Why is an out-of-state retailer treated any differently than an out-of-state winery that is selling wine into a particular state? The nature of the purchase transaction is exactly the same.
Return of the Stone Age in Illinois
Yet that is exactly what is happening in Illinois. After over a decade of out-of-state retailers being permitted to ship to Illinois consumers, a new law is set to take effect June 1, 2008 which bans such purchases while continuing to allow out-of-state wineries to ship into Illinois (read Illinois opens to direct shipping - i.e. for wineries only).
When the world is moving to purchase more and more goods online, why is Illinois going back to the Stone Age? Answer: political contributions/influence and in-state self-interests trump free market competition.
I found it particularly ironic that the above linked article ends with a quote from a representative of the Illinois Department of Revenue trying to justify the state's position when the state is losing tax revenues from such sales that it could capture if it permitted sales by out-of-state retailers to occur.
California at risk too
As Tom Wark over at Fermentation points out in his appropriately titled post, Fixing Stupid Laws, California is at risk of making the same mistake as Illinois. Why would some major California winery trade associations and even groups claiming support of free trade principles like Free the Grapes support such a ban of out-of-state retailers selling to California consumers when even in-state retailers welcome it?
The best solution
It's time for a federal law setting standards for regulating wine shipping by any licensed party (wineries, retailers, and even wholesalers). Anything short of that will continue the patchwork of 50 sets of state laws that change constantly based on acts of economic protectionism and local political self-interest.
(You may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)