This label was pretty good until about a year ago.
Then TTB decided it’s not really a “malt beverage.” TTB decided this because Bard’s Tale Beer is made without malted barley. TTB Ruling 2008-3 explains that a brewery product can not be a “malt beverage,” subject to TTB label rules, unless it contains hops and malted barley.
Bard’s Tale is made with sorghum instead of malted barley because those with Celiac Disease can not tolerate the gluten common to barley. In July of 2008 TTB handed the issue to FDA by publishing the Ruling. About one year later, in August of 2009, FDA accepted the issue by publishing a Draft Guidance on “Labeling of Certain Beers.” In this document, FDA explains that certain beers are subject to FDA’s labeling rules and are not subject to the FAA Act rules enforced by TTB. As a result, such beers don’t need TTB label approval but they do need a statement of ingredients, allergen labeling, nutrition facts, and a Government Warning.
It gets confusing. Some beers are TTB and some are primarily FDA. Some wines are TTB and some are primarily FDA. At least we can take comfort in the fact that all spirits are TTB. Unless they are non-potable (as in cooking spirits or flavors) — in which case once again they flip over to FDA for their main labeling regulation.
As a result of the tossing and turning noted above, the current status of the Bard’s label above is — “surrendered.” Here is an example of Anheuser-Busch’s comparable product (Redbridge), without malted barley. It is also “surrendered” and handed off to FDA.
Search Results for: ttb
Ball Busters and Leghumpers
Poor TTB. They have to make a decision about every cotton-picking label that comes down the pike. And every now and then they have to bite their tongue and affirmatively approve labels they might otherwise prefer to ignore. By contrast, FDA can simply ignore all the inconvenient labels.
But for the requirement to review and approve every alcohol beverage label before it goes to market, TTB could have tried to ignore the naked lady in flagrante delicto on the Cantillon label. The State of Missouri was not amused and filed a complaint, in the late 1990s, charging that the label is obscene: “The label for Gambrinus shows a drawing of a naked woman, with breasts visible, seated on the lap of a figure alleged to be Gambrinus, the Flemish mythological ‘king of beer.'” After a hearing, the Commissioner apparently decided the label did not violate Missouri law, and other states came to a similar conclusion.
The Commissioner had the choice to ignore the label. The current federal law often leads directly to TTB affirmatively approving a motley collection of Leghumpers and Ball Busters. Somehow I doubt the drafters of the FAA Act envisioned this scenario.
How Hard Is Mike's Punch?
It wasn’t so very long ago that TTB would not allow anything like an alcohol content claim, on beer, unless the states required it. The turnabout is quite remarkable, since Coors sued to change the law back in the mid-1990s. Here is a Mike’s Harder Punch label that declares itself to be “hard” no less than seven times in a few square inches, with a couple of fists to drive the point home. It is “Mike’s Hardest Punch Yet.”
Thankfully, the label doesn’t make us guess how hard. It comes right out and explains that it’s 9.9% alc./vol., about double normal beer. The label also sports a “Warning” other than the mandated warning. TTB does not often allow extra warnings (pregnant lady warning) but will do so from time (no kids warning) to time (flammable warning).
Drunken Animals
TTB typically does not allow wine labels to say much about the alcohol content or strength — except in the normal alcohol by volume statement.
So we were surprised that The Drunken Goat, and his n’er-do-well friend, Le Drunk Rooster, would show up on a couple of wine labels. We pretty much expected them to show up, sooner or later, on a spirits label. But not on a wine or beer label, where TTB has historically and fairly vigorously discouraged alcohol content claims.
While the goat and rooster are carousing around, notable is the absence of any drunk humans out and about on approved labels. Unless you count this guy, the toothless fellow on the label for Rocky Mountain Moonshine Sippin’ Hooch. It is distilled from beets and the label suggests “Once tasted, you too will become hooked!” Box 19 surprisingly declares that “The man is no longer ‘drunk’ appearing.” If he’s sober I’d like to see the other version.
Is Beer the New Wine?
At a 2009 National Alcohol Beverage Control Association (NABCA) panel discussion, Boston Beer Company’s Jim Koch boldly proclaimed that “beer is the new wine.”
According to Wine and Spirits Daily, Koch said:
With the emergence of the new mentality about beer driven by small craft brewers, America is starting to create a beer culture in the same way America has created a wine culture.
Is Koch right? The labels tell part of the story. Lately there are many examples of beer labels with terms and elements formerly associated only with wine.
First is Sierra Nevada’s Estate Brewer’s Harvest Ale. TTB sets forth strict rules for wine labeled with the word “estate.” One such rule is that the wine must be produced from grapes grown on land owned or controlled by the bottling winery. According to Greg Kitsock of the Washington Post, Sierra Nevada produces their Estate Ale with hops and barley grown only at their brewery in Chico. The label adds that “this ale reflects the flavors of our surroundings in California’s fertile Central Valley.”
Second is Trader Joe’s 2009 Vintage Ale, produced by Unibroue of Canada. For wine labels, it is clear that a vintage date means one thing: the year in which the grapes were harvested. What exactly does it mean on beer? The Trader Joe’s label tries to explain. “You might be used to seeing vintages on wine; perhaps not so much on beer. And that’s what makes this ale so special.” The label also says that the 2009 Vintage Ale was produced in 2009, in limited quantities, and that it tastes and looks different than those released in previous years.
Third is Blue Moon Grand Cru Limited Edition from MillerCoors. The labeling takes design cues from traditional Champagne labels. It has a vintage date and also mentions “Grand Cru” (meaning “great growth” in French), which is a term generally associated with French wines. Our last and maybe most famous example is Miller High Life, “The Champagne of Beers.”
From a labeling and marketing standpoint, it appears that some beers are trying to develop the same prestige that wine enjoys with the American public. So Koch may well be right. After all, he sells a single bottle of beer for $150, a price near or above that for many of Napa and Bordeaux’s finest.
P*rt Wine
If you are lucky enough to have a wine approved before 2006, you can call it Port. But if it’s made outside Portugal and you don’t have an approval before 2006, you are out of luck and will have to find another name.
Schatz Farms went so far as to show a “USB port” and call it “USB” when foreclosed from simply calling their Lodi dessert wine “Port.” The label says the US:
signed an im____ant agreement with the European Union to protect ____ugal’s geographical indication of this type of wine. Our Unidentified Secret Brand is therefore no mystery wine. . . .
Kobalt refrained from calling their Napa Valley dessert wine “Port” and instead described it as “wine made in the same ‘old world tradition’ as that of the country to the west of Spain.” Another example is here: Not Starboard.
By contrast, for an example of a California wine “grandfathered” and therefore able to brandish the term Port, there is Portacinco Port. TTB approved it with this qualification:
Approved under the “Grandfather” Provision of the Agreement between the U.S. and the EC on Trade in Wine, by enacting the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, signed on 12/20/2006.