What ,ABV related, regulations are the commercial brews complying with

[Beerisyummy]

I received a call from a mate today, telling me that my homebrew was super strong. After a fair bit of checking I concluded that the brew would be around the 4.9-5.0 mark.

Maybe he's just being a softy, or is the ABV listed on commercial beers a guarantee of minimum ABV, as opposed to a promise that it will not contain any more than that amount of alcohol by volume?
Being the nanny states of Aus, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the breweries were forced to guarantee the later, while being allowed to "accidentally fall short" with the real ABV. If this is so, what is the acceptable lower limit?

Is the low end of the acceptable ABV as bad as Subway's foot long, or do I actually pack 12 inches. Hmm.

Unfortunately, I was raised to be a cynic and I trust in mankind's ability to screw every possible situation if it means making a buck.


If anyone has stumbled upon any information on this subject, please share. I'd be interested to know the Aus regs for "what's in the glass", really.



Now I'm going back to my 8% dark with abbey ale yeast. Mmmmmmm.
Thanks for that recipe Warra.

 

[bum]

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011C00588

States that ABV% on beer labels must be accurate within 0.3%.

 

[KingKong]

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011C00588

States that ABV% on beer labels must be accurate within 0.3%.

Not much margin for error. That is what it says though. Suprising when from memory beers advertise to the nearest .1? Means they are hitting some pretty specific targets.

 

[bum]

Industrialisation will do that.

 

[KingKong]

So for a 4.5 ABV brew they would need to be within 0.00135 of 4.5 . Is my maths correct? That would be impossible for a home brewer to measure, surely even a micro would struggle with this?

 

[bum]

Clicking links is hard.

 

[KingKong]

Clicking links is hard.

Is it?

 

[Beerisyummy]

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011C00588

States that ABV% on beer labels must be accurate within 0.3%.

Thanks for that Bum. I'll have a read through now.

I've always noticed a bit of a placebo effect with noobs drinking homebrew. Some crazy person made it in their garage so it must be super strong.
Hell, I've started lying to people about the drinks in order to see what happens. One guy sculled a 4% ABV 60% wheatie, and proclaimed "that's a good drop", based on it being a full strength beer that was better than the 5% beer everyone else was drinking.

 

[bum]

Is it?

All signs point to yes.

 

[doon]

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?Docid=ELD/ED20091/00001

Ato info on excise and alcohol strength measurement

 

[KingKong]

All signs point to yes.

You're very helpful.

 

[bum]

I need to be more helpful than posting that answer already?

You're on your own with the stuff you make up. That's your thing.

 

[Beerisyummy]

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?Docid=ELD/ED20091/00001

Ato info on excise and alcohol strength measurement

I've read a little on that already.

The ATO only cares about getting our money. They will never complain if someone over pays them.
That's from personal experience on top of common sense.

If 0.29% lower ABV will get you past the post then it wouldn't take much to work out the extra cost involved in production, compared to the increase in excise tax.

I'll really need to have a good read through the links provided when I'm not tired and half cut.
Reality is so much clearer in the light of a new day.

 

[KingKong]

I need to be more helpful than posting that answer already?

You're on your own with the stuff you make up. That's your thing.

Is it?

 

[bum]

It should be but I guess it isn't.

0.3%ABV, not 0.3% of stated ABV%. If label says 4.3 then 4.0 is okay.

 

[KingKong]

That seems more plausible. I think I took it as .03 of 0.01 .

 

[itmechanic]

I've read a little on that already.

The ATO only cares about getting our money. They will never complain if someone over pays them.
That's from personal experience on top of common sense.

If 0.29% lower ABV will get you past the post then it wouldn't take much to work out the extra cost involved in production, compared to the increase in excise tax.

I'll really need to have a good read through the links provided when I'm not tired and half cut.
Reality is so much clearer in the light of a new day.

Actually, they do care if they are over paid, that means that they then owe me money, and they don't like to be in that situation.

 

[jotaigna]

I notice myself that sometimes half a stubby will make me lightheaded whereas others I don't notice until well into my 3rd pint. So many factors may affect my perception: exercise, eating, tiredness or even if conversation is interesting that I won't even try to make a guess. One thing is for sure, hydrometer readings do tell a much more credible story than any of our palates, so feel free to tell your mate to savour his(her) drink rather than scull it so it doesn't feel as strong.

 

[Bizier]

There was a relatively recent class action against Budweiser for continually being at the bottom of specification, insinuating that they have the accuracy available to be in the middle, but it is cheaper to be at the bottom of specification and something like it constituting false advertising.

I was once told that basically all big brewers shoot for bottom of spec, though I have not tested this, so I don't have an opinion on it.

 

[mkj]

I assume they pay excise on the exact reading, not what's written on the label?

Edit: Actually reading the links, they pay excise on whichever is higher. So it doesn't make much sense to aim low (except for safety or fermentables cost)