Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17
04/10/2006 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB494 | |
| HB431 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 431 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 494 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 431-WINERY LICENSES 4:08:37 PM CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 431, "An Act relating to sales of wine by a winery licensee." 4:09:01 PM CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff to Representative LeDoux, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, noted a draft committee substitute (CS) included in members' packets. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt CSHB 431, Version 24-LS1578\G, Luckhaupt, 4/06/06, as the working document. There being no objection, Version G was before the committee. MS. MARASIGAN explained that HB 431 makes it possible for in- state wineries to sell wine in-state. Currently, she said, it is possible to go online and purchase wine from out-of-state wineries; however, it is currently illegal to purchase from in- state wineries. 4:10:38 PM STEVEN (STEVE) THOMPSON, Owner, Alaskan Wilderness Wines, said that HB 431 would give in-state wineries equal treatment with out-of-state wineries. He encouraged support of the bill. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what types of wine Alaskan Wilderness Wines produces. MR. THOMPSON replied that his company currently produces a variety of berry wines, in addition to sparkling rhubarb, and mead. He said that production is around 150 cases per year. 4:12:01 PM DALE FOX, Executive Director, Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant & Retailer's Association (CHARR), related that Alaska CHARR supports the provisions for Alaska wineries to ship product to Alaskans. He related that most states allowed in-state wineries to ship but not the out-of-state wineries, which resulted in supreme court challenges. Alaska has a small industry, and all that can be done to support it should be done, he opined. Clearly, if out-of-state wines are allowed to be shipped to Alaska, those wineries in the state should also be allowed to ship to Alaskans. Mr. Fox highlighted that when a retail package store ships alcohol it must follow the specifications of 13 AAC 104.645, which basically establishes provisions to ensure that the purchaser is 21 years of age and the order is paid. If in-state wineries are allowed to ship, then they should be required to follow the same rules as package stores, he said. 4:14:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD recalled that similar legislation addressed this two to three years ago. CHAIR ANDERSON reminded the committee that the legislation to which Representative Crawford spoke did not pass. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG noted that there was a supreme court ruling that specified that there can't be two sets of rules, which this legislation corrects. He asked if there are any statements by the courts that need to be addressed. 4:15:29 PM MS. MARASIGAN explained that in most other states wine can be shipped within the state, but those from out-of-state were prevented from shipping wine into the state. Therefore, the supreme court ruling stated that both must be treated equally. In Alaska, out-of-state wineries are allowed to ship into the state while in-state wineries aren't allowed to ship within the state. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if the parity of taxation was addressed in this ruling. MS. MARASIGAN said she did not believe that it was. She related her belief that taxes were addressed such that an out-of-state winery couldn't be charged more to ship into another state than what those in the state were being charged. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG questioned whether the ruling touched taxation as it applies to Internet sales. 4:17:17 PM DOUGLAS (DOUG) B. GRIFFIN, Director, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board ("ABC Board"), in response to an earlier question, said that the ABC Board would not have a problem instructing the wineries to follow the same provisions, written order provisions, as for package stores. For equity, he agreed that a similar regulation to apply to direct shipment from wineries would be appropriate. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG surmised that an amendment is needed to create the duty unless that is already in place. MR. GRIFFIN said that he would like to speak with his legal counsel on that matter. CHAIR ANDERSON interjected that the next committee of referral for HB 431 is the House Finance Committee. He suggested that the legislation could be reported from committee and the sponsor and staff could address that matter before the legislation arrives in the House Finance Committee. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG opined that the winery should abide by the law and it's merely a matter of whether it should be placed in statute or whether the current regulations are applicable. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if there is companion legislation in the Senate. MS. MARASIGAN replied no. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that this legislation only extends those privileges to in-state wineries. He related his understanding that Alaska's statutes regarding the importation of wine are out of compliance. MR. GRIFFIN pointed out that in Alaska there was never a statutory or regulatory provision that addressed an Alaskan ordering wine from an out-of-state winery. In the absence of the statute, the ABC Board determined that it is permissible for Alaskans to order wine from [out-of-state] wineries for personal use. He related his understanding that the Supreme Court's ruling didn't take away the powers of taxation, but mainly attempted to treat all wineries equal. 4:22:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG related his understanding that a winery outside the state has to be licensed with the State of Alaska in order to export into the state. MR. GRIFFIN replied no. CHAIR ANDERSON, upon determining that no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony. 4:23:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if there was a reason why the winery fee was deleted. MS. MARASIGAN answered that Mr. Griffin didn't feel it was a good idea and thus the winery fee was deleted. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report CSHB 431, Version 24- LS1578\G, Luckhaupt, 4/6/06, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 431(L&C) was reported from committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|