26 U.S.C. § 5222

Production, receipt, removal, and use of distilling materials

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Production, removal, and use(1) No mash, wort, or wash fit for distillation or for the production of distilled spirits shall be made or fermented in any building or on any premises other than on the bonded premises of a distilled spirits plant duly authorized to produce distilled spirits according to law; and no mash, wort, or wash so made or fermented shall be removed from any such premises before being distilled, except as authorized by the Secretary; and no person other than an authorized distiller shall, by distillation or any other process, produce distilled spirits from any mash, wort, wash, or other material.(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to apply to—(A) authorized operations performed on the premises of vinegar plants established under part I of subchapter H;(B) authorized production and removal of fermented materials produced on authorized brewery or bonded wine cellar premises as provided by law;(C) products exempt from tax under the provisions of section 5042 or 5053(e); or(D) fermented materials used in the manufacture of vinegar by fermentation.(b) ReceiptUnder such regulations as the Secretary may prescribe, fermented materials to be used in the production of distilled spirits may be received on the bonded premises of a distilled spirits plant authorized to produce distilled spirits as follows—(1) from the premises of a bonded wine cellar authorized to remove such material by section 5362(c)(6);(2) beer conveyed without payment of tax from brewery premises, beer which has been lawfully removed from brewery premises upon determination of tax, or(3) cider exempt from tax under the provisions of section 5042(a)(1).(c) Processing of distilled spirits containing extraneous substances

The Secretary may by regulations provide for the removal from the distilling system, and the addition to the fermented or unfermented distilling material, of distilled spirits containing substantial quantities of fusel oil or aldehydes, or other extraneous substances.

(d) Penalty

For penalty and forfeiture for unlawful production, removal, or use of material fit for distillation or for the production of distilled spirits, and for penalty and forfeiture for unlawful production of distilled spirits, see sections 5601(a)(7), 5601(a)(8), and 5615(4).

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, § 201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1365; amended Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §§ 1905(b)(6)(D), 1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1823, 1834; Pub. L. 95–458, § 2(b)(4), Oct. 14, 1978, 92 Stat. 1256; Pub. L. 96–39, title VIII, § 807(a)(30), July 26, 1979, 93 Stat. 286; Pub. L. 105–34, title XIV, § 1414(a), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 1047.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

Provisions similar to those comprising subsecs. (a)(1), (2)(D), (b), and (d) of this section were contained in prior sections of act Aug. 16, 1954, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859, as follows:

Present subsecs.:	Prior sections
(a)(1), (2)(D)	5216(a)(1), (4).
(b)	5309, 5362(7), 5412.
(d)	5216(b).

The prior sections, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, are set out in 68A Stat. 640, 641, 658, 665, 675.

Amendments

1997—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 105–34 amended par. (2) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (2) read as follows: “conveyed without payment of tax from contiguous brewery premises where produced; or”.

1979—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 96–39 struck out “, in the production facilities of a distilled spirits plant” after “distilling material”.

1978—Subsec. (a)(2)(C). Pub. L. 95–458 inserted reference to section 5053(e).

1976—Subsecs. (a)(1), (b), (c). Pub. L. 94–455, § 1906(b)(13)(A), struck out “or his delegate” after “Secretary”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 94–455, § 1905(b)(6)(D), struck out “5601(b)(3), 5601(b)(4),” after “5601(a)(8),”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1997 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–34 effective on the 1st day of the 1st calendar quarter that begins at least 180 days after Aug. 5, 1997, see section 1414(d) of Pub. L. 105–34, set out as a note under section 5053 of this title.

Effective Date of 1979 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–39 effective Jan. 1, 1980, see section 810 of Pub. L. 96–39, set out as a note under section 5001 of this title.

Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–458 effective on first day of first calendar month beginning more than 90 days after Oct. 14, 1978, see section 2(c) of Pub. L. 95–458, set out as a note under section 5042 of this title.

Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Amendment by section 1905(b)(6)(D) of Pub. L. 94–455 effective on first day of first month which begins more than 90 days after Oct. 4, 1976, see section 1905(d) of Pub. L. 94–455, set out as a note under section 5005 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 19 cases, 1962–1970 · leading case: United States v. Armando Restaino, 369 F.2d 544 (3rd Cir. 1966).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Armando Restaino, 369 F.2d 544 (3rd Cir. 1966). “§§ 5173 (a), 5601(a) (4); manufacture of distilled spirits on premises which have not been bonded, 26 U.S.C. §§ 5222 (a) (1), 5601 (a) (7); removing, depositing and concealing distilled spirits with the intent to evade payment of taxes thereon, 26 U.”

Melvin Edmond Surrett & Billy Charles Walden v. United States, 421 F.2d 403 (5th Cir. 1970). “§ 7206 (4); (3) making and fermenting mash on premises other than an authorized distillery, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5222 (a); and (4) possessing an unregistered distillery, in violation of 26 U.”

James D. Atwell & Melvin Edmon Surrett v. United States, 414 F.2d 136 (5th Cir. 1969). “Appellants were found not guilty of count one of the indictment, charging violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5222 (a), illegal manufacture of distilled spirits.”

United States v. Frank Warren Price & William Riley, 345 F.2d 256 (2d Cir. 1965). “§ 5179 (a), fermenting mash for alcohol in an unauthorized distillery, 26 U.S.C.A. § 5222 (a) (1), carrying on a distillery business without the required bond, 26 U.”

United States v. Joseph Eugene Baxter, 361 F.2d 116 (6th Cir. 1966). “Defendant was convicted by District Judge Mac Swinford, sitting without a jury, of violating 26 U.S.C. §§ 5222 (a) (1) and 5686(a). The first statute prohibits the production or transportation of mash fit for distillation of distilled spirits without appropriate Treasury…”

United States v. Elbert Roscoe Walden & Raeford Thomas Walden, 411 F.2d 1109 (4th Cir. 1969). “§§ 5173 and 5601(a) (4) by carrying on the business of distillers without having given bond, and in count two with violating 26 U.S.C. §§ 5222 and 5601(a) (7) by making and fermenting mash on premises other than those lawfully designated.”

United States v. Nicholas Ray Walker, 307 F.2d 250 (4th Cir. 1962). “26 U.S.C. § 5222 . 4 . 26 U.S.C. § 5205 (a) (2).”

United States v. Roy Whitehead, 424 F.2d 446 (6th Cir. 1970). “I would affirm appellant’s conviction on count 6 for making and fermenting mash on premises not lawfully qualified for the production of distilled spirits in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5222 (a) (1) and 5601(a) (7) and on count 7 for aiding and assisting in the use of a still for…”

Cecil J. Thornburg v. United States, 406 F.2d 1060 (5th Cir. 1969). “Appellant was convicted of possession of an unregistered distillery [ 26 U.”

United States v. McGee, 282 F. Supp. 550 (M.D. Tenn. 1968). “§ 5173 , and the prohibition in 26 U.S.C. § 5222 of making or fermenting mash fit for distillation “on any premises other than on the bonded premises of a distilled spirits plant duly authorized to produce distilled spirits according to law,” violate his Fifth Amendment…”

Junior William Benefield & Amos Bailous Benefield v. United States, 370 F.2d 912 (5th Cir. 1966). “This, together with his presence at the still, was sufficient to support a verdict of guilty on the charge of making mash fit for distillation, in violation of 26 U.S.C.A. § 5222 (a) (1), which was Count Three.”

United States v. Cleveland S. Warren, United States of Am. v. Leroy Rankin, 428 F.2d 15 (6th Cir. 1970). “Count Three alleged that the defendants “did ferment and have in their possession” mash on unlicensed premises, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5222 (a) (1), 5601(a) (1) (1964).”

Show all 19 citing cases →

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.