A recent USBG Pulse post sparked an intriguing, ongoing conversation about the status of liquor laws that vary from state to state, and that are quickly becoming antiquated given the context of modern bar practices. The culinary aspects of craft bitters, tonics, syrups and batched cocktails blur the lines even further – is it a food or a liquor product? You want to ask questions in order to be compliant, but if you ask too many, you might get attention you don’t want from the powers that be. To make matters worse, most of those ‘powers that be’ don’t have a firm grasp on the laws themselves. We are left, at best, with murky interpretations that vary from state to state, county to county, and agent to agent. These are excellent talking points, to which I would like to add another: The issue of market product availability.

My market is rather small. As a result, and justifiably due to lack of demand, the liquor houses here do not carry certain products that I would love to be able to stock. Here is where an interesting catch 22 presents itself: If there is no demand, a liquor house cannot justify bringing on a product. Demand, however, cannot be created until a market is exposed to a product. Conundrum. A conversation has arisen regarding whether we might be able to create some sort of apparatus through which the liquor commission could impose and report some sort of fee (in lieu of a tax), and thereby approve the sale of non-sponsored products. If, at a later date, a product becomes available through a house, retailers would be required to get it through those means.

The law lags behind technology in every industry. The rules regarding liquor sales, interstate commerce, and taxation have become difficult to understand (let alone justify) in the context of internet sales. I am certainly not out to evade taxation, but if a product is not available through a liquor house, it seems that there should be some avenue to report a purchase, pay a fee, and go on in peace.

This sort of mechanism could be mutually beneficial for bars and liquor houses alike. Bars would have access to a far greater range of products to create a more diversified market experience. Liquor houses could use this situation to test the viability of products in the market. If a product proves worthy of liquor house sponsorship, they could opt to add it to their portfolio, thereby requiring sales of that product in the market to go through them.

As markets continue to see the trend shift from quantity-driven to quality-driven beverage programs, it is necessary for us to have a wide range of available products to work with. The craft cocktail phenomenon is very much in sync with the premises of responsible hospitality; it encourages folks to have one or two great cocktails, as opposed to six crappy ones. We are on the same team as the authorities in that regard. I simply want to be able to offer the best possible customer experience, and to share and promote the products that I believe in as a professional. I do not want to feel like the modern bootlegger who is doing something sketchy in order to meet a demand that the law is not equipped to provide for.

Any thoughts on lobbying for this sort of arrangement?