Plan B Forum

Four out of five British cider makers would be put out of business after a new ruling by the European Commission.



The UK government was formally told last week to change its current excise duty, which means cider makers that produce less than 70 hectolitres (12,000 pints) a year do not have to pay duty. Changes to the 39-year-old exemption is likely to affect 80 per cent of Britain's 480 cider and perry makers, according to the National Association of Cider Makers (NACM). In a statement, the European Commission, said it was 'unanimously agreed' that the UK excise duty scheme contravenes EU legislation.

It said: 'EU excise duty rules oblige Member States to levy an excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages. 'There are no provisions which would provide for an exception to the general obligation to levy excise duty in respect of cider and perry made for sale by small domestic producers.' David Kaspar runs a small apple juice, cider and perry business in Brookthorpe, Gloucestershire, and makes under 170 hectolitres of cider from the 16 acre orchard to sell at markets and a pub. He told the Observer the tax introduction would be 'another nail in the coffin'. 'The exemption is fundamental to keeping craft cider-making going. If we had to pay an extra £2,500 it would probably stop us risking making wooden-barrel cider and perry because it's too fragile.

'It would be very sad if the tax came in. Not just for financial reasons. It would hasten the demise of traditional orchards and would be another nail in the coffin of traditional cider-making and would be a loss to the natural habitat.' The volume of cider produced annually in the UK is in excess of 6 million hectolitres or 130 million UK gallons, according NACM. Some have blamed the industrial-scale cider makers who account for the production of 130 million gallons of cider in the UK every year for the intervention by the EC, according to the paper.

Simon Russell, spokesperson for NACM, told the Financial Times: 'We will make the positive case for the effect of the exemption to be protected whether by retaining the existing legislation or by other means.' The Treasury has been given two months to respond to the commission without a 'satisfactory response' the Commission may refer the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union. A Treasury spokesperson said: 'The government's support for small cider makers has helped create a diverse and vibrant market, improving consumer choice and creating jobs. 'While we will study the commission's arguments carefully, our support for this industry will continue.'

Standing in his cider shed near Gloucester, David Kaspar surveys the array of oak barrels resting on their sides. “Most of the apple trees I’ve planted myself,” he says. “Most of these barrels, I know which orchard the cider came from and which tree it came from.”

Kaspar and his partner, Helen Brent-Smith, run Day’s Cottage, a small apple juice, cider and perry producer. Most of their business is juicing, but they produce just under 170 hectolitres of cider from their 6.5 hectares (16 acres) of orchard, selling it at farmers’ markets, fairs, shops and a pub.

“The exemption is fundamental to keeping craft cider-making going,” said Kaspar. “If we had to pay an extra £2,500 it would probably stop us risking making wooden-barrel cider and perry because it’s too fragile. Quite regularly a barrel isn’t very good, so I have to throw it away. I would also be much less inclined to experiment with some of the varieties we’re bringing back from extinction if we had to pay even before we begin.”


Kaspar, who admits to being a “fruit nerd”, lists some of the 106 varieties of Gloucestershire apple with infectious enthusiasm: Tewkesbury Baron, Arlingham Schoolboys, Hagloe Crab, Bushy French, Taynton Codlin, Foxwhelp. “They’ll be in their prime in the 23rd century,” he says, pointing out some perry pear saplings he planted last year.

“It would be very sad if the tax came in,” Kaspar says. “Not just for financial reasons. It would hasten the demise of traditional orchards and would be another nail in the coffin of traditional cider-making and would be a loss to the natural habitat.”

The role of small producers in the reinvigoration of the rural economy and the stewardship of the environment has led government agencies such as Natural England to encourage the planting of traditional orchards, 75% of which have been lost since the second world war.

Industry groups such as the NACM, which represents both large and small producers, and the Campaign for Real Ale are gearing up for a fight. “I don’t think we’ve got a hope in hell of taking on the EU when they give a reasoned opinion,” says Gareth MacDonald, Camra’s south-west of England regional director. “We do need to think carefully about helping government to find a way around this.”

Some small cider producers believe the intervention by the EU came about because of sour grapes from their counterparts in the wine trade who are not exempt from the duty. Others have blamed “big cider”, the industrial-scale makers who account for the bulk of the 130 million gallons of cider produced in the UK each year.

The Treasury, which has two months to respond to the commission, says it will do its best to support the sector. “While we will study the commission’s arguments carefully, our support for this industry will continue,” it said.

Alex Hill, who has been making Bollhayes cider for 26 years from a smallholding in Devon, says the success of artisan cider-making over the last quarter of a century could be reversed. “The cider industry as a whole trades on this romantic image of the small, local producer,” says Hill, chairman of the South West of England Cider Association.

“There is a far greater variety of ciders produced by smaller makers than by the industrial giants. With the loss of smaller producers, the range of choice and diversity of cider would be sadly diminished, with the market even more dominated by corporate brands.”

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... tax-threat

WASHINGTON – The federal tax on hard cider would decrease to the same rate as the tax on beer, under legislation the Senate Finance Committee unanimously approved Wednesday.

Currently, hard cider with an alcohol content over 7 percent is taxed at a higher rate — the same rate that applies to wine. The rate is even higher — the same as for champagne — if the carbonation level reaches a certain threshold.

That's troublesome for distillers because hard cider's alcohol content can vary between 5.5 percent and 8 percent, depending on the type of apples used and the time of the year the cider is made, said Scott Donovan, a member of the board of the U.S. Association of Cider Makers.

Under the legislation, the threshold for higher taxation would be cider with an alcohol content of at least 8.5 percent.

"This bill basically revamps the law, which is viewed as antiquated and unpractical,'' Donovan said.

Hard cider is the fastest-growing category among alcoholic beverages sold in the U.S. The industry says cider production more than tripled in two years, from 9.4 million gallons in 2011 to 32 million gallons in 2013.

“If we had to pay an extra £2,500 it would probably stop us risking making wooden-barrel cider and perry because it’s too fragile. Quite regularly a barrel isn’t very good, so I have to throw it away. I would also be much less inclined to experiment with some of the varieties we’re bringing back from extinction if we had to pay even before we begin.”

Gob wrote:Which part of;

“If we had to pay an extra £2,500 it would probably stop us risking making wooden-barrel cider and perry because it’s too fragile. Quite regularly a barrel isn’t very good, so I have to throw it away. I would also be much less inclined to experiment with some of the varieties we’re bringing back from extinction if we had to pay even before we begin.”

would you like explained to you?

Gob wrote:

Four out of five British cider makers would be put out of business after a new ruling by the European Commission.



The UK government was formally told last week to change its current excise duty, which means cider makers that produce less than 70 hectolitres (12,000 pints) a year do not have to pay duty. Changes to the 39-year-old exemption is likely to affect 80 per cent of Britain's 480 cider and perry makers, according to the National Association of Cider Makers (NACM). In a statement, the European Commission, said it was 'unanimously agreed' that the UK excise duty scheme contravenes EU legislation.

It said: 'EU excise duty rules oblige Member States to levy an excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages. 'There are no provisions which would provide for an exception to the general obligation to levy excise duty in respect of cider and perry made for sale by small domestic producers.' David Kaspar runs a small apple juice, cider and perry business in Brookthorpe, Gloucestershire, and makes under 170 hectolitres of cider from the 16 acre orchard to sell at markets and a pub. He told the Observer the tax introduction would be 'another nail in the coffin'. 'The exemption is fundamental to keeping craft cider-making going. If we had to pay an extra £2,500 it would probably stop us risking making wooden-barrel cider and perry because it's too fragile.

'It would be very sad if the tax came in. Not just for financial reasons. It would hasten the demise of traditional orchards and would be another nail in the coffin of traditional cider-making and would be a loss to the natural habitat.' The volume of cider produced annually in the UK is in excess of 6 million hectolitres or 130 million UK gallons, according NACM. Some have blamed the industrial-scale cider makers who account for the production of 130 million gallons of cider in the UK every year for the intervention by the EC, according to the paper.

Simon Russell, spokesperson for NACM, told the Financial Times: 'We will make the positive case for the effect of the exemption to be protected whether by retaining the existing legislation or by other means.' The Treasury has been given two months to respond to the commission without a 'satisfactory response' the Commission may refer the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union. A Treasury spokesperson said: 'The government's support for small cider makers has helped create a diverse and vibrant market, improving consumer choice and creating jobs. 'While we will study the commission's arguments carefully, our support for this industry will continue.'

MajGenl.Meade wrote:My parents rented a pretty Georgian cottage attached to a 15th century farm house in Kent. It was an apple farm - a beautiful series of orchards perched on the side of rolling hills. When the Common Market hit, every tree was ploughed under and the farm was sold because the farm could not compete with the flood of Euro-apples and Euro-regulation. My parents had to move out. The farm manager had to move out. Eight people in a rural area lost their jobs.

rubato wrote: The alternative is protectionism to keep failing enterprises going longer than they should have? Forcing consumers to subsidize higher priced and lower quality goods? When America became the most expensive and worst place to manufacture television sets the whole industry disappeared, as it should.

yrs,
rubato

The alternative is protectionism to keep failing enterprises going longer than they should have? Forcing consumers to subsidize higher priced and lower quality goods?

PS. Not a very good Democrat are you?

When America became the most expensive and worst place to manufacture television sets the whole industry disappeared, as it should.

Lord Jim wrote: "...

When America became the most expensive and worst place to manufacture television sets the whole industry disappeared, as it should.

The US television manufacturing industry was destroyed because of near-slave wage pay levels in Asia, (something which rube apparently approves of) not because it was taxed out of existence...

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/1973/CPS ... re-Hazard/

CPSC Warns Of Possible Fire Hazard

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


September 14, 1973


WASHINGTON, D.C. (Sept. 14) -The Consumer Product Safety Commission- acting on a report to it from the Zenith Radio Corporation- today warned consumers of a possible fire hazard in 12,000 Zenith 19-inch table model color television sets.

The affected sets all were manufactured between late June and mid-August 1972.

CPSC Chairman Richard 0. Simpson said that he has been informed by Zenith that they are moving immediately to notify all of their distributors, dealers and set owners. And he said that Zenith has voluntarily agreed to repair the sets at no expense to consumers. A company spokesman said that Zenith will attempt to contact all set owners within two weeks.

Simpson said that Zenith learned of the problem Wednesday, following a fire in one of the sets in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. There were no reported injuries as a result of that fire.

The sets carry model numbers: D-4030W5, D-4030W6, T-2838W6, D-4032W5, and D-4034P6. All of the affected sets also carry one of two additional identifying numbers: 226C or 227C. The model and identifying numbers appear on a white label on the backs of the television sets.

The Commission said that consumers should immediately unplug the sets and discontinue use until they are checked. Simpson said that the problem is not necessarily related to a series of fires which New Jersey authorities have attributed to faulty television sets. He said that the Commission has been investigating those incidents as well as others which have been reported to it from across the country.

Zenith said that the possible fire hazard in the sets is a result of an improperly located high voltage capacitor. Of the 12,000 sets with the potential defect, most are believed to be in homes.

Simpson praised Zenith for the company's immediate response to a potentially hazardous situation. He said that the Commission has received full cooperation from Zenith personnel and said the Commission was making a public announcement to assure that consumers were alerted to the possible danger.

Zenith has issued a public announcement from its Chicago corporate office.