Home of the BrewNosers

elreplica wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:12 pm

The crux of the biscuit...and beer...is the tip of the iceberg...as I (and Toni elaborated) postulated, the SC won't open the Pandoras Box of protectionist tax bastions governments rely too much on vice taxes, grabs and other streams - usually relegated to general revenues. I just don't see it happening as governments have become far too dependent on those cashcows...

Basically this. Not that everything shouldn't be free and open, but that there will be chaos if they do so without a transition plan. It would be nice if they cracked the door open, though.

I've spoken to Blue and a few other lawyers about this—if the SC upholds NB's decision it doesn't mean there would be chaos. When there are big/impactful rulings on things like this there's always a period of time for governments to re-organize and do things right. Just look at the pot thing...oh wait...

I can't see how the SC upholding the ruling would create chaos. It's not like there are hordes of cross border smugglers bringing contraband across provincial lines. At most we'll see some people bring large loads of cheap Bud back from Quebec. And all that will do is force the LCBO and the ANBL to drop their prices to compete. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

KB1138 wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:50 pm

I can't see how the SC upholding the ruling would create chaos. It's not like there are hordes of cross border smugglers bringing contraband across provincial lines. At most we'll see some people bring large loads of cheap Bud back from Quebec. And all that will do is force the LCBO and the ANBL to drop their prices to compete. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The defense's argument stands on whether provinces have the right to put non-tariff trade barriers on things from other provinces. If the supreme Court upholds it, it would affect, as others said, a number of different industries.

CorneliusAlphonse wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:44 pm

KB1138 wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:50 pm

I can't see how the SC upholding the ruling would create chaos. It's not like there are hordes of cross border smugglers bringing contraband across provincial lines. At most we'll see some people bring large loads of cheap Bud back from Quebec. And all that will do is force the LCBO and the ANBL to drop their prices to compete. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The defense's argument stands on whether provinces have the right to put non-tariff trade barriers on things from other provinces. If the supreme Court upholds it, it would affect, as others said, a number of different industries.

But if all those trade barriers are unconstitutional, then they should all be brought down.

KB1138 wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:12 pm

CorneliusAlphonse wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:44 pm

The defense's argument stands on whether provinces have the right to put non-tariff trade barriers on things from other provinces. If the supreme Court upholds it, it would affect, as others said, a number of different industries.

But if all those trade barriers are unconstitutional, then they should all be brought down.

Not really. The canadian constitution doesn't work like the american one, it is a document open to broad interpretation and adjustment, as it's recognized that things that made perfect sense at one point in history will not always make sense. this is called the living tree doctrine.

edit to note: while i feel quite strongly that beer and alcohol should be allowed to cross provincial borders, and probably just about everything for personal consumption, i think the consequences of this case could be very broad. Do we want every chicken egg sold across canada in loblaws stores to come from a huge factory farm in ontario? (i expect opinions on this would vary a lot more). I do expect the supreme court will make a very rational decision, they really are some of the best and least biased actors in the entire governmental system here in canada - they won't be making decisions out of personal nor political interest. I am watching this case with a great deal of interest.

CorneliusAlphonse wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:18 pm

Do we want every chicken egg sold across canada in loblaws stores to come from a huge factory farm in ontario? (i expect opinions on this would vary a lot more).

I'm admittedly a bit igornorant on the interprovincial trade barriers for things like eggs, but it already seems like an awful of the eggs in the big grocers are from out of province. I would have thought that industry in particular is already more controlled by quotas than trade barriers.

Regardless, my impression is that with the alcohol thing, it would be swell if they could somehow deliniate between folks importing for personal consumption vs commerial (bootlegging for profit). That said, I'm sure if they did, it would be through some annoying volume limit. I would personally prefer they just flag individuals transporting an unusual amount of alcohol to either try and catch them in the act of re-selling, or audit them tax time.

Jayme wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:20 pm

Regardless, my impression is that with the alcohol thing, it would be swell if they could somehow deliniate between folks importing for personal consumption vs commerial (bootlegging for profit). That said, I'm sure if they did, it would be through some annoying volume limit. I would personally prefer they just flag individuals transporting an unusual amount of alcohol to either try and catch them in the act of re-selling, or audit them tax time.

That is where things currently stand, as the Comeau case stems from someone caught bringing back more than they were allowed to from out of province

Jayme wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:20 pm

CorneliusAlphonse wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:18 pm

Do we want every chicken egg sold across canada in loblaws stores to come from a huge factory farm in ontario? (i expect opinions on this would vary a lot more).

I'm admittedly a bit igornorant on the interprovincial trade barriers for things like eggs, but it already seems like an awful of the eggs in the big grocers are from out of province. I would have thought that industry in particular is already more controlled by quotas than trade barriers.

Regardless, my impression is that with the alcohol thing, it would be swell if they could somehow deliniate between folks importing for personal consumption vs commerial (bootlegging for profit). That said, I'm sure if they did, it would be through some annoying volume limit. I would personally prefer they just flag individuals transporting an unusual amount of alcohol to either try and catch them in the act of re-selling, or audit them tax time.

Right, a better example could be milk. Or it could be a province that has honeybee restrictions (to save local honeybee populations from diseases that haven't made it here yet). Or ash wood, to prevent the spread of the emerald borer beetle. It doesn't change the thrust of the argument, that there are some interprovincial trade restrictions which are not so cut-and-dry as alcohol for personal consumption. And I (personally) trust it to the supreme court to consider all these possible impacts in detail, and make an appropriate ruling.

KB1138 wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:42 pm

Jayme wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:20 pm

Regardless, my impression is that with the alcohol thing, it would be swell if they could somehow deliniate between folks importing for personal consumption vs commerial (bootlegging for profit). That said, I'm sure if they did, it would be through some annoying volume limit. I would personally prefer they just flag individuals transporting an unusual amount of alcohol to either try and catch them in the act of re-selling, or audit them tax time.

That is where things currently stand, as the Comeau case stems from someone caught bringing back more than they were allowed to from out of province

I believe the current limit is 0, so it's not hard to exceed that. I also thought he got caught at the border, not in the act of re-selling?

He was caught at the border yes, but with multiple cases of beer and a few bottles of liquor. I forget the exact number but there is a small quantity that you are allowed to bring across the border into NB.

From the last CBC article

He was fined $292.50 for violating the New Brunswick Liquor Control Act by having 14 cases of beer, two bottles of whisky and one bottle of a liqueur.

The act sets a personal importation limit of 12 pints of beer (about 18 cans or bottles), or one bottle of wine or spirits.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/beer-cr ... -1.4439295

Craft beer bubble nonsense again. I have been hearing about a market peek for twenty years.

cagiva650 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:49 pm

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/beer-cr ... -1.4439295

Craft beer bubble nonsense again. I have been hearing about a market peek for twenty years.

At least in NS, a lot more taps have been added the last couple of years. Both in new places and in bars expanding their tap count. At some point it will be more difficult to add extra taps. The article mentions that craft breweries offer 10-50 beers, which crowds the market place. It's statements like that that make me skeptical of the entire article.

KB1138 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:18 am

He was caught at the border yes, but with multiple cases of beer and a few bottles of liquor. I forget the exact number but there is a small quantity that you are allowed to bring across the border into NB.

From the last CBC article

He was fined $292.50 for violating the New Brunswick Liquor Control Act by having 14 cases of beer, two bottles of whisky and one bottle of a liqueur.

The act sets a personal importation limit of 12 pints of beer (about 18 cans or bottles), or one bottle of wine or spirits.

Funny...the border..."importation"...within the same country...adds up to greedy robber barons protecting their fiefdoms...all in a direction only to the east of Quebec...some petty noise in Ontario but with their prices tempered the sounds are muted....eg $3.99/Stella 500 mL NS...$2.50 in Ontario...

These articles about a beer bubble always fail to mention that the market here in Canada is nowhere near as saturated as it is in the States, and there continues to be growth there.

Manitoba Restaurant Charges $15 for Bud Lite

https://globalnews.ca/news/3946888/bran ... ud-light/d Lite

I wonder how the AB Inbev thinks about this, like I care.

I like it. Maby Charm School will match the price for BMC beer.

S

I don't get it, why not just stop selling Bud Light? Seems like you're only going to piss off customers who get an unexpectedly large bill. Besides, they are still keeping the price of other macro (including ABI) the same as craft. Seems gimmicky.

It's a publicity stunt, nothing more.

GAM wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:12 am

I like it. Maby Charm School will match the price for BMC beer.

S

Charm School sells that crap???

Nope but it would be funny.

S

Beer sexism in the UK. A mention of folks wanting to do what the Brewers Association has done in the US.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-41892346

GAM wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:10 am

Nope but it would be funny.

S

Yeah, he's a radical for sure...rebel radical and I think that's a cool style...there are other craft brewers that do stock BMC and that's ok but after visiting CS, I think it's kind of like Hells Angels riding Japanese bikes - ain't happening lol. I was glad a couple stocked red/white wine as my old lady is not fond of many craft brews - she's learning but hasn't developed real hop titties yet. The wine allowed me to peruse a few flights lol.

Toni wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:28 am

Beer sexism in the UK. A mention of folks wanting to do what the Brewers Association has done in the US.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-41892346

Interesting article for sure...ahead of the curve here in NS though...so much history of women (likely not only the prime Brewers but likely the discoverers) and usage to sell...the product itself does lend itself to enhanced perceptions of both sexes as many have succumbed and fallen victim to beer goggle and 3's dressed as 9's...good beer however needs no gimmickry.

http://axethebeertax.ca

There seems to be a lot of discussion about this. Some finance minister it is only 5 cents a case. I rarely buy it since I of course make my own. Love some of the responses on facebook, pretty funny.