LIQUOR;

You asked for information about the law allowing consumers to import liquor directly from out-of-state sellers. You also asked us to look at the attached correspondence on the subject.

SUMMARY

Connecticut law allows any consumer to import from any other state up to five gallons of alcoholic beverage in any 60-day period for their own consumption, and up to five gallons in any 365-day period from outside the country. A General Law Committee bill, (HB 6646, copy enclosed), increases the limits to up to 10 gallons. The committee took no action on the bill.

Our law requires that the consumer obtain the prior approval of the Department of Revenue Services (DRS) and pay excise and sales tax on the price of the liquor as a well as shipping before importing it. The correspondence you provided alleges that our law is unworkable since most vineyards and common carriers refuse to deal with Connecticut consumers because of our law.

The correspondence appears to advocate a system that would do away with prior approval and payment of excise and sales tax. Apparently, he wants a law that would allow the consumer to report his purchases to DRS after he received the shipment and pay his taxes then.

Perry Carpinella of DRS disputes the claim that our law does not work. He indicates that his department processes around 100 to 120 requests for permission to import each year, and he believes these consumers are able to make their purchases from vineyards and arrange for shipping. He indicated that the excise taxes are 60 cents per gallon of wine and that sales tax must be paid on both the sales price and the shipping costs. He acknowledged that he was unaware of whether consumers had problems with wineries or shippers. But he believes his department would oppose a law that did not require the consumer to pay tax before importing the liquor.

According to the correspondence, Connecticut should adopt a “reciprocal law”. Apparently, such a law would allow consumers to purchase wine from vineyards located in other states without first paying taxes as long as consumers from that state could do the same with Connecticut vineyards. Several states have reciprocal laws. We have summarized two of them below-California and Oregon.

We have enclosed information from a national advocacy group that is trying to get states to change their laws in this direction. The information includes a so-called model act.

CALIFORNIA

California allows any adult California resident to apply to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control for a permit to receive a shipment of wine from any state that allows its adult residents to receive shipments of no less than nine liters of wine per month from California (California Business and Professions Code Section 23661. 2).

Shipments into California must be made pursuant to rules the department adopts. The total shipments permitted in any calendar month may not exceed 9 liters. The law authorizes common carriers to whom a permit is presented to make delivery to the person named in the permit.

The law specifies that delivery of a shipment pursuant to a permit is not deemed a sale in California. Thus, it apparently may be made without collecting sales tax before or at the time of sale or delivery.

OREGON

Oregon has a similar law (5471. 229 Oreg. Rev Stats). It authorizes any Oregon resident age 21 or older to receive up to two cases of wine per month for personal use, containing not more than nine liters per case, from another state without paying additional taxes, fees, or changes if the state from which the wine is sent allows its residents to do the same. It limits those who transport wine to two cases to the same address at one time.

We have also enclosed copies of the laws of the following additional states, which have similar laws. Colorado (§ 12-47-104 Col. Stat. ); Hawaii (§ 281-33. 1 Stats), Iowa (§ 123. 56 Iowa Code); Idaho (§ 23-1309A Idaho Statutes); Illinois (6-29 Illinois Statutes); Missouri (§ 311. 462. 1 Miss. Rev. Stats. ); New Mexico (§ 60-7A-3 New Mexico Stats. Ann. ); Washington (§ 66-. 12. 190 Washington Stats. ); Wisconsin (139. 035 Wisconsin Stats); and West Virginia (60-8-6 New Jersey Stat. )

GC: eh