I can sort of understand their protectionist agenda with their letter to Wine Library last year, but threatening a major retailer in their own state? How does this do them or any of their wholesalers any good at all? I have purchased from Empire several times in the past and every transaction has been flawless. So help me if they go after any of my other favorite NY retailers; I have traveled to most of them in person in the past (Empire ironically being the one exception) and will go there in person if I must to continue to support them despite living out of state; hopefully that doesn’t simultaneously help these bureaucratic morons.
Authority should never be delegated to those who crave it.
Sometimes, the law is an *ss. ![[help.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/4/4030a9a60185376a7393a78002ce3ec0176e975e.gif "help"){kind=small}
What about Zachy’s? They must do a lot more of this than Empire I would think.
I did wonder why most will ship but a few won’t in NY.
What a jerk. Can’t he be fired?
I have done some reading on this and it appears that the SLA is objecting because the retailer is shipping into states that do not allow residents to buy direct from out of state. Thus, for example, if Empire Wine ships to a resident of Massachusetts, the receipt of the shipment is illegal in Massachusetts and the SLA takes the position that the retailer in New York is acting improperly. Although I have doubts about the right of the SLA to enforce what is essentially a Massachusetts prohibition, the real problem lies in the puritan states that hate alcohol consumption or that want to protect their citizens from the evil retailers.
I spoke to Empire about this recently after my own attempt to purchase there and ship was thwarted. I was surprised as MO has a laissez faire approach to shipping in my experience, though technically a reciprocal state. NY has decided to enforce the hypothetical/potential complaints of any state that wouldn’t allow shipment from NY. In the case of MO that is only because NY does not allow any shipment from out of state, which is hilarious when you consider that they certainly operate at a huge trade surplus as both a producer and a state with many large retailers, with each group having a large out-of-state clientele.
I will add that after reading the article it would appear that they are also citing Empire for shipping to states that totally allow shipment from NY, so apparently NYSLA is reaching even further than what I had originally understood. Either way, this can’t be laid on other states, this is a NY offense that is only going to hurt businesses in NY. Good one guys.
California, Louisiana and Ohio were mentioned. I see no problems here:
the article said that VA and LA are both open shipping (with permit for LA). CA, like MO, is reciprocal. OH prohibits direct shipping, according to your link.
I just double checked ODLC’s website (though just their FAQ, not the official revised code). It doesn’t expressly permit it but doesn’t deny it either. Up to 24 cases/yr direct from wineries, a more generic 6 btls/month from anywhere out of state, and those six bottles are tax exempt if brought in on your person.
These are the same people who, in 2009-10, when wine sales were down 30%, were strictly enforcing rules prohibiting distributors from making deliveries to retailers who were more than 30 days in arrears – even if the distributor was happy to extend credit during the crisis.
Well in any case, NY’s allegations against Empire appear to target states with: No shipping allowed, reciprocal shipping allowed and all shipping allowed. But apparently the NYLSA is citing to a NY “rule” not other states’ laws, so I guess it wouldn’t matter (depending upon how the NY law is written).
It seems absurd in any case. Why hassle successful NY businesses? Apparently they offered a $100K settlement, so maybe that is reason enough. Probably lose that much tax revenue (business tax, not sales tax since none would be collected) pretty quickly though if you really put a stop to out-of-state shipping.
Just caught this on Wine Spectator. Anybody close to Empire Wines? Looks like they might make a fight for retailers via the Granholm Decision.
New York Retailer Charged with Illegally Shipping Wine to Out-of-State Consumers
Albany’s Empire Wine fires back with lawsuit against New York State Liquor Authority
“To arms! To arms!” Good luck, Empire. ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Dupe thread.
I’m not sure what the politics are like in NY, but when Perry became the governor of TX, rules tightened when shipping into TX and cease and desist letters to out of state wineries and retailers went out by the hundreds. When Perry started his march to the presidency, TABC started coming down on out of state retailers. In this instance, the state, (driven by the 2 major distributors in the state), were trying to eliminate competition.
What’s driving NY? Tax greed? Interpretation of post prohibition laws by somebody in authority?
Really a shame they have to go through this! I have bought from them and always had a great experience. Good luck Adam and Empire.
Randy, in the WS piece Empire’s statement refers to a “rule” which they call vague. I’m assuming that there must be some type of regulation promulgated by the state of NY that would allow them to do this. The why is more perplexing. I can only assume it would be to make money off of fines, as I can see no other reason.
An update on this case:
Empire Wine should have the right to question four State Liquor Authority employees, an acting state Supreme Court justice has determined.
Justice Gerald Connolly of Albany has ordered SLA to comply with subpoenas issued by the Colonie retailer, which is defending its license after the regulator cited it last summer for shipping wine to customers in 16 states where such direct shipments are illegal.
Another update:
As its challenge of the State Liquor Authority’s powers winds its way through the legal system, Colonie-based Empire Wine scored Monday with passage of a bill that would limit the regulator’s authority.
Assemblyman Phil Steck’s legislation to limit the SLA’s authority to penalize licensees based on perceived violations of other state’s laws passed the Assembly 90-6 Monday afternoon. The passage comes nearly a year after Empire Wine was cited for sending wine to states where such direct shipments are illegal.
It was the first of hundreds of pieces of legislation that will be voted on over the last three days of the legislative session.
“This bill is about due process,” Steck, D-Colonie, said in a statement. “The New York State Liquor Authority is overstepping the bounds of its authority by attempting to enforce out-of-state laws for which they hold no jurisdiction. Anytime there is an abuse of power by an administrative agency, it is incumbent on the legislature to intervene.”