What makes a rum Jamaican? Question at heart of Caribbean legal dispute
Rum is a key part of Jamaica's cultural identity, but what exactly makes a rum Jamaican?
That question is at the centre of a dispute that is continuing to rumble on the Caribbean island, as some producers wish to strengthen rules on what can, and cannot, be called "Jamaica rum".
In October of last year, Jamaica's Intellectual Property Office (JIPO) approved amendments to the geographical indication (GI) designation for Jamaica Rum that was originally set up in 2016. The biggest change is that ageing the rum overseas is now prohibited.
The amendment was called for by the Spirits Pool Association (SPA), the trade organisation that seeks to speak as a single voice for Jamaica's six rum distilleries - Appleton (which is owned by J Wray and Nephew), Clarendon, Hampden Estate, Long Pond, New Yarmouth and Worthy Park Estate.
The SPO's argument is that a stronger GI is needed for the appellation to be officially recognised in its two key export markets – the EU and the US.
It says this would give Jamaican rum better protection against competitors, and lead to more drinkers recognising it as a premium product made to high specifications in a certain geographic location.
But the amendment has caused quite a stir in Jamaica, because one of the biggest producers claims it would put it out of business.
This company, National Rums of Jamaica (NRJ), owns Long Pond and 73% of Clarendon. NRJ is comprised of three shareholders – the government of Jamaica, Demerara Distillers of Guyana and the Barbados-based West Indies Rum Distillery (Wird).
The key factor is that Wird has since 2017 been owned by French spirits firm Maison Ferrand. Its business model relies heavily on exporting rum in bulk and ageing overseas - something not allowed under Jamaica's new GI.
It argues that rum aged outside of Jamaica is still Jamaican rum, and that the island has exported and aged rum abroad for centuries.
And so, the NRJ is appealing the ruling of JIPO, with a hearing scheduled for 28 April.
The Spirits Pool Association says that Wird only started to have issues with the geographical indication after its takeover by Maison Ferrard.
"What we're saying is, if you truly believe in Jamaica rum, age it in Jamaica," says Christopher Gentles, general manager of the SPA.
Rum is typically made by fermenting and then distilling sugarcane molasses, the thick treacle-like substance leftover after refined sugar has been produced from the harvested plants.
Mr Gentles says that ageing the rum before it is sold is of paramount importance, and that doing so outside of Jamaica invalidates the products authenticity and uniqueness. And so, he adds that "we were a little bit puzzled" by the NRJ's objection.
The SPA also points out that exporting and ageing spirits overseas means Jamaica misses out on the value-added processes like refining, bottling, labelling and distributing as well as other secondary benefits to the local economy like rum tourism.
Both the NRJ and Maison Ferrard declined to comment.
India's spirited rum revolution
From 'hellish liquor' to premium product
Is rum about to become the new gin?
The use of GIs makes a product distinctive, and opens up three potential sources of value, according to Dev Gangjee, professor of intellectual property law at the University of Oxford.
"The first is simply a price premium. Research shows products can charge a price that is 1.5 to 2.7 times more than standard."
This isn't always reflected in profit as GI products are often more expensive to make, he adds.
The second reason is "they anchor production in that region". This stops a product from becoming generic and losing its value - like cheddar cheese, which was originally from a specific part of the UK but is now a by-word for a generalised type of cheese.
Lastly, Prof Gangjee says GIs help to advertise the region and "opens up other aspects of history and geography", citing France's successful wine tourism industry.
Examples of successful and longstanding GIs are Scotch whisky, champagne, and Parma ham.
Another Caribbean country similarly embroiled in a dispute over GI and rum is Barbados. Currently the island doesn't have a scheme.
Barbados has five distilleries and four agreed on the wording of a proposed Barbados rum GI. The sole objector was Wird, which owns brands such as Cockspur.
Similarly to the situation in Jamaica, it objects to the proposed rules against ageing overseas.
The failure by Barbados to obtain a GI has frustrated the other producers, including Richard Seale, owner of the island's Foursquare distillery. "We need to have intrinsic industries that are rooted here, tied here, that cannot be separated from here," he says.
Back in Jamaica, the SPA wants the country's rum to apply for the EU's Protected Geographical Indication classification, but this cannot happen until the proceedings at the JIPO have concluded.
Mr Gentles hopes that a compromise can be reached, even if it means that both sides are not totally happy. "It is my firm believe that one day we will put this behind us," he says.
And while the SPA hopes that a stronger GI will boost acclaim and business, it is also about pride in a product intimately linked to Jamaica's history.
In the days following the October ruling Jamaican newspaper, The Gleaner, endorsed the JIPO decision, saying there were many examples of firms "with no association to Jamaica attempting to appropriate the mystique of the island's brand".
It concluded: "When foreign entities become owners of uniquely Jamaican products, there should be a commitment to robustly maintain the integrity of the brand."
'I'm a little angry': Canadian firms boycott US products
US tech firms feel pinch from China tariffs
Luxury lounges: Credit card perks 'we are all paying for'
Sweden is 'no longer a country that cannot be trusted'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lack of documentation can be fatal when claiming expenses on taxes
One of the practical pieces of tax advice that I continuously dole out to clients, friends and family members each year is the critical importance of keeping receipts for any deductions or credits you plan to claim on your tax return. While this goes without saying for obvious items such as charitable donations and eligible medical expenses, it's perhaps even more important to keep receipts of other expenses, such as employment or business expenses, that you plan to deduct on your return to lower your final tax bill. Depending on your tax bracket, those receipts can be worth more than 50 cents on the dollar. Consider the self-employed, high-income earning Vancouver-based IT consultant who spent $1,000 in airfare to visit a client in 2025. At her top marginal tax rate of 53.5 per cent, hanging on to that receipt could save her $535 in real hard cash taxes that she otherwise would have to remit to the Canada Revenue Agency by April 30, 2026. That's why I encourage anyone who claims employment or business expenses to carefully track them and keep those receipts. That can be done 'old school,' by physically hanging on to the relevant receipts and filing them in a paper folder for tax season. Alternatively, many of us are now in the habit of taking a picture of the receipt (or scanning it) and saving the receipts in an online 'tax folder', by year, stored virtually in the cloud, so that these receipts are all together in one place come tax time. If you incur substantial business or employment expenses each year, I would go so far as to recommend a separate credit card so that you can easily segregate your work expenses from your personal expenses, especially when it comes to some retail purchases that could be either. For example, was that recent Staples purchase tax-deductible office supplies or a large back-to-school stock-up for the kids? The importance of keeping receipts to justify your expenses came up yet again in a recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal released late last month. The issue before the appellate court was whether the lower Tax Court erred in disallowing additional deductions for motor vehicle expenses incurred by the taxpayer in connection with his employment. While it was clear that the taxpayer travelled for work and qualified for various employment expense deductions permitted under the Income Tax Act, the Tax Court concluded that the deductions should not be allowed because the taxpayer did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the amount that should be deductible. I first wrote about this case last year, so before reviewing the decision of the appellate court, here's a brief summary of the facts. The taxpayer was appealing reassessments of his 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 taxation years in which the CRA reduced or denied certain expenses claimed in each of those years. The taxpayer, a visiting registered nurse, was simultaneously employed by four separate employers in 2015 and three separate employers in 2016, 2017 and 2018. His job was to provide nursing services to individuals in their own homes or in a retirement or nursing home. During the tax years under review, he provided nursing services six days one week and four days the next week on a rotating basis. Each week included two or three seven-hour night shifts during which he was on standby for patients who required urgent care. The night before each workday, his employers would provide a schedule of the patients he was to visit the following day. The taxpayer estimated he visited between 10 and 30 patients during a day shift, and he worked an average of 40 to 45 hours per week, plus the two to three seven-hour night shifts. Each employer paid the taxpayer a fixed amount for each patient visit, regardless of the nursing services provided. He travelled daily from his south-central Ontario community to visit patients in the Greater Toronto Area. The taxpayer deducted various automobile expenses in each year, which were denied. Under the Income Tax Act, to be able to deduct vehicle expenses as an employee, you must normally be required to work away from your employer's place of business or in different places, and you must be required to pay your own automobile expenses, as certified on Form T2200, Declaration of Conditions of Employment. In addition, you must not be the recipient of a 'non-taxable' allowance for motor vehicle expenses. An allowance is considered non-taxable when it is solely based on a 'reasonable' per-kilometre rate. The taxpayer may have been entitled to claim some of these as valid expenses, but he was unable to supply any evidence to back up the expenses he had claimed. He testified he had previously provided the records to the CRA by registered mail, but the CRA never received them, and he was unable to provide any backup documentation in court. This proved to be fatal for the taxpayer's claim in Tax Court. 'Maintaining books and records is an ongoing obligation in a self-assessing system and the taxpayer's failure to do so … made it impossible for him to meet the evidentiary burden … to demolish the (CRA's) assumptions' about the denied expenses,' the lower court judge wrote, citing a prior case. The taxpayer appealed the Tax Court's decision to the Federal Court of Appeal, which heard the case at the end of May. The three-judge panel of the appellate court considered whether the taxpayer had provided sufficient evidence as to the amount of his expenses to justify a deduction on his return. The taxpayer tried to argue that, notwithstanding having any receipts or backup documentation, he was found to be a 'credible witness' by the Tax Court judge, and thus his testimony as to the amount of expenses he had incurred and claimed on his tax returns should simply be believed. The appellate court disagreed, writing, 'it was not a matter of disbelieving him; it was a matter of the (taxpayer) failing to present sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the amounts claimed were in fact deductible.' How spousal RRSPs can reduce taxes without getting you in trouble Have you made a mistake or need to change your tax return? Here's how Bottom line – you could be the most honest, believable and trustworthy taxpayer, with a perfect record of tax compliance stretching back decades. But, if you are unable to back up your tax deductions with hard evidence, you are unlikely to be successful in the face of a CRA review. Jamie Golombek, FCPA, FCA, CFP, CLU, TEP, is the managing director, Tax & Estate Planning with CIBC Private Wealth in Toronto. If you liked this story, in the FP Investor newsletter.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
EU could approve Mercosur deal by summer, agriculture chief says
By Kate Abnett BRUSSELS (Reuters) -The European Union could approve its planned trade deal with South American bloc Mercosur before summer, but it has not yet fixed a date to do so, EU agriculture commissioner Christophe Hansen told Reuters on Thursday. "It could be before summer," Hansen said in an interview. EU nations still need to approve the deal, which was finalised in December but has faced opposition from members including France, which argues that the pact would hurt European farmers who face stricter norms and regulations than their South American peers. French President Emmanuel Macron and Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva discussed their differences on the pact at a meeting in Paris on Thursday. Macron said the text could be improved with the insertion of mirror clauses. France has previously argued for the insertion of an emergency break clause to restrict imports if a sudden surge in imports destabilises certain EU markets. "This would indeed require that we go back to the table and reopen. I don't think that this would be helpful in this situation," Hansen said of the idea of resuming negotiations with Mercosur countries to add new safeguards to the deal. "I see from many different parts of the agriculture and food sector, they are really looking for having these new opportunities," he added.
Boston Globe
20 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Stablecoin bigwig Circle set to make its debut on the New York Stock Exchange
Interest in Circle's initial public offering is high. The company's underwriters priced the offering at $31 per share Wednesday, up from an expected price of $27 to $28. The number of shares being sold was raised to 34 million from 32 million. Circle will trade on the NYSE under the symbol 'CRCL.' The shares had not opened for trading as of midday. A view outside the New York Stock Exchange on June 5. Richard Drew/Associated Press Advertisement The dominant player in the stablecoin field is El Salvador-based Tether, which has the stablecoin known as USDT that currently has about $150 billion in circulation. USDC is the second most popular stablecoin market cap, with about $60 billion in circulation. Circle said in a regulatory filing that USDC has been used for more than '$25 trillion in onchain transactions' since its launch in 2018. Revenue-wise the company has seen tremendous growth, going from just $15 million in 2020 to $1.7 billion in 2024. Stablecoin issuers make profits by collecting the interest on the assets they hold in reserve to back their stablecoins. Circle said USDC is backed by 'cash, short-dated US Treasuries and overnight US Treasury repurchase agreements with leading global banks.' Advertisement Circle's IPO comes amid a push by the Trump administration and the crypto industry to pass legislation that would regulate how stablecoin issuers operate in the US. A Senate bill There is also growing competition in the stablecoin field. A crypto enterprise partly owned by the Trump family just launched its own stablecoin, USD1. Circle said its long track record and values – the company says its mission statement is 'to raise global economic prosperity through the frictionless exchange of value' – will help it stand apart in the field.
