27 C.F.R. § 4.23

Varietal (grape type) labeling

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. The names of one or more grape varieties may be used as the type designation of a grape wine only if the wine is also labeled with an appellation of origin as defined in § 4.25.

(b) One variety. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the name of a single grape variety may be used as the type designation if not less than 75 percent of the wine is derived from grapes of that variety, the entire 75 percent of which was grown in the labeled appellation of origin area.

(c) Exceptions. (1) Wine made from any Vitis labrusca variety (exclusive of hybrids with Vitis labrusca parentage) may be labeled with the variety name if:

(i) Not less than 51 percent of the wine is derived from grapes of the named variety;

(ii) The statement “contains not less than 51 percent (name of variety)” is shown on the brand label, back label, or a separate strip label, (except that this statement need not appear if 75 percent or more of the wine is derived from grapes of the named variety); and

(iii) The entire qualifying percentage of the named variety was grown in the labeled appellation of origin area.

(2) Wine made from any variety of any species found by the appropriate TTB officer upon appropriate application to be too strongly flavored at 75 percent minimum varietal content may be labeled with the varietal name if:

(i) Not less than 51 percent of the wine is derived from grapes of that variety;

(ii) The statement “contains not less than 51 percent (name of variety)” is shown on the brand label, back label, or a separate strip label (except that this statement need not appear if 75 percent or more of the wine is derived from grapes of the named variety); and

(iii) The entire qualifying percentage of the named variety was grown in the labeled appellation of origin area.

(d) Two or more varieties. The names of two or more grape varieties may be used as the type designation if:

(1) All of the grapes used to make the wine are of the labeled varieties;

(2) The percentage of the wine derived from each variety is shown on the label (with a tolerance of plus or minus 2 percent); and

(3)(i) If labeled with a multicounty appellation of origin, the percentage of the wine derived from each variety from each county is shown on the label; or

(ii) If labeled with a multistate appellation of origin, the percentage of the wine derived from each variety from each state is shown on the label.

(e) List of approved variety names. Effective February 7, 1996, the name of a grape variety may be used as a type designation for an American wine only if that name has been approved by the Administrator. A list of approved grape variety names appears in subpart J of this part.

[T.D. ATF-370, 61 FR 538, Jan. 8, 1996, as amended by T.D. TTB-91, 76 FR 5476, Feb. 1, 2011]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1979–2004 · leading case: Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly, 95 P.3d 422 (Cal. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly, 95 P.3d 422 (Cal. 2004). “( 27 C.F.R. §§ 4.23 , 4.24, 4.28.) As Bronco concedes, California long has enforced regulations that differ from the federal regulations with respect to method of manufacture.”

Wawszkiewicz v. Dep't of the Treasury, 480 F. Supp. 739 (D.D.C. 1979). “See 27 C.F.R. §§ 4.23 , 4.23a. Next they cite the “geographic rules,” which permit wines to be represented as made from grapes grown entirely within one geographic region (e.”

Wawszkiewicz v. Dep't of the Treasury, 670 F.2d 296 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “27 C.F.R. § 4.23 (1980). The percentage of varietal grapes required will rise to 75% in 1983.”

Bronco Wine Co. v. Espinoza, 128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 320 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003). “) [17] California has exercised this authority to impose additional standards relating to the "method of manufacture" and "composition" of wines bearing California appellations, by imposing stricter standards for the use of water and sugar in the production of grape wine (Cal…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.