Went for some Rye for a change

[CorvallisCracker]

Where I am less certain, is for whisky sent to the U.S. I find the law unclear whether flavouring can include GNS for exported products. Even if the law can be read to allow it, it doesn't mean in practice that Canadian whisky exported to the U.S. or elsewhere contains any.

I've seen repeated reference to a 9.09% limit on "flavoring" additives for Canadian whisky meant for export to the USA, most recently in a post by Davin. Since GNS is by definition "odorless and tasteless", it's difficult to see how it could be used for flavoring.

It could be 2yo grain whiskey, I suppose. But the other 90.91% would have to be whiskey aged at least three years.

I think Davin also pointed out this 9.09% exists so that Canadian producers can put in an American produced product and get some tax advantages. I suspect that this is where you'd find the rumored S-W bourbon in the higher-end expressions of CR. Or maybe LDI-produced 2yo rye. Or maybe older LDI rye (I believe I've read that Diageo has older rye they've purchased from LDI that continues to reside on LDI premises).

[Gillman]

Here is the definition of flavouring, and also, grain whisky. Further in, they define vodka:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C.R.C....ramesView.html

Also in here is the two year aging rule for spirit contained in flavouring for whisky sold in Canada.

The definition of grain whisky, essentially GNS, doesn't state no flavour. The definition of vodka does. So the argument would go, neutral spirit has some taste even if subtle, and therefore it can be added to non-domestic Canadian whisky. The fact of the 2 year rule mentioned would seem to support this. So when I read statements such as in the WA State Internet site for its liquor authority, this is what makes me think that interpretation may apply.

On the other hand, I agree that the definition of flavouring could be read to exclude any spirit which does not add flavour of some kind, i.e., even if grain spirit is taken to have no taste. You can read it that way, but just as legal matter, I incline currently to the former view. Still, that is neither here nor there if, in fact, no Canadian whisky exported from Canada contains GNS. That may well be so, I just don't know.

Gary

[Gillman]

Click on Division 2, Alcoholic Beverages, on the left to bring up the right frame.

Gary

[CorvallisCracker]

Click on Division 2, Alcoholic Beverages, on the left to bring up the right frame.

Gary

Oh, I have the whole PDF, including sections on fruits, vegetables and chocolate, downloaded on my laptop.

As for GNS=vodka, I admit I'm confounding the issue by implicit reference to USA regs, which defines both as being distilled at 95% ABV or higher. Because there is no stated requirement for filtering or anything else to render vodka "odorless and tasteless", I've always considered it a safe assmption that it's the distillation at 95% that accomplishes that.

But, yeah, it's debatable whether something distilled at that level is odorless and tasteless. I swear I can smell the rye in Sobieski vodka.

[Gillman]

That statement from a U.S. State liquor authority sounds pretty specific too, about adding GNS before bottling. Maybe some of what they import does that and I'd think some doesn't.

Anyway, it's an interesting question but at the end of the day, something that is 90% or more grain spirit aged in wood 3 years will not have an assertive character, that's what it comes down to. The old jokes about brown vodka are a bit unfair, but in practice, I don't find much to choose really between Seagram 7 Crown, say, and the regular run of Canadian whisky, I find them similar. And I say that as someone who likes both products.

Gary

[cowdery]

Scott,

Gary and I should have conferenced you in on an email conversation we were having earlier this week. It was a result of that, and discussing the 2-year-old rule for flavoring, that caused my error. Yes, 3 years, just like the UK and EU.

I'd like a list of my minions, please.

Guess I'll also be criticized, though not by you, for using the abbreviations GNS, UK and EU.

I also made the same argument you did about the impossibility of using something flavorless as flavoring. It's a good argument but, as Gary points out, the Canadian equivalent of GNS is not described in their regs as "flavorless" as GNS is in ours.

[imbibehour]

I think my head just exploded...

[CorvallisCracker]

I'd like a list of my minions, please.

Let me go back and look at your "am I too crochety" thread and see if I can pick out some likely candidates.

Josh
Oscar
Steve
Christian
Scott (callmeox)
wade
John
ThomasH, harshest, T comp, dbk, GOCOUGS2002, Brisko, Imbibehour, ratcheer and sku.

I also made the same argument you did about the impossibility of using something flavorless as flavoring. It's a good argument but, as Gary points out, the Canadian equivalent of GNS is not described in their regs as "flavorless" as GNS is in ours.

It applies common sense and is thus irrelevant. These are, after all, bureaucrats we're talking about.

[CorvallisCracker]

Man you guys/gals keep me on my toes!

We live for that. It gives our lives meaning.

I think my head just exploded...

I wondered what that sound was.

[Davindek]

To my understanding, it must qualify as whisky in Canada to be sold as Canadian whisky abroad.

A distiller/blender told me not that long ago that he likes to use a dash of his own 2-year-old Canadian rye flavouring whisky to "brighten up" a blend. It falls within the 9.09% in Canada and would already qualify as straight whisky in the U.S.