September 13, 2005

Chief, Regulations and Procedures Division

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

Attn: Notice No. 41

P.O. Box 14412

Washington, DC

USA

20044-4412

Dear Sir/Madam:

Re: Labelling and Advertising of Wines

This letter is in response to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau, 27 CFR Parts 4, 5 and 7 \[Notice No. 41\] RIN 1513-AB07, with
respect to the labelling and advertising of wines, distilled spirits and
malt beverages.

The following provides the views of the Canadian Vintners Association
(CVA), Canada's national association of licensed wine makers, to the
general questions posed by the TTB in the referenced document. We are
not providing responses to the more specific questions put forward,
though the following comments do touch on aspects of the latter
questions.

1.  *Should TTB seek to require mandatory nutrition labeling (that is,
    calories, fat, carbohydrates, and protein) for alcohol beverage
    products, or should nutrition information be permitted only on a
    voluntary basis?*

> Mandatory nutrition labelling should not be required for grape-based
> wines, as such labelling is not relevant to the information required
> by consumers in deciding on their wine purchase. On the other hand,
> there may be wine producers who would like the option of being able to
> put accurate nutrition labelling on their product, and we would
> support a policy that allowed for such optional nutrition labelling.
> Such labelling would, however, need to be truthful and, therefore,
> would require audit and enforcement by the TTB.

\.../2

\- 2 -

2.  *Should TTB seek to require mandatory ingredient labeling (that is,
    a list of all ingredients used to make the product, including
    processing aids) for alcohol beverage products, or should ingredient
    labeling be permitted only on a voluntary basis?*

> The CVA does not support mandatory ingredient labelling. Such would be
> confusing and misleading to the consumer, particularly in that a
> significant range of processing aids are used in the production of
> wine, virtually all of which are removed prior to the wine being
> packaged for retail sale. Ingredient labelling in the context of
> allergen labelling has been reviewed in Canada, and Health Canada has
> rejected the need for labelling for such items as egg, milk and dairy
> products used in the production of wine. They based this decision on
> the lack of scientific evidence that the levels of such allergens in
> wine, if any, are harmful. Both Health Canada and the wine industry
> agreed to the requirement to label for sulphites in wine at
> concentrations of 10 PPM or greater.

3.  *What areas need further research and evaluation before TTB can
    reach decisions on whether and how changes can be made?*

> It is our view that any mandatory labelling requirements for wine
> should be based on broad consultation, clear scientific evidence and
> sound analysis. If such evidence and analysis demonstrates a clear
> need to inform consumers on specific ingredients or characteristics of
> a wine in the best interest of their health and safety, then such
> labelling may be mandated. Labelling for non health related consumer
> information should not be mandated but should be allowed where
> analysis shows that such optional labelling could be in the best
> interests of consumers and wine producers. Sound research and
> evaluation related to the above issues, as well as an analysis of the
> costs of enforcing such labelling, are areas requiring further study.

4.  *Are there modifications TTB can make to current requirements
    regarding alcohol beverage labels to help consumers better
    understand and benefit from the information on the label?*

> Labels should be clear, legible, easy to understand and unencumbered
> with mandatory items that may be extraneous or confusing to consumers.
> Optional label statements should continue to be regulated as they are
> now.
>
> \.../3
>
> \- 3 -
>
> Mandatory items including product designation, country of origin, %
> alcohol by volume and container volume should be visible in a single
> field of vision on either the "front" or "back" label, in keeping with
> the labelling principles agreed by the World Wine Trade Group (WWTG).

5.  *Should TTB harmonize its alcohol beverage labeling regulatory
    requirements with those of other major producing nations, such as
    the Member States of the European Union, Australia, and Canada, and
    with regulatory schemes of other Federal agencies, such as the Food
    and Drug Administration (FDA)? If so, how would that be best done?*

> The CVA supports, in principle, efforts to harmonize wine labelling
> since such harmonization should reduce labelling costs for producers
> and reduce label confusion for consumers. The International
> Organization of Wine and Viticulture (OIV), the International
> Federation of Wine and Spirits (FIVS) and the World Wine Trade Group
> (WWTG), all have projects underway aimed at bringing greater
> harmonization to international wine labelling. The US wine sector is
> actively involved in all of these processes and the US Government
> participates in the WWTG process. The TTB has shown some flexibility
> in the WWTG negotiations, and we support the TTB's involvement in
> these discussions and any policy initiatives that they may take to
> enhance label harmonization among wine producing and consuming
> countries.

6.  *Are consumers likely to derive benefits from more specific
    information on alcohol beverage labels, and, if so, are those
    benefits sufficient to warrant the economic costs associated with
    such revisions?*

> Consumers *may* derive benefits from more specific information on
> alcohol beverage labels, but, as stated earlier, such incremental
> labelling if made mandatory should be based on sound evidence and
> analysis. For example, labelling wines as containing egg, fish or
> dairy products when in fact such processing aids have all but been
> eliminated in the final product may well be misleading to consumers.
> Equally, statements on "standard drinks" may prove confusing or
> misleading as diverse jurisdictions define standard drinks
> differently. While some incremental specific information on wine
> labels may offer certain benefits to consumers, there is no real
> practical means of measuring the incremental benefit. Further, the
> benefits will not be equally distributed among consumers (a
> significant proportion don't read the labels), and the costs of
> relabelling by the industry, and of enforcement by the TTB, would not
> likely be worth the benefits derived.

\.../4

\- 4 -

7.  *What should be the agency\'s priorities in deciding which changes
    to make on alcohol beverage labels, that is, which changes are most
    important and which are least important?*

> The agency should consider the health and safety of the consumer
> first, and the related efficacy and costs of any health-related
> labelling requirements being considered. Studies have shown, for
> example, that the Surgeon General's warning on wine has failed to
> alter consumer behaviour.
>
> Mandatory labelling requirements beyond health and fraud consumer
> protection should not be considered although optional truthful
> statements that may be of interest to consumers (eg. caloric content)
> should be permitted.

8.  *Should any new labeling requirements apply equally to
    advertisements?*

> The principles of consumer health and fraud protection should apply to
> both wine labels and wine advertising; actual regulation may well
> differ.

We thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Sincerely,

C. William Ross

President