March 5 (Reuters) - Jack Daniel’s maker Brown-Forman’s CEO Lawson Whiting said on Wednesday Canadian provinces taking American liquor off store shelves was “worse than a tariff” and a “disproportionate response” to levies imposed by the Trump administration.
Several Canadian provinces have taken U.S. liquor off store shelves as part of retaliatory measures against President Donald Trump’s tariffs.
Canadians are steering away from U.S. goods, sports events and trips following the recent imposition of tariffs, which have left them stirred, despite the deep ties between the two countries.
Maybe Jack outta have a talk with his boy Trump about why it happened.
Exactly!
Me reaping: ha ha hell yes
Me sowing:
(other way around)
Lol thanks I didn’t catch it
You’re the ones with the money.
I am but a lone Canadian, but I’ll not buy a single American product, especially not from red states, until Tangerine Palpatine leaves office or dies, whichever happens first. We make fucking fantastic whiskey right here in Quebec.
Tangerine Palpatine hahah I’m gonna steal that
Please do!
“wow, if ain’t those the consequences of my own actions”.
Literally could not care less what Jack thinks about us doing what we must.
Fucking deep cut 😂
suck my dick jackie boy
It says right in the article, “Canada accounts for 1% of the sales…” So I’m not one to shit on good news but I don’t think days a problem for them. But that’s just Jack Daniel’s. Across the whole spirits, liquors, and wines industry definitely will add up.
If that’s true, why are they bitching?
That has real vibes of, “I don’t care if you break up with me, I have hundreds of girls ready to date me. Wait! Come back!”
Not our problem your president broke the agreement.
I don’t know the guy’s politics, and I don’t care to know them, but if you have a super generic, easily replaceable export, you should avoid presidents who fuck around, because you’ll be the one who finds out.
Dang. Should have donated harder, bucko.
Removing American products had very little to do with tariffs. It started after Trump threatened to invade Canada.
If you’re pissed, put your influence against Trump and his horseshit tariffs. What was a disproportionate response was Canada doing nothing wrong, and America putting tariffs on their goods.
It’s a terrible whiskey anyway. Go for a good Scottish or Irish single malt.
Bourbons have their place, you can’t really make an old fashioned with a scotch … I mean you can … but you shouldn’t. That said you shouldnt use Jack Daniels for one either.
Eh, Jack isn’t really a bourbon. It’s made with a starter but that’s still not really a bourbon. That would be Jim. I don’t particularly care for either, but when I was drinking, I preferred a good Irish or Scottish neat.
Occasionally I liked a cocktail with Cointreau, Tequila and lime on the rocks. I forget what it was called.
I’m staying out of the whiskey war, but…
Occasionally I liked a cocktail with Cointreau, Tequila and lime on the rocks. I forget what it was called.
This is just a margarita on the rocks, sometimes called a classic margarita. 👍
Jack isn’t really a bourbon
It checks all of the legal boxes to be a bourbon, at least 51% corn, aged in new charred oak barrels, the aging and proof requirements, made in the US, etc.
Being “made with a starter” isn’t a requirement for bourbon, and I’m honestly not even too sure what you mean by that. I assume it’s probably some reference to it being a sour mash whiskey, but that’s not something that factors into the legal definition of bourbon.
The only thing that arguably makes it not a bourbon is the “Lincoln County Process” of charcoal filtering it before aging in the casks, which is a requirement to be called a “Tennessee Whiskey,” all the other requirements are pretty much the same as bourbon (and it’s worth noting that the 2nd biggest Tennessee Whiskey brand is Prichards, which is actually located in Lincoln County, and doesn’t use that process and has a grandfathered exception to that requirement)
The main nitpick is whether that Lincoln county process can be considered to add color or flavoring, because if it does that would disqualify it from being a bourbon. I’m personally of the opinion that if it’s a filtering process, it’s probably removing flavor and color if anything so not a disqualifier, and even if it did, in the relatively short time it’s in contact with the whiskey it’s probably pretty insignificant and not gonna be all that distinguishable from what the charred oak barrels are going to impact to it over the next 2+ years.
And Tennessee is really the only place that makes the Lincoln County Process a requirement for “Tennessee Whiskey” Pretty much any other government or trade organization (like NAFTA) that has a definition for it basically just leaves it at something like “a straight bourbon whiskey made in Tennessee”
That article pretty much just rehashes what I said, and doesn’t touch on what you said about “being made with a starter” so I’m not really clear on why you linked it.
The legal requirements for Tennessee Whiskey are the same as for bourbon + it must be made in Tennessee + charcoal filtering
And since bourbon can be made anywhere in the US, and at least until the next civil war kicks off, Tennessee is still in the US
And since the legal definition for bourbon doesn’t say that you can’t charcoal filter it, and since it’s purpose is to “remove impurities” I think it’s safe to say it’s not adding any color or flavor which would disqualify it. (And one of the big producers doesn’t even need to do it)
I think it’s safe to say that Tennessee Whiskey is bourbon. It just checks a couple extra boxes so it can be marketed as “Tennessee Whiskey” because it makes it sound a little extra special.
Maple. IDC if you want to call it bourbon. I just thought you may want to know the actual difference. Cheers and enjoy your bourbon.
