# shipping wine **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 1, 2009, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295 "2009-10-01T23:48:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![YPOD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e99b99/32.png) [@YPOD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YPOD)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2009, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/1 "2009-10-01T23:48:58Z")
Why can’t a California wine dealer ship throughout the US? They can only ship to about a dozen states. How come? I ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/2 "2009-10-02T00:00:16Z")
Regulations for alcohol reselling are state by state. Certain states have more strict and narrow rules for that than others. ---
**Author:** ![sharding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90db22/32.png) [@sharding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sharding)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/3 "2009-10-02T01:40:03Z")
It’s a huge mess. [http://www.wineinstitute.org/initiatives/stateshippinglaws](http://www.wineinstitute.org/initiatives/stateshippinglaws) ---
**Author:** ![psycat90](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@psycat90](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psycat90)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/4 "2009-10-02T02:38:47Z")
The regulations go back to the 21st Amendment allowing states to govern alcohol sales and the current [three tier system](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-tier_%28alcohol_distribution%29). Things got better overall for winery shipments to consumers after [Granholm v. Heald](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granholm_v._Heald) in 2005, but it’s still a mess, particularly for retailers. A California winery can ship direct to consumers in about 35 states now. CA retailers can ship to about 12, but I’ve seen some interesting work-arounds to this. For example (pulled from a random retailer’s website) - > [@](#): > > All alcoholic beverages are sold in California and title passes to the buyer in California. We make no representation to the legal rights of anyone to ship or import wines into any state outside of California. The buyer is solely responsible for shipment of alcoholic beverage products. By placing an order, you authorize us to act on your behalf to engage a common carrier to deliver your order to you. By the same token, we are fully aware of those states that restrict personal shipments of wine and will not ship to those states. Or, if the state in question allows retailers to ship within the state, it’s possible for a retailer to establish a physical presence within that state in order to do so. [Wine.com](http://Wine.com) does this with several states. A recent court ruling in Michigan stated that Granholm v. Heald applied to retailers as well as producers. It’s hoped that that ruling will open up direct shipping for retailers to consumers the way Granholm v. Heald did for winery direct shipping (in essence, a state can’t allow intrastate shipments while banning interstate ones), but we’ll see. Michigan found a way to [shut it down](http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/01/13/michigan-levels-down-on-wine-retailers/) post haste. Free The Grapes! and The Wine Institute are the best sources of wine shipping laws as they continue to change. ---
**Author:** ![Athena](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/35a633/32.png) [@Athena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Athena)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/5 "2009-10-02T03:10:26Z")
> [@psycat90](#): > > A recent court ruling in Michigan stated that Granholm v. Heald applied to retailers as well as producers. It’s hoped that that ruling will open up direct shipping for retailers to consumers the way Granholm v. Heald did for winery direct shipping (in essence, a state can’t allow intrastate shipments while banning interstate ones), but we’ll see. Michigan found a way to [shut it down](http://shipcompliantblog.com/blog/2009/01/13/michigan-levels-down-on-wine-retailers/) post haste. > > Free The Grapes! and The Wine Institute are the best sources of wine shipping laws as they continue to change. As someone who lives in a remote part of Michigan and attempts to keep a wine cellar, this recent ruling truly sucks. A year ago I could get wine shipped to me from a variety of places; now, most of them refuse. I’m completely pissed, since that means that there is a great many wines that I cannot buy legally as there are only a small handful of distributors who work in my area, and they tend to carry only mass-marketed wine. I’m completely boggled that I cannot conveniently buy something simply because one of the 3 distributors in my area won’t carry it; if I couldn’t find, say, a particular book locally, I’m free to buy it from Amazon and it’s shipped to me just fine. Why is wine so damn different? Of course, it’s even more dumb since I can get around the law in a variety of ways - I can physically go to an out-of-state liquor store, buy the wine, and transport it myself. If it’s too far of a drive, I can have it shipped to a wine warehouse or friend in Wisconsin, and pick it up at my convenience. Or, like **psycat90** points out, a handful of retailers have found work-arounds. I’d be more than happy to pay Michigan sales tax and prove that I’m over 21 and all that if I could just pick up the phone and order wine the way I used to. Even worse, of course, is what it’s done to the local retailers. I used to purchase from wine stores in more populated areas of Michigan. They’ve really been hurt by the no-shipping policy. One of them had a very popular wine club that accounted for a great part of his monthly income; that business was completely shut down by HB 6644. I talked to the owner shortly after the law passed, and he was very pissed, but there was nothing he could do - it went through so fast that no real opposition was posed. Just great logic, for a state that is struggling so badly economically - make it even harder for small businesses to get by. ---
**Author:** ![strqwert44](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@strqwert44](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/strqwert44)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shipping-wine/512295/6 "2009-10-02T07:25:39Z")
basically blame most states’ liquor distributors, which along with new car dealers rank as one of the most governmentally protected industries. obviously direct-to-home wine shipments cut out the middleman and local taxes. so under the guise of “kiddies will buy merlot over the internet,” a lot of state legislatures listen to the local liquor distributor lobby and forbid direct wine shipments, protecting the lobby and state liquor tax receipts. another perfect example of the collective action problem. > **[The Logic of Collective Action](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Logic_of_Collective_Action)** > > The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups is a book by Mancur Olson Jr. published in 1965. It develops a theory of political science and economics of concentrated benefits versus diffuse costs. Its central argument is that concentrated minor interests will be overrepresented and diffuse majority interests trumped, due to a free-rider problem that is stronger when a group becomes larger. > The book challenged accepted wisdom in Olson's day that: > The book argues instead...