Controversy in a cup. This little shooter raises a lot of TTB issues. First of all, it’s a gel-shot and those can be controversial from time to time. Next, it is technically a wine but it has added spirits — in the form of citrus neutral spirits (vodka, for all intents and purposes) and flavors. But wait, there’s more. It contains caffeine. It contains taurine. And … it contains added vitamins, in the form of Vitamin B6 and B12 (pyridoxine and cyanocobalamin).
Not too surprisingly, this 2006 gem of an approval is also “surrendered” (see about halfway down the form).
As of this writing, TTB does not allow vitamins to be directly added to beer, wine or spirits. Until recent months, TTB allowed vitamins to be added so long as their was no direct reference to the vitamins on the label or in advertising. TTB is at the early stages of developing regulations related to alcohol beverages containing vitamins, minerals and caffeine.
Search Results for: ttb
TTB User Fees Unlikely
In a June 24, 2009 speech at the 2009 TTB Expo, TTB Administrator John Manfreda confirmed that President Obama’s 2010 budget called for TTB to derive almost all of its funding from user fees. The fees would cover retailers, wholesalers, importers, and producers, and would range up to $1,000 per year (totaling about $84 million per year). Around the same time, a group of industry associations pressed the House Subcommittee on Appropriations to drop the tax. By early July, a Senate subcommittee had rejected the proposal, as reported by the National Association of Convenience Stores.
TTB’s May 22, 2009 Newsletter explained further:
The recently released President’s budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 proposes a significant change for TTB funding. In the past, TTB has been funded by Congress through appropriated resources. The FY 2010 budget proposal transforms TTB from an appropriated Bureau to an entity that will generate fees in order to fund its operations. These fees will shift the burden of paying for the services we provide from the general public to the parties in the alcohol industry.
To accomplish this, legislation will be proposed to allow TTB to establish a permanent program for FY 2010 and the future fiscal years, requiring the payment of annual fees from its industry members. The fees will range from $300 to $1,000, and will vary depending on the type and size of the business entity. In general, these fees will support the Bureau’s core mission and the funds will be used to continue to provide benefits to retailers, wholesalers, breweries, wineries, distilleries, and industrial alcohol businesses. In particular, TTB’s efforts will continue to ensure that alcohol products are not contaminated, misbranded or illegally marketed, and will prevent dishonest persons from entering into the alcohol distribution system.
While this approach has been proposed under the President’s budget, the final decision as to the method of funding the Bureau will ultimately rest with Congress. It our belief that non-appropriated funding through an industry targeted fee system will put TTB in a stronger position to move forward with our mission and initiatives in the future.
TTB Took His Label Away
And he’s not pleased about it. It’s just a piece of paper but it can provoke amazingly strong reactions. When it gets rejected, lost, delayed, revoked. And also when it gets approved. I would love to know what label and what company are behind this tale of woe. This blog does not necessarily condone any of the views expressed in this video, but we were mighty surprised to find a rock song about, of all things … ALFD. In our experience TTB almost never loses things, so we eagerly await TTB’s video response. Here is an example of a good video response from another context.
The Blue Weber Blues
There is a big lawsuit brewing in the center of Brooklyn, NY about – of all things – a beverage that can only be made 2,585 miles away. A hefty law firm, with about 80 lawyers and 10 US offices, filed suit against Diageo about how much agave distillate is and should be in their top-selling Casamigos and Don Julio brands of Tequila. The suit was filed May 5th in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. With a claim of false marketing, the plaintiffs allege that these products tell consumers that the products are made from 100% (expensive) Blue Weber Agave even though they have “significant concentrations of cane or other types of alcohol. …”
The 22 page complaint backs up this bold assertion, so far, by pointing to press accounts saying thousands of agave farmers in Mexico have been angrily and publicly protesting the use of various sources of alcohol other than agave, such as corn and cane, in various high-end Tequilas. The complaint alleges that lab testing verifies the use of other-than-agave-distillates. A recent label approval for Casamigos Tequila shows how the brand label states “Tequila 100% Agave Azul.”
The complaint stops short of pounding the table, and it probably does not need to do so. The defendants may be forced to admit or deny what is alleged. Beyond that, discovery and further testing should paint a very clear and revealing picture of what is really happening here. The implications seem at least as big as in the Tito’s Vodka case of recent years, because Diageo is huge, the brands are massive, Tequila is a giant category, this could balloon to be a nationwide class action suit, famous people are involved, and the laws of quite a few countries could be significantly implicated before all is said and done. The complaint mostly points to New York and New Jersey law. TTB’s relevant rules (about Tequila) are fairly sparse and deferential to Mexico. They say Tequila is “[a]n agave spirit that is a distinctive product of Mexico. Tequila must be made in Mexico, in compliance with the laws and regulations of Mexico governing the manufacture of Tequila for consumption in that country.”
Felisa Rogers has a large amount of helpful background on these issues, published over the past few months at Mezcalistas. The complaint relies significantly on two of her articles from early 2025. She says:
The agaveros are making a very serious accusation when they suggest that the CRT is allowing tequileros to cut costs by mixing cane alcohol into tequila and labeling it as 100% agave. Although so-called mixto tequila can legally contain 49 percent sugar from other sources, this sugar must be added during the fermentation process. “Cold blending” tequila with other alcohols is illegal. …
For nearly 30 years, the tequila industry has enjoyed a reputation for producing one of the most closely regulated spirits on the planet. In 1994, the CRT was founded to enforce consistency in an industry that had developed a reputation for rotgut.
The agency set to its job with a vengeance. The CRT hired customs certifiers to bust exporters of fake tequila at the US border. In Mexico, CRT officials implemented a stringent system of quality control that included requiring licensed farmers to document every single agave planted (including GPS coordinates) and apply for a verified “passport” to transport agave. They assigned an inspector to every distillery, and mandated that every batch of tequila be tested in a lab to ensure that it meets quality standards.
As Sarah Bowen wrote in Divided Spirits, “The combination of increased quality control by the CRT and its strategic partnerships with government agencies contributed to improvements in tequila’s reputation and a decline in the production of uncertified tequila.” Tequila began its meteoric ascent in popularity and status.
The case is only four days old and so there is not a lot of other information in the docket report so far. For example, there is no court response from the defendants to date. But this case is almost certain to be of major importance, and illuminating, for many months or years to come. Outside of court, Diageo has said “these claims of adulteration are outrageous and categorically false.”
We look forward to sharing the other sides of this story.
Grady Hummer
Grady Hummer joined Lehrman Beverage Law in 2023 as a law clerk.
Grady assists our attorneys with legal research, label and formula approvals, and TTB permit applications. He prides himself on being able to quickly learn new areas of the law and distill the complex issues of federal, state, and local alcohol beverage law into a smooth and digestible format.
Grady is a JD candidate at George Mason University School of Law with an expected graduation date of May 2024. He earned a B.S. in Economics from Longwood University in 2017.
Before attending George Mason Law, Grady worked as an analyst at S&P Global Market Intelligence. There he used internal and external data sources to visualize and understand KPIs and the inputs that drive them.
Outside of the office, Grady enjoys working on various DIY projects, hiking, enjoying craft beers and spirits, and (due to the influence of this firm and work) dabbles in his own homebrewing.
FDA to Phase Out Common Synthetic Food Dyes
Today, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kennedy announced the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) intent to remove 8 common synthetic food dyes from the food supply.
FDA is initiating the process to revoke authorization for Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B and will work with industry to remove FD&C Blue No. 1, FD&C Blue No. 2, FD&C Green No. 3, FD&C Red No. 40, FD&C Yellow No. 5, and FD&C Yellow No. 6 from the food supply by the end of 2026. FDA commissioner Dr. Martin Makary blamed these petroleum-based dyes for rising childhood ADHD, diabetes, depression, and obesity rates. FDA also plans to implement an expedited review process for natural food dyes not yet authorized, including calcium phosphate, Galdieria extract blue, gardenia blue, and butterfly pea flower extract. Additionally, the National Health Institute (NIH) has been asked to conduct comprehensive research on how food additives impact child development and health.
Today’s announcement is a mission statement that does not provide process details or give much insight into how FDA will accomplish its stated goals. Should FDA formally ban these color additives, it is likely that TTB will adhere to its memorandum of understanding with FDA and stop allowing these colors in new formulas and require existing formulas to be updated. If FDA ultimately revokes authorization for petroleum-based dyes, many alcohol beverage suppliers will need to reformulate their products to use alternative colors. Our firm can help navigate these emerging regulatory changes and help keep your products compliant.
