<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Texas to Roll Out New Volume Limits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/08/17/texas-to-roll-out-new-volume-limits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/08/17/texas-to-roll-out-new-volume-limits/</link>
	<description>Untangling the complex world of wine direct shipping and compliance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:37:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wine of Month Club</title>
		<link>http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/08/17/texas-to-roll-out-new-volume-limits/comment-page-1/#comment-184024</link>
		<dc:creator>Wine of Month Club</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:25:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/?p=428#comment-184024</guid>
		<description>I think when you get a state like Texas that isn&#039;t exactly wine friendly it is best to play it safe.  Would I ship a case to a consumer?  Sure.  A case a month, heck no that&#039;s asking for trouble....our 2 bottles per month is fine and that&#039;s all I can really worry about. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think when you get a state like Texas that isn&#039;t exactly wine friendly it is best to play it safe.  Would I ship a case to a consumer?  Sure.  A case a month, heck no that&#039;s asking for trouble&#8230;.our 2 bottles per month is fine and that&#039;s all I can really worry about. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Carroll</title>
		<link>http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/08/17/texas-to-roll-out-new-volume-limits/comment-page-1/#comment-182365</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Carroll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:59:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/?p=428#comment-182365</guid>
		<description>Mike,  
I agree that the wording of the analysis is a little confusing, as is some of the other language in the statute. But, if you take a closer look at the actual &lt;a href=&quot;&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;statute&lt;/a&gt; in this case, it says: &lt;blockquote&gt;The holder of a out-of-state winery direct shipper &#8217;s permit may not: deliver to the same consumer in this state more than nine gallons of wine within any calendar month or more than 36 gallons of wine within any 12-month period. &lt;/blockquote&gt;  
In other words, a direct shipper should neither deliver more than 9 gallons per calendar month NOR ship more than 36 gallons per year. This is consistent with conversations with the TABC as well, so I definitely would not ship 36 gallons all at once. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,<br />
I agree that the wording of the analysis is a little confusing, as is some of the other language in the statute. But, if you take a closer look at the actual <a href="" target="_blank">statute</a> in this case, it says:<br />
<blockquote>The holder of a out-of-state winery direct shipper &rsquo;s permit may not: deliver to the same consumer in this state more than nine gallons of wine within any calendar month or more than 36 gallons of wine within any 12-month period. </p></blockquote>
<p>In other words, a direct shipper should neither deliver more than 9 gallons per calendar month NOR ship more than 36 gallons per year. This is consistent with conversations with the TABC as well, so I definitely would not ship 36 gallons all at once. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
