logo                   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline John Barleycorn  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:43:04 AM(UTC)
John Barleycorn


Rank: Senior Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 804

Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 5 post(s)
"You'll find plenty of references to H.R. 3249 on the web. However, other than some passing comments on what people think the bill is about, you won't find many (of any) details. So I started this thread to provide those details.

The bill was originally introduced on November 7, 2001 (107th Congress, 2001-2002) by Rep. Bart Stupak [D-MI]. The bill was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and died. On October 23, 2007 (110th Congress) the bill was re-introduced as H.R. 3949. The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to repeal the prohibition on producing distilled spirits in specified locations, including dwelling houses, sheds, yards, and enclosed areas connected with any dwelling house. Neither of the bills had/has any cosponsors.

The content of the H.R. 3949 is as follows:
Quote:

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3949

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow distilled spirits to be produced in dwelling houses, other connected structures, and certain other premises.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 23, 2007


Mr. STUPAK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL


To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow distilled spirits to be produced in dwelling houses, other connected structures, and certain other premises.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION OF PRODUCTION OF DISTILLED SPIRITS ON CERTAIN PREMISES.

(a) Repeal- Section 5178(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--

(1) by striking subparagraph (B); and

(2) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).


(b) Conforming Amendments-

(1) Section 5601(a) of such Code (relating to criminal penalties) is amended by striking paragraph (6).

(2) Section 5505 of such Code (relating to applicability of provisions of this chapter) is amended by striking subsection (b).

(3) Section 5178(b) of such Code is amended by striking `(not specifically prohibited by section 5601(a)(6))'.

(4) Section 5178(c) of such Code is amended by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively.


(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.



The stricken paragraphs are as follows:

Section 5178(a)(1)(B):

Quote:
No distilled spirits plant for the production of distilled spirits shall be located in any dwelling house, in any shed, yard, or inclosure connected with any dwelling house, or on board any vessel or boat, or on premises where beer or wine is made or produced, or liquors of any description are retailed, or on premises where any other business is carried on (except when authorized under subsection (b))


Section 5601(a)(6):
Quote:
Any person who -
(6) Distilling on prohibited premises uses, or possesses with intent to use, any still, boiler, or other utensil for the purpose of producing distilled spirits, or aids or assists therein, or causes or procures the same to be done, in any dwelling house, or in any shed, yard, or inclosure connected with such dwelling house (except as authorized under section 5178(a)(1)(C)), or on board any vessel or boat, or on any premises where beer or wine is made or produced, or where liquors of any description are retailed, or on premises where any other business is carried on (except when authorized under section 5178(b)); or


Section 5505(b):
Quote:
Prohibited premises
Plants established under this part shall not be located on any premises where distilling is prohibited under section 5601(a)(6).


Section 5178(b):
Quote:
Use of premises for other businesses
The Secretary may authorize the carrying on of such other businesses (not specifically prohibited by section 5601(a)(6)) on premises of distilled spirits plants, as he finds will not jeopardize the revenue. Such other businesses shall not be carried on until an application to carry on such business has been made to and approved by the Secretary.


Section 5178(c)(2):
Quote:
For penalty for distilling on prohibited premises, see section 5601(a)(6).
"
Offline John Barleycorn  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:47:12 AM(UTC)
John Barleycorn


Rank: Senior Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 804

Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 5 post(s)
"From Wikipedia:
Quote:
Bartholomew Thomas ""Bart"" Stupak (/ˈstuːpæk/; born February 29, 1952) is an American politician and lobbyist. A member of the Democratic Party, Stupak served as the U.S. Representative from Michigan's 1st congressional district from 1993 to 2011.

Stupak chose not to seek re-election in 2010. He departed Congress in January 2011, and was succeeded by Dan Benishek, a Republican from the Upper Peninsula. Stupak is now a lobbyist with Venable LLP.


So the bill no longer has any sponsors. The only sponsor it did have (Stupak) is no longer a Congressman."
Offline John Barleycorn  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:56:45 AM(UTC)
John Barleycorn


Rank: Senior Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 804

Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 5 post(s)
"The bill only seeks to repeal the prohibition on producing distilled spirits in specified locations. It does not legalize anything. A best, it does not prevent the use of one's dwelling or shed from the federal gov't perspective ... and perhaps decriminalizes the use of one's home for distillation activities.

In addition, the bill has no effect at the state and local levels. Distilling at home is not a constitutional right. The state and local gov't can continue to view home (or unlicensed) distillation as a crime. Here's an interesting link that highlights what I mean:

http://djsilverfish.word...e-of-1986-section-5178a1

So there's a long road to hoe here, gentlemen. I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic. Decriminalization may be a very worthy (and attainable) first goal."
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.