Many Americans brew beer in their kitchens and make wine at home. However, making whiskey or gin domestically can lead to legal complications. This distinction caught the attention of John Ream from Ohio, a former aerospace engineer and home-brewing enthusiast. He seeks to distill small quantities of spirits at home for himself and his wife.
Robert Alt, the attorney representing Ream, noted, “It is perfectly legal to make beer at home or to make wine at home, but if you make even a single ounce of distilled spirits at home, it is a federal felony.”
Historical Context
Ream’s interest in crafting his own drinks began with a home-brewing kit gifted by his then-fiancée, now wife, Kristin. His engineering background found appeal in the combination of art and science involved in brewing. After experimenting for years, Ream and his wife opened Trek Brewing Company in Newark, Ohio. However, the legal restrictions on distilled spirits set hurdles for home experimentation.
The federal law allows the home production of beer and wine for personal use, but distilled spirits come under stricter regulation. Violations can lead to steep fines and prison time. This debate has gained attention within the home-brewing community, although the American Homebrewers Association does not have an official position on legalizing home distilling. Some members practice distilling at home and emphasize safety and education.
Origins of Distilling Laws
Why does federal law treat distilled spirits differently than beer and wine?
The roots of this issue stretch back over two centuries. In 1791, the federal government started taxing distilled spirits, culminating in the Whiskey Rebellion. By 1868, concern over tax evasion led Congress to regulate where distilleries could operate, prohibiting home distilling.
Today, this old fight brings up modern questions about Congress’s authority to regulate local, non-commercial activity within private residences. According to Alt, “To what extent can Congress regulate local non-commercial otherwise lawful activity that you engage in, in your very home?”
Two federal appeals courts have offered different answers to this constitutional question. The Sixth Circuit ruled against Ream in April, stating that the restriction supports federal liquor tax collection. Congress initially banned home stills amid tax evasion concerns.
However, earlier the Fifth Circuit reached the opposite conclusion, saying Congress’ taxing authority does not justify the restriction. Both cases have reached the Supreme Court, which has yet to agree to hear them.
The outcome may determine whether this prohibited hobby can extend from commercial distilleries to homes. Ream and advocates argue that tax collection does not permit Congress to ban home distilling altogether.
For home brewers, the dispute holds potential implications for making spirits like whiskey or gin at home. Alt concluded, “This would be a wonderful opportunity to raise a glass to freedom and to limited government.”