Hi there,
Usually I'm here to advocate for cottage food bills, but
today is a rare instance where I'm advocating against one.
Wisconsin is a unique state that has always struggled to pass cottage food legislation. Currently, they have
a law that allows pickled products, and producers can also sell baked goods due to
a lawsuit victory.
This year, they have
a new bill (AB 748) that is trying to legalize all non-perishable foods so that producers can sell more types of products. Sounds great, right?
Well, not so much. The problem is that
the bill tacks on so much red tape that Wisconsin would have the worst cottage food law in the nation if it passed!Let's examine the pros and cons of this bill:
Pros:- Would allow all non-perishable products (currently allows baked goods and pickled products)
- Would allow pickled products to be sold from home and delivered directly to the customer
Cons:- Would impose a $40k/year sales limit (currently unlimited sales for baked goods, and $5k/year for pickled products)
- Would require registration with the ag department (currently no registration required)
- Would require the producer to get ag department approval for every product before they can sell it
- Would require a home kitchen inspection
- Would ban some sales venues, including sales at roadside stands, individual popup sales, and in-state shipping of online sales (currently allowed for baked goods)
- Would require business liability insurance (this has never been required by any cottage food law, ever)
So while I am all for expanding the allowed foods list, at some point you have to ask yourself: At what cost? In this case,
the downsides of this bill greatly outweigh the upsides.
And
the insurance requirement is very strange and worrisome, because IMHO, that has no place in a cottage food bill. Many cottage food entrepreneurs choose to get insurance, but that's exactly what it should be: their choice. A cottage food law isn't supposed to protect an entrepreneur from themselves, and perhaps that's why
no cottage food law has ever required insurance.
Some might argue that having this bill is a good starting point, and hopefully amendments can get added that improve it before it gets passed. But that is an uphill battle, because rarely do amendments make a bill better.
Usually a bill starts off with only pros and no cons, and then it gives the legislators room to compromise in order to get the bill to eventually pass.
So at this point, I think
this bill is a lost cause, and I would throw it out and start over. For once, we can cross ours fingers and hope that a cottage food bill gets ignored and dies!
And if you live in Wisconsin, the Institute for Justice has created
this page where you can help fight against this bill.
Forraging ahead,
David