Whaaa?
Retailers do not have the same protection in the law as wineries. The Granholm Supreme Court case made it legal for wineries to ship to any state that allows its own in-state wineries to ship (I assume every state, but not positive). That case (sadly, and inexplicably) did not extend to retailers, so they are subject to the whims (and legal bribery) of each state’s alcohol control system. I know that MD retailers cannot ship to California (there are wines in MD I’ve been interested in), so I assume the reverse is true, no surprise. It’s not a matter of licensing, it’s that they are completely prohibited.
California wineries can and do ship to MD.
K&L has not shipped to MD since I started buying wine so I do not buy from them. Vineyards can ship to MD, which means I solely buy from them.
According to shipcompliant.com, there are only 14 states where retailers (not talking about wineries) can ship their wines to, and each have certain requirements regarding permits, volume limits, etc. I also saw somewhere that my state of WA only allows intra-state shipping from retailers to consumers, and it is certainly not one of those 14 states listed…despite the fact that most retailers across the country have been shipping to WA as long as I have been collecting wine. So…I assume that they have just ignored the restrictions. Now whether the UPS issue with K&L is due to them not wanting to ship “illegally” (though why would they not pick up shipments from K&L to “legal” states?), or whether they want to get out of the wine shipment business (perishable goods and maybe they have had too many claims regarding damage?), I don’t know. Have consumers been getting emails from any other internet retailers other than BP wine mentioned above?
http://www-archive.shipcompliant.com/media/40066/retail_to_consumer_updated.pdf
Yes, that was my point. They can, but retailers don’t have the same protection from states prohibiting them.
Not good; I’ve got a few orders from California retailers up for shipping this season and my preferred ground shipper is UPS because FedEx Ground/Home delivery in my area has been very unreliable and their only pickup location is an hour away.
Why is this freaking issue getting worse, not better?
According to K&L, UPS has gotten out of the wine shipping business. Period. At least from retailers. They didn’t say whether UPS’s decision applied to wineries.
Why is K&L the only one that has said this? We shall see if all my shipments into CA next week will be via Fedex or not.
Ups website is unchAnged. https://www.ups.com/wine
I expect that K&L received the same cease and desist letter from FedEx that I received late last week. It begins by reciting how under my agreement with FedEx I agreed to comply with all alcohol shipping laws. It then states that since January 2013 I have made one or more shipments to New York, and demands that I either provide proof that I am licensed to make such shipments or cease and desist. No more shipments to New York for me, either. Sadly, quite soon, it may be California only.
I expect that this was precipitated by a stern letter to FedEx from New York authorities.
Sounds so familiar to me.
This is getting scary. So many wines don’t make it out to California, buying from out of state retailers is a necessity for any true wine geek. I’m wondering how this will start to affect out of state retailers shipping to California.
I’ve been away from retail online wine shipping for a few years, but this seems to be coming to near the end of a progression that began maybe 10 years ago. When I had my shop I shipped a single shipment to Vermont or New Hampshire for a customer and got that same kind of letter… except it was from the Attorney General’s office of that state. Over the years this seems to have gotten tighter and tighter, to where the carriers themselves are no longer willing to be in the middle (just a guess, but likely due to pressure from the states).
At the time of the Granholm decision I recall wondering WHY it only pertained to wineries and think the prevailing thought at the time was that retailers had no organized effort to be part of it. When Costco went to court in Washington I recall it appearing to be the possible beginning of an opening for retailers, but that didn’t really happen.
Here’s a link to the National Association Of Wine Retailers info on the subject. It’s pretty bleak if a retailer follows the rules. http://cdn.nawr.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RetailerlShippingStates.pdf I suspect that many haven’t, partly because they don’t want to pay the costs and go through the hoops, and partly because carriers didn’t take responsibility for the legalities. That last part appears to be changing.
"K&L is always one of the first stores to react to the “legal changes.” Daniel Posner (ITB), on Galloni’s Vinous message board.
Ship all your stuff now.
Interesting that the only “state” besides California and Alaska that allows out-of-state wine retailers to ship wine without any permits or remittance of taxes or fees is . . . Washington, D.C. !!
Because it was exempt from the Prohibition Repeal which started the three-tier system.
Buy and ship now, or forever hold your money.
I spoke to UPS yesterday and they said their policy hasn’t changed. I may try calling and asking a few different people there though…
NYC has always been prohibited for retailers to ship via UPS afaik… See below for the list of permitted states they sent us when we set up an acct with them a year~ ago:
***IMPORTANT NOTE: Shippers are responsible for ensuring that all shipments of wine comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and requirements, including quantity limitations, reporting requirements, limits on frequency of shipments, and permitting and/or taxation requirements. Most destination states require permits or licenses from the destination state for wine shipments to consumers. Shippers must ensure that they do not ship to dry areas in any state that may otherwise allow wine shipments (which will be reflected as “Yes” in the chart below), including to dry areas in Alaska, Connecticut, Florida, New Hampshire and West Virginia. Shippers are also responsible for compliance with any “reciprocity” requirements, including those that may be in effect in California, Missouri, New Mexico and New York.
Alaska
California
IdahoP
LouisianaP
MissouriP
NebraskaP
NevadaP
New HampshireP
New MexicoP
North DakotaP
OregonP
VirginiaP
Washington D.C.
West VirginiaP
WyomingP
P - State requires license or permit for some or all shipment types.
R1 - Per state reciprocal laws, shipments allowed only from Alaska, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Virginia, Washington, D.C., West Virginia and Wyoming.
R2 - Per state reciprocal law, shipments allowed only from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. See https://www.sla.ny.gov/out-of-state-direct-wine-shipment.
IntraIntrastate shipments (shipments tendered and to be delivered in the origin state) are allowed, but state prohibits shipments from other states.
I am sure I could be wrong but I’m thinking some of this is missing a distinction between shipments from wineries and retailers.