www.fgks.org   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

  • Site Search
  • Search Local Business Listings

New keg law results in additonal cost, fewer sales, for liquor store owners, manufacturers

Published: Friday, December 02, 2011, 8:01 AM
kegtaglaw.JPGAn employee of Ideal Party Store, 908 N. Johnson St., points to where tags are required to be placed on kegs per a new law.

KOCHVILLE TWP.-- Michael Sous has sold two kegs since Nov. 1.

Sous is the owner of Jenny’s Party Store, 6340 Bay, and he says that before Michigan’s keg tagging law went into effect, his store sold four to five kegs weekly.

Sous’s store caters to many Saginaw Valley State University students, he said.

“It’s pretty pathetic,” he said. “No one wants the liability.”

Since the beginning of November, state law requires that all kegs sold be tagged, with an identification stating who purchased the alcohol. In order for keg deposits to be returned, the tags must remain in place. Removing the tag results in the loss of the deposit and a potential misdemeanor charge with up to 93 days in jail and/or a $500 fine.

Sous says that while the law is a positive move to curb underage drinking, sales of other products, like cases and 30-packs have simply increased.

“I’ve heard of some stores that have stopped carrying kegs,” he said. “We’ll always be having kegs. College kids are the ones buying the kegs.”

For Jeff Opperman, the owner of Cork and Ale, 2940 Midland, the new law hasn’t cost him keg sales, instead, they result in a different trouble: additional paperwork.

“It sure costs us a lot more money, taking time with my employees, with other customers to fill out forms,” he said. “That is a lot more hassle for us and a lot more work for us that we don’t get anything out of.”

Opperman says keeping alcohol away from minors, but it can be done in different ways.

“It’s typical, bureaucratic paperwork that’s overdone,” he said.

His customers, unlike Sous’s, are older, and purchase kegs to produce at-home microbrews.

He also said that beer manufacturers are going to see a challenge, as removing the tagged kegs to refill them will equal significant costs in labor.



Sponsored Links




Comments Feed

View: Oldest first | Newest first
  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next comments »
hone December 02, 2011 at 8:21AM

Yeah, those republicans sure are good at getting those regulations off the backs of busines owners. They, like in almost every instance, preach one thing and do the opposite. I say hypocritical, how about you?

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
cherrychump December 02, 2011 at 9:10AM

Sigh. I assume that you have no clue about who passed this law. I apologize if incorrect.

The law was introduced by a Republican in the Senate. It was passed unanimously in the Senate. Unanimously means no senator, Rep or Dem, voted against it. Two Reps and one Dem did not vote. In the house the vote was 55 for, 39 against. Of the 55 yes votes, 44 were cast by Dems. Of the 39 nay votes, 30 were cast by Reps. It was signed into law by Jennifer Granholm, a Dem.

2011 House Bill 4137: Repeal new law mandating beer keg tag, introduced by Republican Pat Sommerville, currently languishes in committee.

Care to retract your snarky sarcastic post hone? How about you, StealthSavant?

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
chosenspeed December 02, 2011 at 9:21AM

I believe the bill started in the House and was introduced by Mark Meadows, a Lansing Democrat. HB 4565.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
Aletheia - 3 December 02, 2011 at 9:39AM

Good ole Mark Meadows, the Minority Vice-Chair of the Judiciary. I am sure he'll also rubber stamp the overturning of the MMJ Act as well. He’s unresponsive, disconnected, and a disgrace. Hope his replacement actually listens to their constituents.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
cherrychump December 02, 2011 at 9:45AM

So 4565 comes before 4137? It may be true that someone introduced something before Sommerville. HB4565 ain't it.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
cherrychump December 02, 2011 at 9:48AM

Whoops. I see that you are talking about the original Keg bill. I thought you were talking about possible repeal.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
Durwood_Mac December 02, 2011 at 1:31PM

You cannot expect the brainwashed to ever change their post. Try telling a liberal that Republicans voted in higher percentage for the Civil Rights Act in the early 60's. They have been SO conditioned as to HATE all non-left wingers, that they will fight tooth and nail debating against that point, EVEN when you bring up the congressional vote record.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
Aletheia - 3 December 02, 2011 at 4:32PM

Durwood - I wrote "Good ole Mark Meadows, the Minority Vice-Chair of the Judiciary. I am sure he'll also rubber stamp the overturning of the MMJ Act as well. He’s unresponsive, disconnected, and a disgrace. Hope his replacement actually listens to their constituents."

And you know darn well I am a lefty. So you got some crow to eat...

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
Durwood_Mac December 02, 2011 at 1:32PM

You cannot expect the brainwashed to ever change their post. Try telling a liberal that Republicans voted in higher percentage for the Civil Rights Act in the early 60's. They have been SO conditioned as to HATE all non-left wingers, that they will fight tooth and nail debating against that point, EVEN when you bring up the congressional vote record.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
yabigdope December 02, 2011 at 1:40PM

well done, Cherry.

Nothing like cold hard facts to shut down the ignorant. Of course we all know the liberal haters will only find another way to blame a Republican.

I'm actually surprised they aren't claiming it is all George Bush's fault.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
casper489 December 02, 2011 at 2:40PM

so true cherry but we all know that this to is Bush's fault, just like everything else they want to complain about! I'm joking of course, but no one wants to stand up for anything, it is to easy to blame others.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
shanedr December 02, 2011 at 11:37AM

Not only was it a Republican law but it is so onerous it takes a whole minute or two for the store to fill out the tag and post it on the keg.

So if keg sales have been cut in half the logical conclusion would be the store had been making at least half it's keg sales to minors. Which is exactly why we have this new law to prevent sales to minors.

Some regulations are a good thing, and very welcome. Regulations done correctly should be the goal. Not the elimination of regulations

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
RankTank December 02, 2011 at 11:47AM

I agree that good regulations should be the goal. But this is not a good regulation. This does nothing to curb underage drinking, it just encourages other forms of alcohol.

It's not a logical conclusion that half the sales were going to minors. The conclusion should be that the people buying the kegs are now buying alcohol in alternative forms because they don't want the liability.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
shanedr December 02, 2011 at 7:18PM

It is an excellent regulation. It barely slows down the sale of a keg, it identifies the person the keg was sold to. As for minors getting alcohol from other sources that is another problem. But this regulation does exactly what it was designed to do and does it simply and effectively.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
RankTank December 03, 2011 at 9:34AM

This whole article is how this is slowing down the sales of kegs. Regardless, the problem of minors getting alcohol from another source is not just "another problem." It's the whole problem. Because if they are getting alcohol from another source just as readily, then the regulation has done nothing besides artificially changing preferences away from beer in kegs to other alcohol. That is the definition of a bad regulation.

Inappropriate? Alert us.
Reply Post new
  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next comments »



Quantcast