Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Mead and the law

Expand Messages
  • Terrance
    unfortunately, that is correct, i joined a barter group locally that exchanges gift certificates, and got a surprise (a very LATE one at that) a 1099 for the
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 22, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      unfortunately, that is correct, i joined a barter group locally that exchanges gift certificates, and got a surprise (a very LATE one at that) a 1099 for the gift certificates I supplied. blew me away, but it is correct

      Terrance
      Atenveldt

      --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, eulenhorst@... wrote:
      >
      > Actually, the BATF considers barter the same as sale. They even frown on
      > giving unopened bottles as gifts. Sharing and drinking it together is ok.
      > Carolus
      > > Or you could use it as a trade good in return for either goods or
      > > services. Nothing illegal about that so long as money isn't involved. 
      > >
      > >  
      > > Visit Your Group
      > > --
      > > [Email to SCA-Archery-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com to leave this list]
      > >
      > > MARKETPLACE
      > > Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on -
      > > Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
      > >
      > > Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
      > > .
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Derek Estabrook
        I ask for statutes to be sited specifically if one knows as I m curious where there is a reference for this. I have read over the ATF statutes and can t
      Message 2 of 23 , Sep 22, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
         
        I ask for statutes to be sited specifically if one knows as I'm curious where there is a reference for this. I have read over the ATF statutes and can't find a definition of sale. They are very implicit about monetary sales, but nowhere do I see a reference to trading, though it could be implied in the way they define the use of homebrewed items.
         
        The current rules for homebrewing federally are for beer 100 gallons, wine 100 gallons, double that for families with two or more. If you make more then they have to tax you, however its kind of hard, nigh impossible to prove that you are making more than the legal amount unless you are 1. giving away massive amounts, hence you have witnesses that can prove you are making too much or 2. you are storing it in larger than legal amount quantities. So long as its being used within a group and nobody has a big mouth, it would almost be impossible to catch you on this, nor are they likely to try. The ATF has better things to do than hassle people who drink too much privately, for the most part they're interested in people trying to get around or break their laws on a larger scale such as those who operate bars and operating medium to large scale illegal operations. Thats definately walking a fine line legally, but I'm just making a point that if one was to make 250 gallons of wine for personal/ family use its unlikely you'd be bothered unless you were doing something stupid otherwise, not that I encourage it.
         
        Also, one needs to be more creative in legal ways. Rarely do states restrict the trade of ingredients (well unless you're doing something weird) used to produce most alcholic beverage including the water used. Granted if you are doing something stupid or illegal, trading in these items could get you noticed for investigation, but you wouldn't be prosecuted for trading barley or honey, but for whatever law you were dumb enough to break.
         
        The 18th ammendment which did regulate bartering etc. federally was overturned. Remember prohibition? Well, those laws don't exist anymore. New ones have taken over.
         
        Now states are free to make there own laws and most state laws do prohibit the bartering of alcohol. However most websites I've seen that mention bartering, trade, etc. of beer and wine mash federal and state statutes together.
         
        So as I read it federally, a family of two homebrewing could make 200 gallons of beer and 200 gallons of wine, trade eggs ( or any legally tradeable good etc) for ingredients barring state laws that say otherwise, drink with family and friends, give away as much of your total allowed to be produced as you choose,  and transport it to legally allowable places such as a neighbors house, homebrewing contest, or event.
         
        Businesses (at least for profit ones) are not allowed to brew privately without being taxed, however once again kind of a gray area since a business consists of members. The members individually have a right to brew privately, they just can't use the businesses name or resources to do so. However to those who push the line of legality, I would say its kind of stupid since while it isn't necessarily easy to prove wrongdoing, it is very easy to get noticed when operating a business and the ATF probably is far more likely to want to make an example of a business disobeying its laws than a private citizen who is just isn't running a major operation or a distillery.
         
        The feds are not really that restrictive as they are most concerned in the same way a noble would about getting their share of taxes and discouraging the flaunting of the few laws in place. Now if you are selling it is a much more complicated manner and they definately get a lot more involved in that aspect.
         
        Its probably even more important to know state and local statutes as aside for the simple basics of the above stated homebrewing rules, you are far more likely to have a problem with the local sheriff, deputy, highway patrol officer, police officer, etc. than you will a federal organization. States definately have a lot of variance and there are a thousand ways I could see one get into trouble over issues a person probably would never think of.
         
        Thanks by the way, this is a subject I needed to do some more research on eventually anyway.


      • richard johnson
        people why try to get around the law, end up finding out that the Law is smarter and nastier than are they. It is better to NOT push it and to avoid ANY
        Message 3 of 23 , Sep 22, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          people why try to get around the law, end up finding out that the Law is smarter and nastier than are they.
          It is better to NOT push it and to avoid ANY appearance of pushingor breaking the law than to defend yourself in court later.
           
          I'd rather not attract their attention.
          And if someone were to get sick from my 'Mead' and tells the doctor that he bought or traded for the wine that made him sich and that doctor decided to report me to the Health Dept who may decide to get ATF involved, things get out-of-hand real fast.
           
          I think that I will obey the most conservative interpretation fo the laws and not take ANY chances of people with no sense of humor and big guns kicking down my door.

          On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Derek Estabrook <ironhandofalmuric@...> wrote:
           

           
          I ask for statutes to be sited specifically if one knows as I'm curious where there is a reference for this. I have read over the ATF statutes and can't find a definition of sale. They are very implicit about monetary sales, but nowhere do I see a reference to trading, though it could be implied in the way they define the use of homebrewed items. --
          Rick Johnson
          http://Rick-Johnson.webs.com
          "Those who give up a little freedom in return for a little imagined security will soon find that they have neither."
        • Puppy
          Look anywhere in the US code for a definition of sale as it applies, not just the ATF statutes. (Also any ruling in any federal court which references a sale,
          Message 4 of 23 , Sep 23, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Look anywhere in the US code for a definition of sale as it applies, not just the ATF statutes. (Also any ruling in any federal court which references a sale, pre Revolutionary War precedents set in British courts, the Magna Carta, or anything else even remotely relating to common law for which you are considered 100% responsible for understanding and obeying regardless of legal training)

            In New York State, one of the Rockefeller Drug Laws which has not been repealed is to legally define the word "sale" as any transfer, even when you are not compensated. That was intended to allow anyone who passes a joint to the next person to be convicted for a felony as a drug dealer, but gets applied anywhere in NY a sale is deemed illegal.

            For example: I once received a summons for paying for a friend to get on the subway with my metrocard citing a city ordinance against the sale of metrocard swipes. It got dismissed, but not over legal standing. When I tried to argue that there was no sale because there was no return compensation, I was directed to the legal redefinition of the word sale in the NYS penal code.


            Pup


            --- In SCA-Archery@yahoogroups.com, Derek Estabrook <ironhandofalmuric@...> wrote:
            >
            >  
            > I ask for statutes to be sited specifically if one knows as I'm curious where there is a reference for this. I have read over the ATF statutes and can't find a definition of sale...
          • Derek Estabrook
            Thank you, however I was looking for specific source material that is directly applicable, not a legal debate. I have taken business law courses and have a
            Message 5 of 23 , Sep 23, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Thank you, however I was looking for specific source material that is directly applicable, not a legal debate. I have taken business law courses and have a pretty good idea how things work in general. Not a brag in any matter, but if I want legal counsel beyond my limited, specific knowledge I won't seek that online.
               
              Here is a legal definition of sale
              n. transfer of something (and title to it) in return for money (or other thing of value) on terms agreed upon between buyer and seller. The price paid may be based on a posted cost, established by negotiation between seller and buyer, or by auction with potential buyers bidding until the highest bid is accepted by the seller or his agent (auctioneer).
               
              Hey, I know from contract law that terms usually need to be specified and you cannot just use blanket terms and then say "Hey you should have known since a minor Act passed during the Revolutionary War referenced the sale of goods and grouped monetary payments with bartering". I'm pretty sure somewhere both the feds and state laws defined things specifically even if based directly on precedent, that precedent should and would usually be cited.
               
              Oh, and state law is another field altogether and one cannot group it together as its applicability needs to be specifically referenced. Pretty much always. North Carolina definition of sale doesn't mean much to North Dakota and so on typically.
               
              Oh, and please do not take this the wrong way as this post is not intended to be as harsh as it may come off, just as I'm sure the previous post was not as condescending as it appeared to be either I am sure. I am still interested in specific references to applicable laws, but not in general legal debate about the way the system works as stated before or getting into a base argument.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.