A group of state attorneys general have asked brewers Anheuser-Busch and Miller Brewing for more information about the way they market caffeine-infused alcoholic beverages in their product lines.
State enforcement officials are examining the degree to which brewers use packaging and advertising to target the drinks—which add caffeine, ginseng or guarana to alcohol—at a youth market.
According to press reports, Anheuser-Busch confirmed that it received subpoenas from attorneys general in New York, Maine, Maryland, Arizona and Iowa for information about the sales and marketing of its Tilt and Bud Extra brands. Miller Brewing confirmed it received requests for documents related to its Sparks brand from legal officials in Illinois, New York, Iowa, Maine and Maryland.
Beer-and-caffeine combinations have been the subject of state legal attention twice in the past year. In May 2007, attorneys general from 30 states made public a letter sent to Anheuser-Busch expressing concern over the additions of stimulants such as caffeine to alcohol in Bud Extra, Tilt and Spykes, a line of single-shot fruit- and chocolate-flavored alcoholic drinks.
While noting that the flavors and packaging in these drinks were designed to appeal to consumers under 21, the May letter also referred to warnings from public health officers that adding stimulants to alcohol could mask the adverse effect of the alcohol to a consumer’s motor skills or reaction times.
Anheuser-Busch no longer sells Spykes.
Last August, those state AGs sent a letter to the federal government’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau asking for an investigation into the “aggressive marketing” behind alcohol/caffeine drinks from Anheuser-Busch, Miller and a third company, Charge Beverages, maker of Liquid Charge and Liquid Core (Promo Xtra, Aug. 23, 2007).
In that letter, officials expressed concern about apparent age-targeting in slogans such as those used to market Bud Extra: “You can sleep when you’re 30” and “Who’s up for staying out all night?”
They also asked the bureau to rule on whether the brands in question should be taxed not as malt beverages, but at the higher distilled-spirits rate. It did so in September, saying the current malt-beverage tax rate was correct.
All parties are awaiting a report from the Federal Trade Commission on the marketing of caffeinated alcoholic drinks. No date has been set for publication of that report.
Network
