Wine

[Victor Steinbok]

Last time I saw the designation list was in the early 1990s. The beer
and wine regulations were significantly revamped in 1993, so that might
have been one of the parts affected. Or I could misremember that it was
a federal list. But if you go through 27 CFR, you will find that there
are several malted beverages that have specific designations. Low
alcohol beer is cut off at a specific point (2.5% IIRC), as is
no-alcohol beer (0.5%). Believe it or not, no-alcohol product is
different from alcohol-free product, which cannot contain /any/ alcohol.
So that's four categories of malted beverages alone. Similar
distinctions exist for wines and even more detailed ones for spirits,
although you're right that state beer&wine regulations are much more
detailed.

For example, neutral spirits up to 160 proof must be labeled with the
original source (grain, potato, etc.) and fruit spirits must be labeled
as such up to 195 proof--I wish I were kidding, but it's right there in
black and white (195 proof is pretty much pure ethanol). So if it's
under 195 proof--which covers pretty much all distilled spirits--it must
be labeled as "neutral spirits--fruit" (unless, of course, they are not
neutral and are in fact cognacs, brandies, etc.). So it's not just
excise tax--and these particular regulations may exist for industrial
use, not for retail consumption.

The reason FDA gets involved is because it is very easy to produce
moonshine that contains methanol, which is either deadly or highly
toxic. Beer and wine can be adulterated in way that are not
approved--not quite German purity laws (that would ban production of all
major American breweries because they use rice malt), but it is still
highly restrictive. So there are four different sources of alcoholic
beverage legislation and regulation--ATF/Treasury, ATF/DOJ, FDA and IRS.
These are quite repetitive but occasionally in conflict. But the
regulations do go well beyond mere fermented/distilled distinction.

     VS-)

On 12/10/2011 5:40 AM, David A. Daniel wrote:
> The feds are very interested in what kind of liquor is what for excise tax
> reasons, and they are especially interested in whether a beverage is
> actually alcoholic or not. (If you have "Alcohol" in your bureau name you
> only get to make rules about stuff that has alcohol in it.) If you go here
> http://www.ttb.gov/beer/bam/chapter4.pdf you'll find several dozen
> designations for beers, ales, malt beverages etc. Every one of them is
> simply defined as having at least 0.5% alcohol, except for Near Bear which
> must have less than 0.5% alcohol. There's no other grading, by alcohol
> content, of what can be called what. And of course they want to make sure
> you're not selling swamp water and labeling it a malt beverage, or that if
> you label something as "reduced alcohol," that it really is. But that is the
> extent of it. And, again, there's nothing at the federal level about
> changing names as alcohol content goes up. That's up to the states. There
> are 20 or so states currently revising their beer-labeling laws to
> accommodate high-alcohol boutique beers that can have stratospheric alcohol
> contents (for beers).
> DAD

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org