WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 4824

Liquor: other; definition of brand; modify. Amends sec. 105 of 1998 PA 58 (MCL 436.1105) & adds sec. 604. TIE BAR WITH: HB 4823'25

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Joe Aragona and 13 co-sponsors

Defines brand and brand extension to broaden when products are treated as brand extensions, and requires wholesalers for multibranded products registered with MLCC.

bill ordered enrolled
#liquor:other
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4824

Summary — HB 4824 (2025): Liquor — Definitions of “brand” and “brand extension”

Status / timeline
- Introduced: March 13, 2025 (Rep. Matt Bierlein).
- Committee activity: Referred to Regulatory Reform; substitute (H‑3) reported and adopted. Reported to Rules.
- House action: Passed the House (substitute H‑3) on October 22, 2025 (Roll Call #261 — Yeas 99, Nays 4); given immediate effect October 28, 2025.
- Current status: Referred to Committee on Regulatory Affairs.
- Tie bar: Bill may not take effect unless HB 4823 is also enacted.
- Affected statutes: Amends MCL 436.1105 and adds proposed MCL 436.1604 (Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998).

Purpose / intent
- To revise how the Michigan Liquor Control Code defines “brand” and “brand extension,” clarifying when supplier names constitute brands, broadening the circumstances under which a product is treated as a brand extension, and to require wholesalers to be appointed for multibranded products registered with the Michigan Liquor Control Commission (MLCC).

Key provisions
1. Redefined “brand” (amendment to MCL 436.1105)
- A brand is any word, name, letter, symbol, group/combination of those used by a supplier to name, identify, or trademark a specific beer, wine, mixed wine drink, or mixed spirit drink.
- A supplier’s legal name, assumed name, trade name, or DBA is treated as a brand name/identifier/trademark if it is “prominently featured” on the container or packaging to market and identify the product.
- Exceptions: the supplier name is not a brand if (a) it is not prominently featured on packaging, or (b) it appears only to identify the supplier that manufactured, bottled, or imported the product.

  1. Redefined “brand extension”

    • A brand extension is any product marketed using the same name/identifier/trademark (or a derivative or portion thereof) of a previously sold brand in Michigan in a way that would lead a reasonable person to recognize the relationship.
    • Clarifies that brand extension status applies regardless of:
      • addition of words/letters/names/symbols;
      • differences in packaging, formulation, production, container shape/size/type;
      • changes in alcohol category (e.g., beer to mixed wine drink);
      • whether the manufacturer, importer, or out‑of‑state seller differs from that of the underlying brand.

  2. Distribution rights and transitional rule

    • Distribution rights (wholesaler rights) in effect as of the bill’s effective date are preserved for the purposes of the new definitions.
    • The revised brand/brand extension definitions are not limited to brand extensions based only on brands that existed before the bill’s effective date (i.e., the definitions apply prospectively to new and future extensions).

  3. Multibranded products and wholesaler appointment (new sec. 604)

    • A supplier registering a multibranded product (a product that includes two or more brands of different suppliers) with the MLCC must appoint the wholesaler(s) that have rights to the supplier’s underlying brand(s).

Who is affected
- Suppliers (brewers, microbrewers, winemakers, mixed drink manufacturers, and out‑of‑state sellers): labeling and naming practices may change; suppliers must appoint wholesalers when registering multibranded products.
- Wholesalers/distributors: protections for distribution rights may be strengthened; assignment/appointment requirements for multibranded product distribution clarified.
- Michigan Liquor Control Commission: will implement and enforce the updated definitions and registration/appointment requirements.
- Retailers and consumers: potential indirect effects via labeling, product availability, or distribution arrangements.

Procedural/other notes
- Fiscal impact: Nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency reports no fiscal impact on state or local government.
- Stakeholder input: Committee reports note testimony in support from the Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association and Michigan Brewers Guild; Imperial Beverage indicated support.
- Legislative context: Similar to prior Senate bill (SB 868, 2023–24). Companion Senate bill: SB 1180.

Potential practical effect
- Broadening the statutory definitions may expand when a product is treated as a brand extension, which can affect interpretation of distribution/wholesaler rights and disputes. Suppliers may change packaging or naming strategies to avoid unintended brand classification; wholesalers may see clearer statutory bases to assert distribution rights, especially for multibranded products. Enforcement and disputes will be resolved under the MLCC and applicable distribution contracts.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.