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).
Search Results for: ttb
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.
Energy Beer
TTB is not likely to allow anything labeled as “energy beer” anytime soon. But that doesn’t mean there is any shortage of beer tinged with caffeine. Notwithstanding the demise of Sparks and Tilt, there is a big upsurge in beers with added caffeine, guarana, tea, yerba mate — and coffee. Today, coffee.
Pipeline Porter is made with 100% Hawaiian Kona Coffee according to the label.
Joe is brewed with coffee, by Philadelphia Brewing Company of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Yeti is stout aged on oak chips with coffee added. The front label pretty much suggests serving it with breakfast.
None of these labels mention energy, stimulants, caffeine, or the amount of caffeine, so the consumer is left to guess. My grandpa Joe never dreamed of beer mixed with coffee or any other alcohol beverage that would perk him up.
Michael Taylor’s Comment for Diageo; Top 5 Things to Know
It is likely that all beer, wine and spirits labels will change dramatically in the near future. TTB Administrator John Manfreda confirmed this in a recent speech. TTB has been working on new rules since CSPI and other groups submitted a petition in 2003. The new rules would require a “Serving Facts” panel on every container. This panel would include a lot more information, such as the typical serving size, number of servings per container, calories, carbohydrates, protein and fat. Because this is a big, controversial change, TTB has received more than 18,000 public comments during the past few years. There are far too many comments for most people to review, and so we will highlight and summarize the most noteworthy comments here. The most recent proposal and comments are here. This is comment 21 in a series; to see others, click on the “serving facts” tag below.
Michael Taylor (on behalf of Diageo) submitted a 4 page comment. It said:
- Diageo hired Mr. Taylor in 2005 and he’s currently a research professor at George Washington University. From 1991-1994 he was FDA’s Deputy Commissioner for Policy and was actively involved in setting the comparable rules for foods more generally.
- I am disappointed that TTB will not require reference to a “standard drink.”
- The Dietary Guidelines are an important tool and among other things they point out that moderate consumption of alcohol may convey health benefits.
- It is wrong to argue that there is no “standard drink.” The concept can and should be used to avoid the need for consumers to make complex calculations at the point of purchase. It is similar to the % daily value concept successfully deployed by FDA.
- “Any new alcohol label will have to be explained to consumers, and TTB should recognize that no new information tool on a consumer label achieves its full utility overnight or automatically.” TTB must preserve the “serving facts” concept and make it workable.
