible advertiser may be contacted.
For wine: the name and address (city and state) of the permittee responsible for the advertisement (TTB has modernized the advertising rules for malt beverages and distilled spirits but has not yet finalized modernization of wine advertising rules).
For all commodities: the class to which the product belongs, corresponding with the information shown on the approved label.
For distilled spirits only: the alcohol content presented as a percentage of alcohol by volume (the same alcohol content that appears on the label of the distilled spirits you are advertising) and, if needed, the percentage of neutral spirits and the name of the commodity.

There are several [...]

Continue Reading

TTB Industry Circular 3: Calculating Tax Rates and Tax Credits on Imported Distilled Spirits

by Alva C. Mather | Jan 5, 2023 | Advertising and Marketing, Alcohol Excise Taxes, Import/Export, Legislation, Trade Practices, Transactions

In the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s (TTB) final Industry Circular of the year, they provided DSPs guidance on how to calculate effective tax rates for distilled spirits products eligible for the Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA) reduced tax rates, as well as providing importers with guidance on calculating and using effective tax rates or standard effective tax rates (SETRs) for imported products that are eligible for CBMA tax benefits. This Industry Circular supersedes Industry Circular 2018-4. This 2022 iteration essentially restates the procedures for DSPs calculating effective tax rates for distilled spirits products subject to CBMA reduced tax rates, but updates guidance for importers on how to calculate and use effective tax rates or SETRs for imported products that are eligible for CBMA tax benefits.

Because the guidance for DSPs on calculating effective tax rates remains essentially unchanged, we summarize the updated guidance for importers set forth in the Industry Circular below:

The Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 transferred responsibility for administering the CBMA tax benefits for imported alcohol from US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to the US Department of the Treasury (Treasury) beginning with products entered for consumption in the US on or after January 1, 2023. That responsibility was then delegated by the Treasury to TTB.

Generally, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (IRC) imposes a tax of $13.50 per proof gallon on distilled spirits produced or imported into the U.S. See 26 USC § 5001(a)(1). However, reduced tax rates of $2.70 and $13.34 per proof gallon may be available under certain circumstances. Id. at § 5001(c). Section 5010 of the IRC allows certain credits against the tax imposed in Section 5001 on each proof gallon of alcohol in a distilled spirits product derived from eligible wine or from eligible flavors to the extent the eligible flavors do not exceed 2.5 percent of the finished product on a proof gallon basis (5010 credits).

An effective tax rate for an imported distilled spirits product is the tax rate applicable to the product after subtracting allowable 5010 credits. TTB must approve an effective tax each time a distilled spirits product containing eligible wine or eligible flavors is imported into the US. The procedure for securing approval of an effective tax rate is located in 27 CFR § 27.76.

An SETR for an imported distilled spirits product is established under 27 CFR § 27.77 based on the least quantity and lowest alcohol content of eligible wine or eligible flavors used in the manufacture of the distilled spirits products. TTB must also approve an SETR for distilled spirits in accordance with the procedure set forth in 27 CFR § 27.77.

Beginning January 1, 2023, importers who want to take advantage of CBMA tax benefits must pay the full tax rate to CBP and then submit a claim to TTB for a refund of their claimed benefits. TTB advises importers to follow the procedures set forth in 27 CFR § 27.76 to establish effective tax [...]

Continue Reading

Legal Considerations for Ready-to-Drink Cocktails

by Alva C. Mather | Jan 21, 2022 | Advertising and Marketing, Alcohol Excise Taxes, Distribution, Legislation, Trade Practices

The ready-to-drink cocktail or “RTD” category has exploded in recent years, and it’s occupied by more than merely craft distillers familiar with a carefully made cocktail. Brewers, distillers and even vintners have joined in, capitalizing on consumers’ desires for pre-made, no-fuss beverages. The most unexpected development to emerge with RTDs, however, is the legal complexity surrounding these products—something the industry is only beginning to understand.

Many of these legal issues stem from the fact that the legal regulatory landscape in most states has not caught up with the rapidly evolving alcohol industry. That leaves ready-to-drink cocktails, much like hard seltzers, as not having a specific class or type in certain states. Suppliers looking to enter the space have plentiful options when creating a new product, subject to what licenses the manufacturer holds and what those licenses allow them to produce.

Ready-to-drink cocktails can be spirits, malt, sugar, cider or wine-based. The base of the RTD product, nonetheless, is the key federal factor. It is also an important factor in most states when determining how the product will be treated from a legal perspective in the following areas:

Licensing needed to manufacture, distribute and sell the product;
Applicable franchise law (Do beer franchise laws apply to low-proof spirits?);
Available channels of distribution (Can you sell this product in grocery or convenience store?);
Excise tax rate charged to the manufacturer (Does state law have a lower excise tax rate for low ABV products?);
Labeling and advertising considerations (Is your product a modified traditional product?); and
Trade practice considerations/promotions (Do spirits laws apply?).

Industry members dabbling in a sphere that is relatively new to the market, state regulators and legislatures should be mindful of the patchwork of emerging regulations. Like hard seltzer, ready-to-drink cocktails are not a clearly defined category under existing alcohol law. Meanwhile, states are working quickly to legislate in this domain. New Jersey is considering a reduced alcoholic beverage tax rate on low-ABV liquors to align with the beer tax rate (NJ SB 701), Vermont is considering legislation to define “low alcohol spirits beverage” and treat it as a “vinous beverage” (VT HB 590) and the Washington State Senate has a bill pending that would establish a tax on low-proof beverages (WA SB 5049).

From franchise issues to excise tax, the issues discussed here are only a glimpse of the nuanced and complicated legal landscape that governs the distribution of RTDs and alcoholic beverages across all categories. Consulting with competent legal counsel with experience in the industry is crucial to ensuring compliance with applicable federal, state and local regulations.

BLOG EDITOR

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS