As someone who was born and raised in Dover I love NH, however what is up with their treatment of beer? Anyone from the area knows about the Draconian restrictions on new beers in the state but just as in state craft brewing seems to be kind of, sort of getting ready to take off and at least make a bit of a dent in to the beer dominance of VT and ME in Northern New England, the NH legislature proposes this bill: http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20130113-NEWS-301130314 So much for Live Free or Die. My favorite portion of the article is the following item, "I would like to see the extra revenue go toward a badly stretched budget," said Weed, who prefers light thirst-quenching beer over heavy craft brews and says he's made his own beer. I call shenanigans on the "made his own beer" claim. This guy just seems like a total DB to me on top of being a complete moron considering he is only targeting craft beer with this tax increase and not wine or liqour. He claims he wants the extra tax revenue to go to alcohol treatment programs but how many alcoholics are serial craft beer drinkers? If anything the "heavy" craft beer tht Weed (D - Keene) is targeting seem to discourage binge drinking and alcoholism due to the fact that people can generally only drink so much craft beer before becoming uncomfortably full. Is there any hope for craft beer in NH or is the state government just to far in the pocket of the distributors, macro beer producers and state liquor revenue folks to allow this high growth industry the room to grow it deserves?
I moved from MA to NH a few years ago and the beer situation is my only complaint. I hop over the state line to Leary's in Newburyport. I've been hearing from beer reps that there is a real solid momentum for change.
It is pretty frustrating with some of the outdated laws that are still in affect as well. I live in Portsmouth and routinely drive to Kittery or Newburyport to take advantage of a much better selection. If they want to make more money off of me, offer me a better selection so I don't go out of state to buy it. Raising taxes will just make me drive over the border and stop spending any money on craft beer in NH.
While not related to the proposed tax increase (but certainly related to beer in NH), it was refreshing to read the editorial below in The Concord Monitor this morning: It would have been nice to see them also broach the subject of NH's absurdly-high label registration fees, which seems to be more of a true hindrance to craft growth in the state than censorship, but this is a nice start. Perhaps momentum for change is indeed developing. From: http://www.concordmonitor.com/home/3804867-95/beer-labels-state-hampshire Editorial: Stop beer label censorship Monday, January 14, 2013 (Published in print: Monday, January 14, 2013) In Maine, the battle was over Santa’s Butt Winter Porter; in New York and other states over Bad Frog beer and the frog’s extended middle froggy finger. In New Hampshire, Founders Breakfast Stout was banned because the label depicted a bibbed toddler in a high chair spooning something into his mouth. Among the many prohibitions in state law is a ban on any reference to minors, “pictorial or otherwise,” that might induce someone under 21 to drink. Santa’s Butt was banned on the grounds that seeing Old Nick with a frosty in his hand would lead children to drink. That ban was lifted after the Maine Civil Liberties Union challenged the state’s refusal to issue a permit to distribute the beer. Flying Dog Brewery’s Raging Bitch beer, and label artist Ralph Steadman’s crazed drawing of a deranged dog, led to more than raised eyebrows. According to a spokesperson for that brewer, New Hampshire was one of the states that, at least initially, banned the beer because of the label. States can set standards more stringent than those used by the federal government, and some do. New Hampshire’s Liquor Commission, to its credit, recognizes that adults are the intended market for alcoholic beverages and there are more effective ways to deter underage drinking than censoring the artwork on labels. Even though an executive councilor complained, the commission declined to delist a popular wine called If You See Kay, and it approved the sale of Arrogant Bastard Ale and other brands that cater to the 20-something male market. We’re aware that advertising that can be taken to excess will be, but in this second decade of the 21st century, beyond certain basic consumer information, should government be in the business of approving or rejecting the names of alcoholic beverages and the designs of their labels? We think not, particularly since the standards are often subjective and decisions based on the sensibilities of, in most cases, one or a handful of people. Labels or artwork determined to be not just obscene but too risque for the censor’s taste can be rejected. Among them have been labels decorated with reproductions of famous paintings of nude or semi-clothed women. Brewers and vintners face scores of hurdles and months or years of delay when seeking permits, licenses and approvals. Needless regulation bogs down the process, drives up prices and discourages innovation. Now New Hampshire lawmakers will consider a half-dozen or more bills that could aid what is a vibrant new industry that has emerged in the state. One of them should be a bill that revises 179:31, the law regulating alcoholic beverage advertising to minimize or eliminate the Liquor Commission’s role as a state censor. Beer labels, for example, need both federal and state approval. Something as simple as the label for a new seasonal beer can take a month or more for approval and far longer if the original design is deemed unacceptable. New Hampshire now has some two dozen brew pubs and microbreweries and about an equal number of wineries. There are even a few entrepreneurs who distill their own spirits and a few who bottle and sell hard cider. This is good news for the economy, especially in a tourist state. That makes it a good time for the Legislature to review liquor laws, some of which date to the Prohibition era, and repeal unnecessary nanny state laws that give the Liquor Commission the power to censor beer labels.
I saw this in the papers and on Facebook over the weekend. This bill is incredibly ill-conceived and so downright dumb, that any non-beer drinker should see right through it. And yet, I won't be the least surprised if the NH House passes it. We all know that revenues are down and state budgets are very tight, but this is the best thing an elected official can come up with? Wow. Either Rep. Weed is related to someone at the Budweiser plant in Merrimack, or maybe some of his homebrew got infected and caused some irreparable brain damage. Oh Mr. Beer, you sneaky Macy's special, you!
I really don't expect this bill to make it very far. More people are catching on to craft beer in New Hampshire, and some of the state's bigger craft brewers like Smuttynose (as well as the shear number of much smaller brewers) should help convince even those unfamiliar with craft beer of how bad this bill would be for business. I wrote a letter to the chairman of the Ways and Means committee, stressing the many reasons why this bill is foolish. Here are some of my main points: While I strongly believe that New Hampshire needs to raise more revenue for these areas and reverse some of the drastic cuts of the past two years, this bill doesn't even target the money toward areas that the state has neglected and underfunded, such as education, health care, state parks and conservation, or transportation infrastructure. Furthermore, it unfairly targets one item, beer, out of the much larger category of alcohol products, unfairly asking responsible beer drinkers to pay the entire bill for alcohol treatment programs for people who are at least as likely to have abused hard liquor or wine. It also puts the burden on small businesses in a sector (craft beer) that is really just beginning to take off in New Hampshire, and it foolishly places the burden on the sector (craft beer) that sees the most production in New Hampshire, as opposed to items such as wine and liquor, which are mostly made by out-of-state producers. That last point is the most important in my opinion: this bill would foolishly burden in-state breweries at the benefit of out-of-state corporate distillers and so forth. It's a very bad bill, and I expect that legislators will recognize that, especially since NHPR is reporting on the formation of a Bipartisan Beer Coalition at the State House.
The beer label censorship is especially stupid when you consider what the Liquor Commission allows when it comes to the liquor sold in its stores. What do you think results in more underage drinking: a relatively hard-to-find craft beer with a child on the label, or ubiquitous bottles of cotton candy flavored vodka?
The beer excise tax is .30$/gallon on all beer sold in the state, not just craft brewers. I'm sure ABI is on "our" side. Wine and Liquor are the cash cows for the state as they are also the retailers. We brewers have flipped a pretty high tax bill for a while. $9.30/BBl vs. 3$/bbl for MA and $6/bbl for CT. Include fed taxes at $7/Bbl and we're on the road to 10$ of every keg going to excise tax. But this is not just about the numbers. NH charges a very high registration fee for out-of-state brands which limits our variety compared with surrounding states. I don't mind paying our fair share, but when you redirect that money to alcohol abuse and prevention programs, it sends a message that brewers and their beer are solely responsible for addiciton and abuse. We've finally got some wind in our sails due to increased NH owned and operated breweries opening every year, and we need to nurture the growth if these small businesses are to survive. I'd rather see Smuttynose open up their new facility and hire dozens of real people for real jobs, than pass legislation to create 3-4 high-paying gov admin jobs to wag their fingers at us. Thank you for allowing me to vent, but these taxes just get passed on to the consumer and food inflation is a real danger right now. Keep the faith and remember moderate and responsible beer consumption is not a "sin". So there is no need to tax us like it. Cheers, Paul Davis-Founder/Brewer The Prodigal Brewery @ Misty Mountain Farm Effingham, NH 03882 "Purveyors of Effing-good Lagers" Coming really soon (I mean it this time) to fine establishments near you, as long as you live near me!
Good news! Looks like the Governor of NH has the brewers back. She will veto the bill if it passes the house/senate. http://hampton-northhampton.patch.com/articles/gov-hassan-says-shell-veto-beer-tax-hike-b0f5d478
