Pennsylvania, along with Massachusetts, remains one of the two remaining key states that wineries and consumers both hope to see open for direct wine shipping. The possibility that this could be the year for direct shipping coming to the Keystone State remains quite real, depending on what happens when lawmakers return to the capital in the fall to consider a number of wine bills still on the table.
In June, House Bill 121 sponsored by Representative Curt Sonney passed the House and was delivered to the Senate for consideration. This is the second year that a shipping bill successfully moved through one half of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. Last year a bill passed through the Senate, but was held up in the House where the issue of direct wine shipments became conflated with the effort to privatize the state’s liquor distribution system.
Despite the fact that both a House and Senate version of privatization included direct shipping provisions, it is expected that HB 121, or another separate bill, such as Senate Bill 101, will be considered independently of privatization in the fall. However, HB 121 does have some problematic provision. For instance, as currently written HB 121 would require direct shippers to impose both a 6% sales tax on all wines as well as the state’s “Johnstown Flood” tax of 18% on top of the retail price of the wine. Such a tax burden could make the direct shipment channel prohibitive for many consumers. Senate Bill 101 compromises on this issue and creates a more palatable 12% “direct wine shipment tax” instead of the full 18% Johnstown Flood tax.
Still, optimism is currently running high that some form of direct shipment will be enacted this years as indicated by a recent article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette that support for direct shipping has bi-partisan support. The Post-Gazette article also reported that direct wine shipments have the support of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB) as well as the influential United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1776, the union representing state liquor store employees.
It appears then that despite the ongoing struggle and battles over privatization, 2013 may very well be the year for wine shipments to Pennsylvania. We’ll monitor developments in Pennsylvania and report any significant movement on the various direct shipping bills as they occur.
Following North Dakota’s implementation of SB 2147 last week, which is explained in detail here, North Dakota announced that alcohol carriers FedEx and UPS have submitted applications and are now approved for shipping direct-to-consumer orders into North Dakota through the end of the year. SB 2147 updated the existing direct shipping law with the requirement that alcohol carrier and fulfillment logistics companies get “Alcohol Carrier” and “Logistics Shipper” licenses, respectively, in order for wine direct shippers to use their services for shipments to North Dakota consumers. FedEx and UPS therefore may now be used for wine direct shipping by North Dakota licensees who ship from their licensed premesis.
Wineries and Retailers licensed to sell and ship to North Dakota consumers should remember, however, that until logistics shippers (aka fulfillment warehouses) are licensed under SB 2147 requirements, only in-house fulfilled orders can be shipped. North Dakota periodically publishes a list of licensed entities on their website located here under the link title “List of Alcohol Licenses”.
FedEx will halt shipments effective November 1st, 2013. Please see this post for more information.
An update to North Dakota’s existing direct shipping law is going into effect today, August 1. Passed earlier this year, the new law maintains much of the existing law surrounding direct shipping, but also adds two new licenses, “Logistics Shipper License” and “Alcohol Carrier License”, in addition to new shipment reports.
Since April of 2010, fulfillment warehouses have been prohibited from shipping into the state on behalf of their winery or retailer clients. Effective today, a fulfillment warehouse can ship into the state once they apply and are approved for a “Logistics Shippers” license. Also effective today, an “Alcohol Carrier” license is required for any carriers shipping direct-to-consumer orders into the state; this includes common carriers such as FedEx and UPS. According to a recent newsletter sent out by North Dakota’s Office of the State Tax Commission,
“All direct shippers, logistics shippers, and alcohol carriers MUST be licensed BEFORE shipping… and must ensure the alcohol beverage is being shipped and delivered by licensed direct shippers, licensed logistics shippers and licensed alcohol carriers.”
No Logistics Shipper or Alcohol Carrier licenses have been issued as of yet. This means that, in effect, until carriers become licensed, direct shipments into North Dakota will not be compliant. Alcohol Carrier and Logistics Shipper licenses may take a week to be processed.
Licensees should also be aware of new shipment reports. The law now requires each of the three aforementioned types of licensees to electronically report shipments into the state. Each licensee must keep records and will be required to report the name and license number of the other licensees they used for each shipment. All licensees will be required to report the name and address of the recipient, the type and quantity of alcohol shipped, and tracking numbers. Direct shippers may file the existing annual electronic report for all 2013 shipments (“Schedule H” for sales of liquor and wine); the new direct shipper reporting requirements will go into effect beginning with the 2014 filing period. Alcohol Carriers and Logistics Shippers must report monthly. To ease the reporting burden, the Office of State Tax Commissioner publishes license names, numbers and addresses of licensees on their website.
ShipCompliant clients should note that we added “Carrier Prohibited” rules for FedEx and UPS to our database that will cause all shipments to North Dakota to be not compliant effective today. Once we receive confirmation that the carriers are licensed, we will remove each rule to allow shipments from approved Alcohol Carriers. Similarly, we applied a “Third Party Shipper Approval Required” rule to North Dakota that will cause shipments from non-approved fulfillment houses to fail compliance checks. Currently, no fulfillment houses are approved, but we will update this rule immediately after getting confirmation of each approved Logistics Shipper.
Alcohol Carrier License Application
Logistics Shipper License Application
Direct Shipping Permit Application
– $50/year Renewals will be sent out in November for the 2014 licensing period
All out-of-state wine and distilled spirits suppliers that sell to Kentucky distributors are now required to obtain an “Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier License” following the passage of SB 13 in April. Before this bill became effective on June 25, 2013, suppliers still needed to register their brands with the ABC prior to selling to Kentucky distributors but did not need to obtain a license. In an informative fact sheet, Kentucky explains SB 13 was “…a much needed ‘clean up’ of existing statutory problems and inconsistencies that existed in Kentucky law without changing or expanding existing license privileges.” By now, most current out-of-state wine and spirits suppliers have received an application packet from the Kentucky Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to apply for the new license, needed in order to continue selling to their Kentucky distributors.
SB 13, originally a bill to allow for sales of alcoholic beverages on election days, went through several amendments that also added changes to current law in regards to sampling allowances, elections of wet/dry location changes, and numerous updates to the alcoholic beverage licensing system. These added amendments included the creation of the Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier Licenses and accompanying fees:
- “Out-of-state Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier” – 50,000 gallons or more
produced imported annually. $1550/year or $3100/two years
- “Limited Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier” – 2001 to 49,999 gallons
produced imported annually. $260/year or $520/two years
- “Micro Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier” – 2000 gallons or less
produced imported annually. $10/year or $20/two years
If you are an out-of-state wine/spirits supplier that has not yet applied for the new license, or if you wish to begin selling to Kentucky distributors, fill out the application for an Out-of-State Distilled Spirits/Wine Producer/Supplier License and submit to the state, or contact the Kentucky ABC at (502) 564-4850 for further assistance.
UPDATE: License fees are based off of gallons imported into the state of Kentucky on an annual basis-not overall annual production.
Big changes regarding alcohol regulations continue to unfold for Arkansas this year with the passage of HB 1480, now Act 1105 (signed into law shortly Arkansas’ recent direct shipping bill). Act 1105 effectively changes the current wine and spirits brand registration process. Below is a table comparing the current requirements with the new requirements outlined in the Act, which will go into effect mid-August.
Of the changes outlined above, the biggest to note is the new fee requirement of $15 per “brand label” and “brand label size” and the implementation of annual renewals. The Act defines a “brand label” as “…the label carrying the distinctive design of a brand name of a spirituous liquor or vinous liquor”. In the past, Arkansas has not required additional sizes to be separately registered, nor did they explicitly require notification of new brand label extensions.
Also noteworthy is a new license requirement for wine and spirits suppliers. The $50 license will allow producers and importers to continue to sell to Arkansas wholesalers. Those already licensed as an “Arkansas Small Farm Winery” (needed to sell wine directly to Arkansas retailers) do not need to obtain additional licenses to sell to Arkansas distributors; their existing license will suffice.
Updated procedures are not public yet, however as time draws near the effective date, Arkansas will surely release information on their implementation process. Keep an eye on the ShipCompliant blog for updates.
On March 21, 2013, House Bill 1749 became Act 483, signifying its passage into law. Once enacted mid-August, the state of Arkansas will be added to the list of states that allow wineries to ship wine directly to consumers — but with many limitations.
Aside from the low cost of the license, the requirements under this new shipping law limit the abilities of licensed out-of-state wineries, arguably more than any other state that currently allows direct-to-consumer wine shipping. These limitations include requiring all shipments to be purchased in person at the winery, and affixing a special, ABC-provided, shipping label to each shipment.
For those wineries interested in navigating these one-of-a-kind requirements, Arkansas consumers will no doubt enjoy the ability to ship home a case of wine after visiting their favorite wineries. No license applications or information are available as of yet. Below is a breakdown of the licensing process, as well as the requirements and restrictions to operate, as stated in the new law:
Restrictions/Requirements (not limited to the following):
- Consumers must be physically present at the winery when purchasing the wine to be shipped to Arkansas consumers (onsite orders only)
- Every shipment must be affixed with a shipping label provided by the ABC, costing up to an additional $10 per label
- Collect and remit sales and excise tax, “as if the sale took place on the premises of a Arkansas Small Farm Winery”
- Ship only to a private residence – added difficulty, as shipments require an adult signature
- Customer volume limit of one case per customer, per quarter
- Registration with the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration Alcoholic Beverage Control Division (ABC), including a $25 annual fee.
- Provide the ABC with a copy of the winery’s home-state license as well as the winery’s TTB Federal Basic Permit