.
Feedback

Blumenthal Supports Lower Beer Brewery Tax

If the bill passes in Washington D.C. then excises taxes will drop in half for small breweries.

 

Small beer brewers throughout the state pay a $7 excise tax just for the privilege of hopefully being able to sell the beer. U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal supports legislation that would drop the tax to $3.50 for the first 60,000 barrels brewed.

The aptly named Brewer's Employment and Excise Tax Relief (BEER) Act was introduced by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) in March 2011 but still has not been voted on.

Blumenthal believes that the two-page bill would help Connecticut’s craft beer industry thrive.

"The future of Connecticut is about growing small businesses like the Thomas Hooker Brewing Company that make a Connecticut product and hire Connecticut workers,” said Blumenthal in a statement. “The proposal gives Connecticut's exploding craft beer industry a leg up by cutting in half a painful and outdated tax, bringing economic activity and new visitors to the state."

The bill would also benefit larger breweries by lowering the excise tax from $18 to $16 on barrels beyond the first 60,000.

Blumenthal toured the Thomas Hooker Brewing Company in Bloomfield, Conn. 

Curt Cameron, President of Thomas Hooker Brewing Company, the bill would save the brewery approximately $40,000-$50,000 per year in federal excise taxes.

“Most small breweries pay this tax quarterly and I can tell you it can certainly be a painful tax to pay at the end of the quarter," Cameron said in a statement.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Weston-Redding-Easton Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Thomas Paine June 18, 2013 at 01:43 pm
Why is it the panel for this event does not include a single advocate for gun-owners' rights? WithRead More all due respect to Chief McNamara, why does the panel no include a person who can speak to gun safety from a gun-owning civilian's perspective? ML, you claim that the assembled folks "do not offer judgements about gun ownership" but they are not including a single voice that can offer perspective on gun ownership. I have been to "education" sessions sponsored by Meg's March for Change and they are one-sided indoctrinations into gun control advocacy. >>>> I was in Hartford for the public hearings in January when both Meg and March co-founder Nancy gave their personal testimonies and they all but threatened the legislators on the panel with election day retribution for all those who did not tow the gun-control line of thinking (i.e. March and CAGV). To suggest that Meg "does not offer judgements" if fallacious at best, disingenuous at worst.