Something is going on politically in Alberta’s beer system. At this point I am not sure where it leads, but I something is afoot, as Mr. Holmes might say.

First there was the feature length piece in the Edmonton Journal this weekend (mentioned in the comments on my last post) taking a long look at inducements and their impact on the beer industry in the province. This piece was many months in the works, and I know the reporter had a hard time getting people to speak on the record about it. While I don’t think the piece furthers our understanding of inducements too much, it is, without question, the most public acknowledgement to date that it is rampant in the industry.

Does it lead anywhere? I doubt it. But if we combine the willingness of the Journal to print such a critical piece with other political happenings, I wonder if maybe, just maybe, the Alberta government wants to shake up the beer industry. Allow to explain.

From conversations I have been having with various beer industry types in the past couple months, it is clear the Alberta government has been quietly engaging in a consultation process around AGLC beer policy. The main focus of the review is the mark-up rate, and the mid-level transitional rate in particular (for a primer on the system and what the transitional rate is read here, here and here). There are clearly moves afoot, likely led by the big boys, to eliminate the transitional mark-up – a move targeting Big Rock and Minhas I suspect but with clear ramifications for all Alberta brewers and craft beer importers.

The review is headed up by Deputy Premier Thomas Lukaszuk, which is both odd and concerning. It is odd because normally a review of this nature would be headed by either the Minister reponsible or some backbencher. That the second most powerful member of the government caucus is involved hints that the government is serious about this review. Of course, it also means the review is being run by a person with no background or experience with the file. Still, it is noteworthy.

While they were first excluded, the Alberta-based brewers have found a way to muscle themselves into the consultation, and , in an interesting display of solidarity, have crafted a set of recommendations endorsed by all of them. The highlight of the package is a proposed revamping of the mark up system. The highlights go like this: under 20,000 HL production would be marked up 10 cents per litre (half of the current rate). From 20,000 to 50,000 HL the mark up would be 20 cents (again half of current rates). Then from 50,000 to 200,000 the rate would remain at the current 40 cents. After 200,000 the full rate of 98 cents would apply (same as today). They propose the rates be graduated, meaning the higher mark ups apply only to the volume above the cut-off.

The part of the proposal some may find controversial is their recommendation that the lower rates apply only to beer brewed in Alberta. All beer produced outside the province would be taxed at the 98 cents level. The Alberta brewers argue that their proposal would promote the development of more small brewers in the province, and would level the playing field for local producers competing against imports from elsewhere in Canada and the U.S.

I am well aware from my conversations with small brewers outside Alberta, that closing the transitional mark-up to imports would significantly hamper their ability to sell beer in Alberta. Many western Canadian breweries depend heavily on Alberta sales to keep afloat.

I can certainly understand and respect the position the Alberta brewers take on this position. They are looking after their interests. And they are right on theĀ  need to build-in lower tax rates for smaller brewers. If the big boys get their way and eliminate the lower rates, that would be bad news for all beer lovers. The issue of applying the lower rates only to Alberta produced beer is more complex. I have a certain affinity to it, being a big believer in supporting local. But I also know there are many good people who legitimately need that lower rate as well.

Much of this uncertainty is due to the publicity earlier this year about Minhas receiving the transitional rate for making discount beer in Wisconsin. The problem is that policy solutions to this legitimate concern are much harder to find than one might think. There is no easy way to distinguish in policy between a quality craft brewer like Paddock Wood or Yukon and Minhas. I don’t think a “not very good beer” tax is feasible (although wouldn’t it be nice if it were?).

Needless to say I suspect we will be seeing changes to Alberta’s beer regulatory system in the coming months. Will inducements and their enforcement be a part of those changes? I doubt it. But we will likely see a new mark-up system of some form. I will try to keep you posted (as long as I can keep myself informed, which isn’t always easy – transparency is not the Alberta government’s favourite word).