License for beer

When the agencies spread the news that in the summer of 2012, sellers and producers might need a license for beer, the suppliers of this low-alcohol drink immediately declared their disagreement with such a statement of the question. Since this issue concerns not only sellers, but also consumers, the main emphasis was made on the fact that as a result of the proposed changes, the buyer will lose. In general, opinions about whether a license for beer is needed, as it usually happens on all controversial issues, are divided.

Beer is known to mankind from time immemorial, this alcoholic drink has won a huge army of admirers, and every year their number only increases. Especially it should be noted the merits of television and other media in the popularization of this foamy drink.

The price of a drink directly depends on what source of raw materials the producer chooses, natural beer, naturally, more expensive. A huge selection of different varieties on the shelves amazes imagination, what only beer is not produced! Light and dark, strong, light and non-alcoholic, and even "live", sell it in bottles, in cans and bottled.

Prepare the beer that we buy in stores, or from hops with barley or from concentrate. Recently, the deputy of the Duma Viktor Zvagelsky said that more than 90% of all beer in Russia is not beer, as it is produced from concentrate, which means that it should be labeled as a "Beer". The Union of Brewers immediately sued him, but lost the case.

Silence and grace in a cozy market for the sale and consumption of beer was violated in 2011, when the first time an attempt was made to introduce licensing of retail beer sales. But by joint efforts, beer producers repulsed this attack. In the summer of this year, lawmakers tried to bring it to an end, from July 22 it was planned to introduce compulsory licensing for all those engaged in the production and sale of low-alcohol products, but this norm was from the draft amendments to the law of extinction.

The brewing union, which, as already mentioned above, was categorically opposed, said: "The license for beer will give rise to a cycle of corruption and kill Russian brewing", "licensing is harmful to any transparent business", etc.

Other manufacturers pointed to the obvious fact that for them to receive this document does not present any problem, and indeed, for large enterprises the license for beer is not a serious waste, and the small law does not apply, for them the thought was going to make an exception.

But the Union continued to bend its line, according to the brewers, the idea of deputy Zvagelsky, from which filed the whole story, contradicts the announced by the Russian leadership course on improving the climate for business. In general, according to the brewers, the license for beer from counterfeit will not protect, and honest producers will cause huge losses. According to the calculations presented by the Union, 50% of the plants participating in the production of beer, in case of adoption of the law, will be completely paralyzed for an indefinite period.

According to some experts from the brewing industry, companies will have to perform tremendous work on preparing the documents necessary for obtaining a license for beer. The bureaucratic machine will return these papers in the event that the slightest inaccuracies are revealed back and forth in a circle, and the enterprises at that time will suffer losses.

But sober members of the Union of Brewers point to the obvious fact that giants who control up to 80% of the market will be able to get all licenses without straining, but those small plants that work in the regions can be hard to come by. In this case, in their opinion, "the consumer can not receive a high-quality product".