Hoping the link above works. I just came across this yesterday. In my reading of the new law that took effect last week (July 1), it appears that Sections 6 & 7, through a definition change of “Vendor” to “supplier”, may now prohibit out-of-state retailers from shipping alcohol/wine to NV consumers.
I realize this only (directly) impacts NV residents, but have followed threads for other states (IL for example) that had shipping laws changed and am curious what, if anything, can be done to reverse it.
It looks to me like 369.490.2.(c) still seems to allow direct shipment of wine from out of state, up to 12 cases per year, for personal use, without having to worry about the prohibitions or permits otherwise set forth in the Chapter.
As an aside, it also looks to me like an out of state retailer who directly imports wines that don’t have a designated importer for NV can get a “supplier” license, at least for those wines, because they would meet the definition of “supplier” (which does not generally include retailers). That would allow them to comply with the statute rather than having to rely on the “this Chapter doesn’t apply” exception cited above.
Not legal advice. All statutory interpretations wrong or your money back.
My reading is the same as D@ave’s. “Supplier” does not include “retailer” in any of the definitions I located in the Nevada Revised Statutes. Nothing I see in SB 307 changes the ability of out-of-state retailers to ship to consumers. (Not an attorney so this is not legal advice, but I did drink a 2016 Once & Future Bedrock Vineyard Zin last night.)
I’m not sure I’d go that far. It looks like before, an out of state “vendor” could get a permit to ship into the state, without having to be a “supplier.” Now you have to be a “supplier” to get a permit, it would appear, and a retailer is not within the definition of a “supplier,” so would appear to be ineligible for a permit. So before the change, an out of state vendor with a permit could ship. Now, only an out of state “supplier” can get a permit (but see my comment above about a retailer who does direct importation). With a permit, shipping is allowed without having to rely on the personal use exemption I cite above, and thus one resident could order more than 12 cases per year, or possibly alcoholic beverages other than wine (I didn’t dig that deep to confirm this), from an out of state “vendor” with a permit.
Now that an out of state vendor can’t get a permit, they have to rely on the exemption and observe the limits that go with it (personal use only, 12 cases per year, wine only).
Again, not legal advice. All interpretations based on a quick read of the old and new statute without any prior knowledge of NV ABC law and without consulting any regs, case law, or ABC officials. Thus, all statutory interpretations herein remain guaranteed wrong or your money back.
I don’t live in NV any more, but Southern wields a pretty big hammer. Hope it doesn’t affect folks like us getting wines from where we want, but it sure looks like a step in the wrong direction. I’m now back in CO purgatory and can’t get wine from K&L and Total Wine has me on secret probation.
I have to imagine that Nevada would be 51st out of 51 among the states and DC in the percentage of sales “lost” by the big wholesalers to out of state retailers shipping to residents (all else being equal). Surely hotel and restaurant sales are a much bigger percentage of total wholesale sales than in just about any other state or DC.
Thanks D@ve & WBeck. I read/interpreted it both ways with the definition of “supplier” and “vendor”, and figured I probably missed something. We already had a limit (not sure if it was 12 or 15 cases), so I presumed this was a more restrictive move as I can’t see the purpose of the bill otherwise. Given temps for the next several months, I won’t know the practical implications of this until shipping season reopens late Oct / early Nov.
Sadly this is real. Heard today that the NV Department of Taxation are pulling all Certificates of Compliance from out-of-state retailers due to Nevada SB307 coming into effect on Jul 1. This means that out-of-state retailers are no longer legally allowed to ship to Nevada consumers.
Again, based on my reading (which well could be wrong), pulling all Certificates of Compliance from out-of-state retailers seems to follow the statute, as they are no longer eligible (unless they are also importers and someone buys my argument on that). And those retailers need Certificates of Compliance to do all the relatively unlimited things they used to do.
BUT, based on my reading, I still think they don’t need a Certificate of Compliance for shipments that fall within the exemption for shipments of a) wine to people b) for personal consumption, c) in amounts less than 12 cases per person per year.
Of course that doesn’t mean the NV Dept of Taxation will agree with my reading.