Ask the Collective
The questions independent drinks founders ask most — answered. Distilled from years of community knowledge so the good stuff never disappears in the feed again.
How is duty calculated on ready-to-drink canned cocktails, and what are the duty rates in the UK and France?
Duty on RTD cans depends on the **base of the alcohol** in the product, not just the ABV alone. If the product is over 50% fermented base (e.g. wine), it falls under wine duty; if it's spirit-based, it falls under spirit duty. **UK Duty Rates:** - **Wine Duty** applies to made-wines and wine-based RTDs. The rate depends on ABV: - More than 1.2% to 4%: 91.68p per litre - More than 4% to 5.5%: 126.08p per litre - More than 5.5% to 15%: 297.57p per litre - More than 15% to 22%: 396.72p per litre - More than 22% ABV: charged at spirit duty rate - **Spirit Duty** applies to spirit-based RTDs: £28.74 per litre of pure alcohol - **Fortified wines** (e.g. port, where approximately 1/3 is spirit): duty is calculated based on the wine component percentage, not the spirit content **France Duty Rates:** French duty on canned RTDs is significantly higher and is described by members as "basically prohibitive to sell RTDs in France." Members report rates of approximately €110 per litre of pure alcohol, plus additional levies: - Standard rate plus premix tax: approximately €0.23 + €1.38 = €1.61 per 5% ABV can - Products with no or very low sugar may avoid some of these levies, though confirmation is unclear **Key caveat:** Members note that French duty makes RTD cans economically unviable for export to France, and several have flagged this as a significant cost burden across the spirits industry more broadly.
What is the minimum maturation period required for a spirit to be legally called whisky in the UK and EU?
Whisky must be matured for a minimum of 3 years and 1 day in oak casks to be legally called "whisky" in the UK and EU. This applies to all whisky globally. **Key rules:** - **3-year minimum** — spirits aged less than this cannot use the term "whisky" or "whiskey" on the label, even with the word "spirit" added (e.g. "Manx Whisky" was forced to rebrand as "Manx Spirit" when unaged) - **Age statement rules** — when blending multiple whiskies of different ages, the age statement on the bottle can only reflect the youngest whisky in the blend - **New make/unmatured spirits** — unmatured spirit cannot be called "whisky" or use that term in the name at all; "Single Malt Spirit" is acceptable for unaged malted barley spirit from a single distillery, but this is not the same as Single Malt Whisky - **Global application** — the 3-year minimum is enforced across all regions, not just the UK and EU Members warned that regulators enforce this strictly: attempting to use "whisky" in the product name without meeting the maturation requirement will trigger relabelling.
What is the current UK spirits duty rate and timeline for increases?
Members confirmed that UK spirits duty was increased from 1 August 2023, with the rate rising to approximately £1.35 per litre at 40% ABV. The increase aligns with inflation at roughly 10% year-on-year, with the rate now fixed. Members noted that lobbying efforts may attempt to influence future government decisions, but the current trajectory appears locked in unless there is a significant policy reversal. One member shared a link to just-drinks.com reporting on the duty changes, suggesting that's a reliable source for tracking updates.
What are the practical strategies and service providers for managing EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) compliance and costs?
EPR compliance is creating significant cost pressures for drinks brands, with some facing six or seven-figure annual impacts depending on sector. Members are using several practical approaches: **Service Providers & Consultants** - **Ecosurery** (Bristol) — recommended by multiple members for managing EPR registration and compliance - **CLARITY** — a consultancy that has identified potential cost mitigation strategies and is helping brands develop collective responses **Cost Mitigation Tactics** - **On-Trade exemption letters** — Some consultancies have identified a potential route to reduce costs: obtaining written confirmation from end-on-trade customers (not wholesalers) stating that bottles cannot be removed from the premises where sold. Members report most customers are willing to sign these letters. - **Collective industry approach** — Several members are forming a united group with competitor brands to submit appeals to DEFRA, though this takes time. A large soft drinks brand has already faced investigation for attempting to exclude on-trade from waste returns to avoid the levy. **Key Caveats** - Retailers and wholesalers are responding inconsistently — some are collaborating with suppliers on costs, others are delaying decisions and leaving suppliers to fund the interim gap. - Amazon and other major online platforms have notified some sellers of EPR tax increases and requested price decreases; members report some suppliers are absorbing these rather than passing them on. - The on-trade letter strategy may face scrutiny (DEFRA has already investigated similar approaches by larger brands). - Joining a collective buying group or consultancy arrangement can help coordinate strategy but requires time investment. Members advise monitoring DEFRA's response to appeals and collective challenges.
How does the Scotland Bottle Deposit Scheme work and what should drinks producers do to comply?
The Scottish Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is widely viewed by members as poorly designed and potentially unworkable. Key concerns raised: **Complexity and enforcement gaps** — Members highlighted a critical flaw: there's no clear mechanism to distinguish where bottles were initially supplied (e.g. England vs. Scotland), making it difficult to prevent cross-border arbitrage (someone buying stock in Carlisle and returning it in Scotland to claim deposits). Without separate bar codes or tracking, enforcement appears impractical. **Industry response** — Several producers are treating it as too bandwidth-intensive to plan around right now. One member reported switching their Scotland supply to **Nitro Cans only** (which fall outside the scheme) to avoid the administrative burden entirely. **Advice sought** — Members recommend attending specialist briefings (e.g. **Johnston Carmichael** hosted a talk on 25 October) to understand obligations, though attendees acknowledged the scheme remains confusing. **Wider sentiment** — There is broad scepticism that the scheme will proceed as planned; members compared it to Brexit-style policy that creates months of planning uncertainty only to be amended or abandoned at the last minute. **Caveat**: The excerpts don't contain detailed compliance requirements, pricing, or a clear operational roadmap. Until the scheme is finalised and clarified by regulators, it's unclear whether full compliance is even practical for multi-region suppliers.
What address should a UK drinks producer include on product labels—their own, the distributor's, or both?
For UK-produced products sold domestically, you must include a UK address for consumer complaints, but you don't need to include your distributor's address on the label. **Key points:** - **UK address requirement** — UK law requires a UK address on labels so consumers have a point of contact for complaints. This is a legal necessity post-Brexit (previously EU addresses were acceptable). - **Distributor address not required** — While your distributor may request their address appear on labels, it's not a legal requirement. Members advised against including it, as it creates operational friction if you ever change distributors. - **Market-specific rules** — Some markets (particularly outside the UK) have different requirements, such as "imported and distributed by" statements, sometimes requiring stickers. Check legislation for your specific sales territories.
What are the UK EPR registration and payment obligations, timelines, and revenue thresholds for drinks businesses?
UK EPR compliance hinges on revenue thresholds and financial year timing. Here's what the community understands: **Revenue thresholds and liability:** - Businesses with **£1m+ UK revenue** are classified as 'small' producers; those at **£2m+ become 'big'** producers - **Only UK revenue counts** — export revenue is excluded from the threshold calculation - Liability to pay begins in the financial year *following* the year you cross the revenue boundary (not immediately upon crossing) - There is also a **tonnage exemption** (specific threshold not recalled by discussants) **Registration and submission timeline:** - **31st May 2024** was the registration and data submission deadline to the Environment Agency - Payment obligations vary by producer size; businesses under £2m revenue may not be liable to pay immediately (unless they fall into PRN-paying categories) **Caveats:** - Members noted there is "a lot of confusion" and limited discussion in the industry about exact requirements. The specifics of which financial year triggers liability can vary depending on your reporting period, so verification with your own accountant or the Environment Agency is advised. - Miles Beale's article in The Spirits Business (January 2025) was flagged as a useful, recent reference point on EPR concerns.
What are the current regulatory rules around declaring tequila additives, and what's the industry stance on 'additive-free' claims?
The tequila industry is navigating a significant regulatory shift around additive declarations. The **Consejo Regulador del Tequila (CRT)** has recently restricted how producers can market additives, including a ban on claiming products are 'additive-free'—a move that has generated debate within the sector. Key points from community discussion: - The restriction appears to stem from regulatory control efforts by the CRT, with industry observers noting it's partly about controlling the narrative around tequila quality standards rather than purely health-driven - **Tequila Matchmaker** has been at the centre of advocacy around additive-free standards, creating tension with the CRT's position - Consumer awareness is mixed: while some consumers care deeply about additives (particularly regarding hangover effects and chemical breakdown), the broader market uptake of 'additive-free' messaging remains uncertain - Industry figures like Grover have weighed in on the control dynamics at play - The Consejo and regulatory bodies continue to shape these rules, and the **BDA** (British Distributors Association or similar) has also been communicating updates to UK importers Members should monitor CRT communications and consider how this affects their own labelling and marketing claims, particularly if selling into markets where additive declarations matter to consumers.
What is the scope of Small Producer Relief for alcohol duty, and does it cover spirits?
Small Producer Relief has different scope depending on the drink type, and **does not apply to spirits**. - **Lower-strength beverages (made wine, cider, perry, etc.)** — Relief applies to products up to 8.5% ABV - **Spirits** — Unfortunately, there is no equivalent small producer relief for spirits at all, despite collective campaigning by members to change this - **Bottled cocktails and RTDs under 8.5% ABV** — These may be eligible if they fall within the duty relief categories For full eligibility details, see the [official HMRC guidance](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/check-if-youre-eligible-for-small-producer-relief-on-alcohol-duty). **Caveat:** Members have noted this is a significant gap in the relief scheme, particularly for spirits producers, and campaigning efforts to extend relief to spirits have not yet been successful.
What is Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation and how does it affect imported drinks products into the UK?
Extended Producer Responsibility requires producers and importers to track and report packaging data. **Reporting thresholds:** You only need to formally report if you have turnover over £1 million and generate 25 tonnes of packaging waste annually (approximately 35,000 glass bottles at 700g each). **For imported products:** If you're importing drinks, you'll need to clarify responsibility with your importer — either you or they may be designated as the responsible party for reporting packaging data. Members noted that communication from HMRC about the Advanced Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulations (APPA) has been limited, and several discovered the requirements through industry bodies like the BDA rather than direct government outreach. Even if below reporting thresholds, importers should still be recording packaging data for compliance purposes.
What regulatory requirements must UK RTD cocktail brands meet to legally use tequila in their products?
The Tequila Regulatory Council (TRC) is actively enforcing strict rules on tequila use in ready-to-drink cocktails in the UK market. Brands are being contacted directly and required to comply or face enforcement action. **Key requirements:** - **CRT (Consejo Regulador del Tequila) authorisation** is mandatory for any brand using tequila in RTD cocktails. Without it, you cannot legally use the product or the term "tequila" in marketing. - **Affidavit requirement**: Brands being contacted are being asked to sign an affidavit confirming they will cease using tequila in cocktail formulations and remove tequila terminology from social media and marketing materials if they do not have authorisation. - The TRC is treating this as a priority enforcement area in the UK, where many brands are currently non-compliant. **Practical next steps:** - Contact the TRC early to understand your specific product's compliance status and to explore obtaining authorisation if needed. - Members recommend speaking with experienced contacts who have navigated this process (e.g., Nav Grewal at Vivir Tequila has recent direct experience with TRC discussions and can advise). - Do not assume existing tequila RTD products are compliant; the TRC has been enforcing these rules in other markets (notably Australia) and is now targeting the UK. **Warning**: Being blacklisted by the TRC carries serious commercial risk. Brands that do not comply face potential removal from retailer shelves and legal action.
What bottle sizes are permitted for spirits exports to markets like Brazil?
You should be okay selling 70cl bottles in Brazil — this is the standard bottle size accepted in that market, despite some initial confusion around whether 75cl was required. **Key points:** - 70cl is the acceptable standard for Brazil exports - Verify specific regulations directly with your distributor or importer in-country, as regulations can vary and change
Are non-standard spirit bottle sizes (e.g., 75cl) legal for exporting spirits to the UK?
Non-standard spirit bottle sizes are **not legal** for spirits in the UK market. Members' experience confirms that while you may not face immediate enforcement action, the regulatory risk is not worth taking. - **UK Weights and Measures regulations** require spirits to be sold in specified quantities only (typically 20cl, 35cl, 50cl, 70cl, 1L and larger standard sizes). 75cl does not meet these legal requirements. - **Member experience**: One founder launched with 250ml bottles and realised after 6 months it was illegal; they quietly switched to the compliant 200ml and 500ml sizes under the guise of a "new product launch" to avoid immediate enforcement. - **Risk profile**: You won't necessarily get "pulled up for it immediately," but relying on this is unwise for a legitimate export operation. **Caveats**: If your Arrack is currently bottled in 75cl in Sri Lanka, you will need to rebottle into a UK-legal size for UK distribution. This adds cost and complexity to your supply chain.
What are the key duty and cash flow differences between distillers and brewers under UK alcohol duty regulations?
UK alcohol duty treatment differs significantly between distillers and brewers, with major implications for cash flow and growth: **Duty payment timing** — Brewers pay duty on invoicing (when they sell), but distillers must pay duty before sale. This creates a substantial cash flow disadvantage for spirits producers. **Small producer relief** — Brewers benefit from small producer relief on duty, but distillers have no equivalent relief available. Members have flagged this as a major parity issue and called for distillers to receive the same relief as small brewers. **Implications** — The combination of upfront duty payment and lack of small producer relief means distillers face significantly higher working capital requirements than brewers at comparable production scales. Members noted this is a persistent structural inequality in the regulatory framework that disadvantages the spirits sector relative to beer.
How can small craft distillers compete with large brands given the current duty structure and lack of small producer relief?
Small UK distillers face structural disadvantages compared to large producers, with no equivalent to small brewers' relief despite years of WSTA lobbying. The community identifies two main competitive pressures: **Structural disadvantage:** Unlike beer (which has small brewers relief), spirits have no duty relief for small producers. This puts craft distillers at an immediate disadvantage to both large brands and other alcohol categories. Wine producers face similar challenges—even the slight duty reduction on sparkling wine was offset by increases on still wines, with no small production relief. **Cash-flow and lead-time impact:** Long advance notice of duty changes favours large producers with substantial cash reserves. They can prepay duty on anticipated stock and simultaneously raise prices, while smaller producers lack the cash pile to absorb this strategy. The long lead time into implementation also creates perverse market behaviour: major cash-and-carries like Dhamecha reportedly increased pre-duty purchasing from £10m to £40–45m in July alone, disproportionately buying mainstream brands (Smirnoff, Bacardi, JD) which are easier to flip quickly. This created a four-month demand collapse for smaller brands during the purchasing window. **Broader pressures compound this:** Small producers are simultaneously hit by weak sterling, bottle supply shortages, Brexit customs friction, cost-of-living crisis, energy price inflation, and wage pressures—none of which affect large competitors proportionally. **Advocacy routes members are exploring:** - **Direct MP contact:** Writing to or securing face-to-face meetings with local MPs, who collectively represent dozens of constituencies across the membership. - **Social media pressure:** Messaging politicians (Sunak, Hunt) on Twitter to request small distillers relief, with the goal of reaching Special Advisors. - **Petition/signature campaign:** A DocuSign petition posted in the community, targeting 200+ signatures. With ~350 craft distillers estimated in the UK, the membership could potentially gather a significant proportion. - **Industry body consolidation:** A suggestion that distilling might need its own dedicated organisation (like those in the US) rather than riding two horses within broader alcohol industry bodies. **Caveat:** The community notes that large players like Pernod and Diageo are unlikely to voluntarily apply pressure for relief that would help smaller competitors. Small brewers relief was historically won in 2004, possibly because politicians of that era had personal affinity with real ale—a context that may not apply to spirits.
What should drinks suppliers and founders know about the CMA's new greenwashing enforcement powers coming into effect in April?
The CMA introduced new powers effective from April 6th to enforce stricter rules against exaggerated or false sustainability claims, with the ability to fine companies found to be complicit in greenwashing. - **CMA enforcement** — The regulator now has powers to fine companies making misleading sustainability claims. Members recommend reviewing all product claims, marketing copy, and supplier assertions about environmental credentials to ensure they are substantiated and not exaggerated. - **Further guidance available** — One member who specialises in this area has written an explainer and is available to discuss the legislation in detail with anyone needing clarification on what the new rules mean for their business. **Caveats:** This is an active enforcement area, and the CMA is taking greenwashing seriously. Drinks companies should audit their sustainability messaging proactively to avoid exposure.
What are the key requirements and steps for getting regulatory approval to sell alcoholic beverages in Nigeria?
Navigating Nigeria's alcohol market requires working with local regulatory bodies and experienced distributors. Based on community experience: - **NAFDAC registration** — This is the primary regulatory requirement. Members recommend partnering with an experienced local distributor who can guide you through the process. One member's brands are distributed by **Really Great Brands** in Nigeria, whose team assisted with NAFDAC registration, suggesting this is a viable route for newcomers unfamiliar with local requirements. - **Local distributor partnerships** — Rather than handling regulatory paperwork solo, members indicate the standard approach is to work with an established Nigerian distributor who has existing relationships with regulators and understands local compliance. **Caveat:** The discussion contains several messages that appear to be scams or off-topic banter (requests for Bitcoin, money transfers, credit card details). Ignore these entirely and work only with verified, professional distributors and regulatory consultants with traceable track records in Nigeria's drinks industry.
What are the standard dimensions of UK duty stamps on alcohol labels, and what should producers know about upcoming changes?
The standard dimension for a UK duty stamp printed on an alcohol label is **25mm**. **Important timing note:** Duty stamps are being cancelled in May (next year), so members recommend ordering conservatively and avoiding large print runs to avoid waste. Plan your label inventory accordingly if you're currently using duty stamps.
What are the pros and cons of stevia, fructose, and cane sugar as sweetening ingredients in beverages?
Members report significant trade-offs between these three sweeteners, with taste and regulation being the key drivers. **Stevia** — A plant extract used by brands like Skinny Tonics and Happy Soda. The main challenge is an aftertaste that many consumers dislike, making it "the hardest to get the taste right." However, newer formulations like Stevia A may mitigate this problem; Galley Bird has developed a well-regarded range of stevia-based tonics that members praised. **Fructose** — Widely used by spirit manufacturers and preferred where sugar tax and HFSS (High Fat, Salt & Sugar) regulations are a concern. Members noted that fructose can be dosed below HFSS and sugar tax thresholds (for example, at 45g/L), making it commercially attractive. However, it still carries sweetness concerns and doesn't avoid the broader perception issues around sugary drinks. **Cane sugar (sucrose)** — The traditional choice and reportedly "the most expensive botanical" in flavoured spirits during product development. It tastes clean but faces increasing regulatory pressure from sugar tax and HFSS rules, pushing brands toward alternatives. **Market trend:** Members expect a longer-term shift toward significantly less sweet drinks, driven by changing consumer preferences and regulatory pressure. There is also broader frustration that regulation (HFSS) allows "the big boys to cut corners" rather than addressing underlying health and education issues.
What happened to consumer prices, distributor margins and sales volumes when alcohol tax was removed, and what should we expect if it's reinstated?
When tax was removed previously, **most retailers did not pass savings on to consumers** — prices stayed the same rather than dropping. This suggests that if tax is reinstated, increases will likely be **passed directly to end customers rather than absorbed by distributors**. Members expect distributor margins to remain relatively stable, with the tax burden flowing through to the till price. The actual impact on sales rates remains unclear from available data; members noted this is largely anecdotal consumer observation rather than industry-wide analysis. One member indicated they had a contact with potential insight into the mechanics, though no detailed findings were shared in the discussion.
What planning use class (B1 vs B2) should a small craft distillery with rectification and compounding operations be classified under?
Small craft distilleries that rectify and compound spirits can typically operate under **B1 (light industrial)** classification rather than B2 (general industrial), provided noise and emissions remain minimal. - **B1 classification is the norm** for small distilleries doing rectification and compounding, as long as operations don't generate excessive noise, dirt, or smoke - **Local authority interpretation varies** — councils don't always understand distillery operations well, so classification can be somewhat flexible depending on your specific local authority - The key factor is **whether your operations create significant nuisance** (noise, dirt, smoke); if not, B1 is usually the appropriate category **Caveat:** Given variable local authority understanding of distillery operations, it's worth engaging early with your specific council planning department to confirm their interpretation of your operation's classification before establishing premises.
How are UK drinks brands responding to artificial sweetener regulations and the sugar tax, and what reformulation strategies are members using?
The sugar tax and HFSS regulations have forced many brands to reformulate to stay commercially viable, but this has created a difficult choice between artificial sweeteners and natural sugars. Members report mixed market responses: **Market landscape:** - Several established brands (e.g. London Essence, Fever-Tree) have come under scrutiny for their sweetener choices. Fever-Tree originally built their brand on cane sugar but may now be using artificial sweeteners in some lines, though packaging claims suggest they maintain a no-artificial-sweeteners positioning. - Large multinational brands like Pepsi are responding with global nutrition initiatives, though members note these are often PR responses rather than fundamental reformulations. **Member approach:** - Members emphasise that a "solid values-driven ethos" is key to differentiating in this environment. One founder specifically chose to use natural sugars rather than artificial sweeteners in their category, positioning this as a core brand value. - The consensus view is that less-processed sugar is preferable to artificial alternatives, particularly for founder-led brands with strong philosophical positions. **Key concern:** While well-intentioned, the sugar tax and HFSS regulations have unintentionally pushed brands without strong values toward artificial sweeteners to maintain margin and hit regulatory thresholds. This has become a commercial disadvantage for brands committed to natural formulations.
What do drinks brands need to know about Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) packaging regulations and compliance in the UK?
EPR legislation is now a mandatory consideration for drinks brands, with significant cost and compliance implications. Here's what members recommend: **Compliance & Administration:** - **Ecosurety** — members use them to handle packaging waste submissions and PRNs (Packaging Recovery Notes). They provide guidance on the regulatory landscape and cost implications. - Monitor packaging regulations and revenue/weight thresholds carefully if your company is fast-growing; non-compliance in even a single year can result in criminal charges, so this is not optional. - Recycled glass content and other material considerations now factor into costs, which can incentivise more sustainable packaging choices. **Key Actions:** - Review the government guidance at gov.uk/guidance/extended-producer-responsibility-for-packaging-who-is-affected-and-what-to-do to understand if and when your brand is affected. - Factor EPR costs into your cost base and financial projections early—these are real, incremental expenses that will grow over time. - Work with a compliance partner (like Ecosurety) rather than handling submissions in-house if you lack expertise. **Caveat:** The regulatory landscape is evolving, so staying informed and planning ahead is critical to avoid penalties and unexpected costs.
Can EPR costs be mitigated by obtaining written confirmation from on-trade customers that bottles won't leave the premises?
Members report that some consultancies have identified a potential EPR cost mitigation route: obtaining written confirmation directly from on-trade customers (not wholesalers) stating that bottles will not be removed from the premises where they were sold. Early indications suggest most on-trade customers are willing to sign such letters. However, there are significant caveats: - **DEFRA scrutiny risk** — The regulatory environment is uncertain. DEFRA has already investigated major brands for attempting to exclude the on-trade from waste return schemes to avoid EPR levies, suggesting this approach may face regulatory challenge. - **Interim cost burden** — Wholesalers, retailers and online channels are responding inconsistently to EPR requirements, with some delaying action. Suppliers are currently funding the interim gap, creating six or seven-figure annual impacts depending on sector. - **Collective approach** — Members recommend joining industry collectives (e.g. **CLARITY**) to mount united appeals with DEFRA rather than acting alone, as regulatory interpretation may change. - **Real-world compliance risk** — There are joking but pointed references to enforcement challenges in certain geographies, questioning practical enforceability of such confirmations. This approach remains experimental and unproven at regulatory level. Members advise treating it as one potential lever in a broader EPR strategy rather than a reliable solution, and staying connected to industry groups monitoring DEFRA's stance.
Where should we publish our premises licence application notice and what is the process?
You are required to publish your premises licence application notice in a local newspaper serving your area. Members report that this is a mandatory but frustrating step in the licensing process. **Local newspaper publication:** - **Lewisham Gazette** — used by at least one member in South London; noted as expensive and operating with archaic processes, but necessary for compliance in that area. Members recommend identifying the equivalent local paper for your region (typically the main newspaper circulating in your local authority area) and contacting them directly about their licensing notice fees and timelines. **Caveats:** Members emphasised that the premises licensing system overall is outdated and frustrating. Budget for publication costs, which appear to be substantial. The process is a legal requirement so cannot be skipped.
What are the current alcohol duty rates and when do regulatory changes take effect?
Members confirmed that new alcohol duty rates came into effect on **August 1st**. The official rates and details are published by the UK government and can be found at the government's dedicated publication page on alcohol duty rate changes. Members recommend checking the official gov.uk source directly for the most current and authoritative information on duty rates applicable to your product category.
Where can you source CBD ingredients for beverage applications, and what regulatory requirements must you meet?
CBD sourcing for drinks requires careful supplier vetting because CBD remains on the UK novel foods listing and suppliers must be approved. **Suppliers:** - **Mile High Labs** (www.milehighlabs.com) — recommended by the community for CBD beverage applications **Regulatory requirement:** - Ensure your chosen CBD supplier is approved under the novel foods listing. This is a mandatory check before proceeding, as non-compliant sources could expose you to enforcement action. The community emphasised this as a critical step in supplier selection.
What are the regulatory and commercial challenges of exporting spirits to India?
India is highly protectionist toward spirits imports and presents a distinctly challenging market entry compared to other territories. **Key barriers:** - Each state has separate regulations and licensing requirements, significantly complicating distribution - Retail pricing is substantially higher than other markets—expect pricing of $80+ per 70cl bottle, the highest reported by any member selling globally - The super-premium spirits segment in India is very small, limiting addressable market **Market reality:** Members advise treating India as a long-term, niche opportunity rather than a near-term revenue driver. The protectionist regulatory environment and fragmented state-by-state system create both compliance complexity and demand constraints that differ markedly from Western markets.
Can a non-alcoholic product be Halal certified if it's manufactured in a facility that also processes alcohol?
No — Halal certification typically requires that products be produced in facilities dedicated to non-alcoholic manufacturing. Members report that the guidance is clear: a product cannot be Halal certified if it's made in a place that also bottles alcohol, even if the product itself contains no alcohol. - **Dedicated facilities required** — The certification process requires production in a facility that does not process alcoholic products at all. This is a hard requirement, not a grey area that can be negotiated around. - **Specialist advisors available** — Members recommend connecting with consultants who specialise in Halal certification guidance, as the process can be more nuanced than initially apparent and professional support helps navigate the requirements.