The Cliff At Fifteen Thousand

Third article in this silo. Canadian craft brewing is unusually well served by tax policy and unusually badly served by explanations of it.

The Verdict, Stated First

Five claims, in descending order of confidence.

One. Beer is taxed under the Excise Act. Spirits, wine, cannabis, tobacco and vaping products are taxed under the Excise Act, 2001. They are different statutes and the CRA's own rates page says so plainly.

Two. The published tier structure produces a 3.5 times marginal jump at 15,000 hectolitres, which is our arithmetic on their rates and is larger than any other step in the schedule.

Three. The 75,000 hectolitre production volume limit is shared among related or associated brewers, and they must file an election agreement showing how it is allocated.

Four. We reproduced Finance Canada's stated relief figures from the rate table, one exactly and one to within thirteen dollars.

Five. And that verification establishes something the announcements do not say, which is that the headline 75,000 hectolitre relief figure is computed without the 50 percent cut rather than including it.

The third is the one that costs real money, ours. A brewery group that assumes each entity gets its own 75,000 hectolitres has understated its duty by a very large multiple.

A Warning About Dates

Standing feature of this silo, and unusually important here. Ours.

Four observations.

Excise duty rates on alcohol are indexed to inflation and adjusted every 1 April, because the Excise Act and the Excise Act, 2001 require automatic indexation to total Consumer Price Index inflation at the beginning of each fiscal year[5].

So every dollar figure in this article expires on 31 March 2027, and possibly sooner if Parliament amends the schedule again.

The current relief is also explicitly temporary. Both the 2 percent cap and the 50 percent cut run for two years from 1 April 2026[2], which means they are scheduled to end.

And the structural points outlast the numbers, ours. The tier boundaries, the aggregation rule and the filing obligation have been stable for longer than the rates have, and those are what this article is really about.

Our Grades For These Claims

Applying the scheme this publication uses throughout. This is the best-sourced article in this silo so far.

Grade A-plus for the rate table, obtained directly from the Canada Revenue Agency's own rates page[1].

Grade A for the aggregation and election rules, from a CRA excise duty circular[3].

Grade A for the legislative history, from the CRA and two Department of Finance releases[2][4][6].

Grade A for our own arithmetic, which is checkable against the published table and which independently reproduces two government figures.

Grade D for anything provincial, which we have not researched and which is a material omission we flag in its own section.

A Note On Method

Everything here is verified to 29 August 2026.

We obtained the complete beer rate table from the CRA's own page, including all fifteen reduced-rate cells and the three full rates[1].

We obtained CRA Excise Duty Circular ED212-11, dated June 2022, on the application of reduced rates to the first 75,000 hectolitres[3].

We did not obtain the Excise Act itself, and cite its provisions as the CRA circular identifies them.

We did not research provincial markup, licensing or reporting, which is a large part of what a Canadian brewery actually pays and is not covered here.

All arithmetic is ours. Every rate is the CRA's and every production volume is invented to demonstrate the structure.

This article discusses federal excise duty and is not tax advice. A brewer should confirm current rates and their own eligibility with the CRA or a qualified advisor.

The Wrong Act

The distinction to get right before anything else, and it is easy to miss.

The CRA's rates page states that it provides "the rates of all excise duties imposed under the Excise Act on beer and under the Excise Act, 2001 on cannabis products, spirits, tobacco products, vaping products, and wine."[2]

Four observations, ours.

Beer sits alone under the older statute. Every other excisable product a beverage business might touch is under the 2001 Act.

That matters operationally for a producer doing more than one thing. A brewery that adds a distilling operation is now under two excise regimes, with different licensing, different returns and different rules.

It also matters for research, which is how most people meet the problem. Searching the Excise Act, 2001 for beer provisions returns nothing useful, and a practitioner who does not know this loses an afternoon.

And the reduced rates specifically are found in Part II.1 of the Schedule to the Excise Act[2], which is the citation to use.

One consequence for anybody drafting an engagement letter, ours. A scope clause referring to "excise duty under the Excise Act, 2001" excludes the client's beer entirely, which is the kind of drafting error that surfaces only when something goes wrong.

What Changed In 2026

The current position, with its legislative history.

The CRA records that as a result of an amendment to the Excise Act included in Bill C-30, an Act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled 28 April 2026, which received royal assent on 18 June 2026, the annual adjustment to beer excise duty rates remains capped at 2 percent for two years, and the rates on the first 15,000 hectolitres brewed in Canada remain cut by half for two years[2].

Four observations, ours.

The word throughout is "remains." This is an extension of relief first introduced on 1 April 2024, not a new measure[6].

There was a live compliance trap in the interval. The CRA advised that a brewer could report at the proposed lower rates from 1 April 2026, but "if you choose to pay the duty using the proposed new rates, you will be required to pay the difference in applicable duty if the legislation is not enacted by Parliament"[1].

Royal assent on 18 June 2026 resolved that exposure, so a brewer who took the lower rates in April and May is no longer at risk on this point.

And the amendment is narrower than the headlines suggest. It changed only the rates for the first 15,000 hectolitres; all other rates had already been adjusted by 2 percent[2].

The Rate Table

The CRA's published rates effective 1 April 2026, for beer brewed in Canada above 2.5 percent alcohol by volume[1].

0 to 2,000 hectolitres: $1.8845. 2,001 to 5,000: $3.769. 5,001 to 15,000: $7.538. 15,001 to 50,000: $26.383. 50,001 to 75,000: $32.037. Above 75,000 hectolitres, the full rate of $37.69 applies.

Four observations, ours.

The reduced rates apply to the first 75,000 hectolitres of beer brewed in Canada each calendar year by a licensed brewer and any person related to or associated with that brewer[2].

Note the units. These are dollars per hectolitre, and a hectolitre is 100 litres[6], so the lowest band works out to under two cents per litre and the full rate to roughly thirty-eight cents.

There are parallel tables for beer at not more than 1.2 percent and more than 1.2 but not more than 2.5 percent alcohol, at substantially lower rates[1].

And the tier boundaries are the whole subject of this article, ours. The rates themselves are unremarkable; the spacing between them is not.

Two features of the spacing worth noting before the arithmetic, ours. The first three bands double at each step, which is a smooth geometric progression.

And the last two steps are much gentler, at 1.21 and 1.18 times, so the schedule accelerates hard in the middle and flattens at the top. The interesting behaviour is all around 15,000 hectolitres.

Verifying The Government's Own Figures

Our own arithmetic, run as a check on our reading rather than as a finding.

Finance Canada states two numbers. That the 50 percent reduction represents "up to about $90,000 in additional tax savings in the 2026-27 fiscal year alone" for a craft brewery[4], given more precisely elsewhere as $90,456[6]. And that the reduced rates on the first 75,000 hectolitres "would have provided relief of up to $921,521 for each brewer" in 2026-27[6].

We computed both from the published table.

On the first claim: duty on 15,000 hectolitres at the un-halved rates is $180,912, and at the halved rates is $90,456. The difference is $90,456, which is an exact match to the stated figure.

On the second: the full rate on 75,000 hectolitres is $2,826,750, and the reduced-rate duty computed without the 50 percent cut is $1,905,242. The difference is $921,508, against a stated $921,521. A discrepancy of thirteen dollars, attributable to rounding in the published per-hectolitre rates.

Four observations.

We did this because a tiered schedule is easy to misread, and reproducing the author's own totals is the cheapest available test of whether you have understood it.

It worked, and we would recommend the habit generally. Any published relief figure computed from a rate table can be checked against that table, and the check takes minutes.

The exact match on the first figure is the stronger result. An exact match on a five-figure number is not a coincidence, and it confirms both the tier boundaries and the halving mechanism.

And the thirteen dollar gap on the second is the expected size of a rounding artefact across five tiers of rates published to three or four decimal places.

What The Verification Establishes

The substantive finding that came out of the check. Ours.

Four observations.

To reproduce the $921,521 figure we had to compute the reduced-rate duty without the 50 percent cut applied. With the cut applied, the relief is larger and the figure does not match.

So the headline $921,521 and the $90,456 are additive, not alternative. The first is the value of the 75,000 hectolitre tier structure; the second is the incremental value of halving the first three bands on top of it.

Finance Canada's own wording supports this, which is why we are confident. The 75,000 hectolitre relief "would have provided" and the reduced rates "would provide additional tax relief"[6], and the word additional is doing the work.

It is nonetheless the sort of thing that gets miscited, ours. A reader who takes $921,521 as the total federal relief available has understated it, and a reader who adds them without noticing the second is conditional on the first has no error at all.

The Cliff

Our own arithmetic on the CRA's rates, and it is the operational heart of this article.

The marginal rate at each tier boundary, for beer above 2.5 percent: from the first band to the second is a multiple of 2.00. From the second to the third, 2.00. From the third to the fourth, 3.50. From the fourth to the fifth, 1.21. From the fifth to the full rate, 1.18.

Four observations.

The 15,000 hectolitre boundary is the largest step in the entire schedule, and it is nearly twice the size of the doublings below it.

The reason is structural rather than designed. The 50 percent cut applies only to the first 15,000 hectolitres, so the bands below that boundary are halved and the band above it is not, which manufactures a step where the underlying schedule had a smaller one.

Without the cut, the step from the third band to the fourth would be from $15.076 to $26.383, a multiple of 1.75. The relief measure has doubled the size of the cliff it sits behind.

We would not call that a criticism, ours. Relief targeted at small producers necessarily creates a boundary, and the alternative is to relieve everybody, which costs more.

The Effective Rate Climbs All The Way

Our own arithmetic, and it corrects a common impression.

Total duty and the blended effective rate per hectolitre, at various annual production volumes.

At 2,000 hL: duty of $3,769, an effective $1.88 per hectolitre, or 5.0 percent of the full rate. At 10,000: $52,766, $5.28, 14.0 percent. At 15,000: $90,456, $6.03, 16.0 percent. At 20,000: $222,371, $11.12, 29.5 percent. At 50,000: $1,013,861, $20.28, 53.8 percent. At 75,000: $1,814,786, $24.20, 64.2 percent. At 100,000: $2,757,036, $27.57, 73.2 percent.

Four observations.

A brewery at 15,000 hectolitres is paying sixteen percent of the full rate. One at 50,000 is paying fifty-four percent.

So the relief does not switch off at a threshold; it erodes continuously across the whole range, which is a gentler structure than the cliff arithmetic alone suggests.

The two facts sit together and both are true. The marginal rate jumps sharply at 15,000 and the average rate climbs smoothly, and which one matters depends on whether you are deciding about the next hectolitre or budgeting for the year.

And a brewery never reaches the full rate on its whole output. At 100,000 hectolitres the blended rate is still 73 percent of full, because the first 75,000 remain tiered.

Which is worth stating for anybody modelling a large producer, ours. The tiered relief is a permanent feature of the schedule rather than a startup concession, so it belongs in a valuation of any Canadian brewery regardless of size.

The Most Expensive Thousand Hectolitres

Our own arithmetic, expressing the cliff the way a production decision meets it.

Growing from 14,000 to 15,000 hectolitres adds $7,538 of excise duty. Growing from 15,000 to 16,000 adds $26,383. Growing from 16,000 to 17,000 adds $26,383 again.

Four observations.

The thousand hectolitres immediately above the boundary costs 3.5 times the thousand immediately below it, and the ones after that cost the same as the first thousand above.

So the cliff is a step, not a spike. There is no penalty band that abates, and a brewery does not benefit from pausing just above the line.

That distinction matters because it defeats the obvious response. A brewer cannot wait out a temporary penalty, since crossing 15,000 permanently reprices every hectolitre above it for that calendar year.

And the calendar year reset is the planning variable, ours. The production volume limit runs on a calendar year[3], so the counter returns to zero on 1 January regardless of the brewery's fiscal year end.

The Rule That Catches Groups

The most expensive misunderstanding available in this area, and it is stated plainly by the CRA.

The circular states: "A brewer may be related to or associated with one or more brewers. In that case, the reduced rates of excise duty are available only to an aggregate total of 75,000 hectolitres of beer brewed by all of the related or associated brewers, and not to each brewer in that group."[3]

Four observations, ours.

The limit is one per group, not one per company. A holding structure with three brewing subsidiaries does not get 225,000 hectolitres of reduced rates.

The exposure scales with the error. A group at 45,000 hectolitres across three entities that each claimed the bottom tiers has claimed the 0 to 2,000 band three times, and the duty owing on reassessment is the difference between what it paid and what the aggregate schedule requires.

The trigger is related or associated, which are defined terms and not a matter of how the businesses feel about each other. The CRA publishes a separate circular on the point[3].

And this is the item we would check first on any brewery engagement, ours. It is binary, it is expensive, and it is invisible on a single entity's return.

The Election Nobody Files

The compliance step that follows, and it is a filing obligation rather than a choice.

The circular states that pursuant to subsection 170.1(5), where brewers are related or associated, "they must make an election in the form of an agreement that shows how the 75,000 hectolitre production volume limit is allocated among them and which brewer will claim production at which rates." Each brewer must file the election agreement with their regional excise office and keep a copy of the agreement on file at each brewery. Brewers may use Form RC627 or create their own[3].

Four observations, ours.

Note the verb. They must make an election, so a group that has simply divided production informally has not satisfied this.

There are two separate obligations: file with the regional excise office, and keep a copy at each brewery. A group that filed once centrally has met one of them.

The allocation is a real decision with money attached. Which entity claims the bottom bands determines where the cheapest hectolitres land, and a group with one high-margin brand and one low-margin brand may prefer a particular answer.

And the form is not the requirement, ours. RC627 is offered as a convenience and a group may write its own, provided it shows what the circular requires.

Every Premises Needs A Licence

A structural point with an administrative consequence.

The circular notes that every separate premises must be issued a licence under subsection 14(2), so some brewers operate more than one licensed brewery[3].

Four observations, ours.

So a second location is a second licence, even under one corporation and one owner.

That is a licensing multiplication rather than a relief multiplication. More licences do not produce more reduced-rate hectolitres, and the two are easy to conflate.

It also has a records consequence that connects to the election. A copy of the allocation agreement must sit at each brewery, which for a multi-site operator means several copies in several places.

And it is worth confirming before signing a lease, ours. A satellite taproom that brews is a licensable premises, and the administrative burden of the second licence belongs in the business case.

Two things we could not establish and would want answered, ours. Whether a brewpub producing solely for on-site consumption is treated differently, and how a licensed premises that only packages, rather than brews, is characterised.

Both are answerable and neither is answered here. We report the gap rather than reasoning from the general rule, because licensing questions turn on definitions we did not obtain.

Low Alcohol And Non-Alcoholic

Two thresholds that are frequently merged and are not the same.

Beer containing not more than 0.5 percent absolute ethyl alcohol by volume is not subject to excise duty[5]. Beer containing not more than 1.2 percent is dutied, at a full rate of $3.128 per hectolitre and reduced rates starting at $0.1564[1].

Four observations, ours.

0.5 percent is the exemption and 1.2 percent is a rate band. A producer who reads 1.2 as the exemption threshold will under-remit.

The gap between them is commercially populated. Many products marketed as non-alcoholic sit at or below 0.5 percent, and products between 0.5 and 1.2 are dutiable at the lowest band.

The low-alcohol bands are very cheap in absolute terms. The bottom cell is 15.64 cents per hectolitre, which is fractions of a cent per litre.

But they still consume the production volume limit, ours, and we could not confirm from the sources we obtained whether low-alcohol volume counts toward the 75,000 hectolitres. A producer with a large non-alcoholic line should ask the CRA directly rather than assume.

What A Brewery Can Actually Do About It

Practical responses, ours, and not tax advice.

Four points.

Know which calendar year hectolitre you are on. The limit resets 1 January and most breweries track production against a fiscal year, so the two counters diverge.

Model the cliff before committing to a capacity expansion. On the CRA's rates, the first thousand hectolitres above 15,000 carries $26,383 of duty against $7,538 below, and that belongs in the payback calculation.

Get the association analysis done once, properly. It is binary, it is expensive if wrong, and it does not change often.

And file the allocation election and keep the copies, because the requirement is a filing rather than an internal understanding.

One further discipline worth adopting, ours. Reconcile hectolitres brewed to hectolitres reported at least quarterly, because the production volume limit is measured on brewing rather than on sales, and a brewery tracking only what left the warehouse is measuring the wrong quantity.

Not A Reason To Stay Small

The misreading to avoid, and it matters commercially. Ours.

Four observations.

Nothing here says a brewery should hold production below 15,000 hectolitres. The additional duty on the next thousand hectolitres is $26,383, which is under twenty-seven cents a litre.

Against a wholesale price measured in dollars per litre, that is a margin question rather than a barrier, and a brewery that can sell the volume will almost always be better off selling it.

The cliff matters for marginal decisions near the boundary, not for strategy. A contract packing arrangement that adds 800 hectolitres at 14,500 is a different proposition from the same 800 at 16,000.

And the industry's own position is that the thresholds are too low rather than too generous. A brewers' coalition has argued publicly for extending relief above 15,000 hectolitres, noting that a majority of Canadian craft production comes from breweries above that line[7].

We note that as a position rather than endorsing it, ours. Where a threshold should sit is a policy question we have no standing to answer, and this article establishes only what the current one does arithmetically.

The Layer This Article Does Not Cover

A material omission, given its own section because it is large. Ours.

Four observations.

Federal excise duty is a minority of what a Canadian brewery pays on a litre of beer. Provincial markup, listing fees, container deposits and sales tax sit on top of it.

Those regimes are provincial and differ substantially, and several use their own graduated small-producer scales with their own thresholds.

We did not research any of it, and a brewery reading this article has been told about one layer of a stack.

We flag it here rather than in the limits note because of the risk of a wrong conclusion, ours. A brewery that plans capacity around the federal 15,000 hectolitre boundary alone may find a provincial threshold sitting somewhere else entirely.

Contract Brewing And Whose Hectolitres They Are

A structure common in Canadian craft brewing, and one this article can only partly answer. Ours.

Four observations.

A great many Canadian brands are brewed under contract at somebody else's licensed premises, either because the brand has no plant or because it has run out of capacity.

The reduced rates attach to beer brewed in Canada by a licensed brewer[2], which locates the entitlement with the licensee rather than with the brand owner.

So the arrangement consumes the contract brewer's production volume limit, not the client's, on our reading of that wording, which means a contract brewery running several clients can exhaust its own bottom tiers on other people's beer.

We stop there deliberately, ours. We did not obtain guidance addressing contract brewing specifically, the commercial arrangements vary, and this is precisely the kind of question where a confident answer from a secondary source would be worth less than none. Ask the CRA.

When The Duty Is Actually Paid

A working capital point the rate tables do not show. Ours.

Four observations.

Excise duty on beer is a producer-level tax, so it is incurred by the brewery rather than collected from the customer at the till.

Which means it is funded out of the brewery's own cash ahead of, and independently of, whether the beer sells through.

On our own arithmetic that is a real number even at modest scale. A brewery at 15,000 hectolitres carries $90,456 of annual duty, and one at 20,000 carries $222,371.

And it interacts badly with slow-paying channels, ours. A brewery selling into a provincial monopoly on extended terms has paid duty on inventory it has not yet been paid for, which is an ordinary working capital problem made larger by the tax.

If You Advise A Brewery

For our own profession. Ours.

Four points.

Confirm the association position before anything else. The 75,000 hectolitre limit is aggregate across related or associated brewers and the reassessment exposure is the largest single item here.

Ask to see the filed election agreement, not a description of the allocation. The obligation is to file with the regional excise office and hold a copy at each brewery.

Check the statute you are citing. Beer is under the Excise Act; everything else excisable is under the Excise Act, 2001.

And reproduce the client's duty from the published table at least once. It takes ten minutes, it validates the tier allocation, and on our experience with the government's own figures it either matches closely or reveals a misreading.

What To Do

Cite the Excise Act for beer, and Part II.1 of its Schedule for the reduced rates. The Excise Act, 2001 governs spirits, wine, cannabis, tobacco and vaping products.

Treat every rate here as expiring 31 March 2027. Alcohol excise duties are indexed annually on 1 April, and the current relief is legislated for two years.

Confirm whether your brewery is related or associated with another. The 75,000 hectolitre limit is one per group, not one per company.

File the allocation election and keep a copy at each brewery. Subsection 170.1(5) requires it and Form RC627 is available for the purpose.

Model the 15,000 hectolitre boundary before expanding. On our arithmetic the marginal rate rises 3.5 times there, which is the largest step in the schedule.

Do not confuse 0.5 percent with 1.2 percent. The first is the exemption; the second is a rate band with duty payable.

Remember the counter is a calendar year, not your fiscal year.

And do not plan on the federal layer alone, since provincial markup and thresholds are larger and are not covered here.

The Limits Of This Analysis

Several caveats matter. This article discusses federal excise duty on beer and is not tax, legal or accounting advice; a brewer should confirm current rates and their own eligibility with the CRA or a qualified advisor. All rates were verified on 29 August 2026 and are scheduled to change on 1 April 2027, because the Excise Act requires annual indexation, and the current 2 percent cap and 50 percent reduction are legislated for two years from 1 April 2026 and are therefore scheduled to end. We did not obtain the Excise Act itself, and cite subsections 14(2) and 170.1(5) and Part II.1 of the Schedule as the CRA circular identifies them; the circular we relied on is dated June 2022 and we did not confirm whether it has been superseded. We did not research provincial markup, licensing, listing fees, container deposits or sales tax, which together are a larger cost than federal excise duty for most Canadian breweries, and this article should not be used for capacity planning without that layer. We could not confirm whether low-alcohol and non-alcoholic volumes count toward the 75,000 hectolitre production volume limit, and a producer with a significant such line should ask the CRA directly rather than infer from this article. All arithmetic is ours, and while every rate is the CRA's published figure, every production volume is invented to demonstrate the structure. Our reproduction of Finance Canada's relief figures is a check on our own reading rather than an audit of theirs, and the thirteen dollar discrepancy on the second figure is our attribution to rounding rather than a confirmed explanation. And our statement that the relief measure doubled the size of the cliff is our own characterisation, not a finding of any source.

Related Reading

Niche Industry Finance Three Years, Not Five The other article in this silo where published guidance disagreed with the regulator. Niche Industry Finance Inventory Valuation Methods What happens to a producer's tax position when the costing method changes. Niche Industry Operational Finance The Error It Cannot See The three-way trust reconciliation catches most errors and is structurally blind to one. A transaction posted to the wrong client for the right amount...

Frequently Asked Questions

Which statute taxes beer in Canada?

The Excise Act. The Excise Act, 2001 governs cannabis products, spirits, tobacco products, vaping products and wine. The reduced rates for beer are determined under Part II.1 of the Schedule to the Excise Act.

What are the current reduced rates?

For beer above 2.5 percent alcohol, effective 1 April 2026: $1.8845 per hectolitre on the first 2,000, $3.769 from 2,001 to 5,000, $7.538 from 5,001 to 15,000, $26.383 from 15,001 to 50,000, and $32.037 from 50,001 to 75,000. Above 75,000 hectolitres the full rate of $37.69 applies. These change on 1 April 2027.

Why does the rate jump so much at 15,000 hectolitres?

Because the temporary 50 percent reduction applies only to the first 15,000 hectolitres. The bands below are halved and the band above is not, which on our own arithmetic produces a 3.5 times marginal step, against 1.75 times if the reduction were not in place.

Does each company in a brewing group get its own 75,000 hectolitres?

No. The CRA states that where brewers are related or associated, the reduced rates are available only to an aggregate total of 75,000 hectolitres brewed by all of them, and not to each brewer in the group. They must also file an election agreement showing how the limit is allocated.

What is Form RC627?

The agreement among related or associated brewers for the allocation of the production volume limit. Under subsection 170.1(5) such brewers must make an election showing how the 75,000 hectolitre limit is allocated and which brewer claims production at which rates, file it with their regional excise office, and keep a copy at each brewery. A group may use its own form instead.

Is non-alcoholic beer subject to excise duty?

Beer containing not more than 0.5 percent absolute ethyl alcohol by volume is not subject to excise duty. Beer at not more than 1.2 percent is dutiable, with a full rate of $3.128 per hectolitre. Those are two different thresholds and confusing them leads to under-remittance.

Should a brewery stay under 15,000 hectolitres?

On our own reasoning, almost never. The additional duty on the next thousand hectolitres is $26,383, which is under twenty-seven cents a litre and is a margin question rather than a barrier. The cliff matters for marginal decisions near the boundary, not for strategy.

References

1. Canada Revenue Agency, Rates of excise duty on beer, obtained in full, setting out the proposed adjusted rates effective 1 April 2026. Full rates: beer not more than 1.2 percent absolute ethyl alcohol by volume, $3.128 per hectolitre; more than 1.2 but not more than 2.5 percent, $18.85; more than 2.5 percent, $37.69. Reduced rates by annual production volume increment for beer more than 2.5 percent: 0 to 2,000 hectolitres, $1.8845; 2,001 to 5,000, $3.769; 5,001 to 15,000, $7.538; 15,001 to 50,000, $26.383; 50,001 to 75,000, $32.037. Parallel tables are given for the two lower alcohol bands, beginning at $0.1564 and $0.943 per hectolitre respectively. The page records that the annual adjustment would remain capped at 2 percent for two years and the rates on the first 15,000 hectolitres would remain cut by half for two years; that the amendment changes only the rates for the first 15,000 hectolitres, all others having already been adjusted by 2 percent; and that a brewer choosing to pay at the proposed rates would be required to pay the difference if the legislation were not enacted by Parliament. Note: the CRA's own rate table and the primary source for every rate in this article. canada.ca
2. Canada Revenue Agency, Excise duty rates, stating that the page provides the rates of all excise duties imposed under the Excise Act on beer and under the Excise Act, 2001 on cannabis products, spirits, tobacco products, vaping products and wine; that as a result of an amendment to the Excise Act included in Bill C-30, an Act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on 28 April 2026 and receiving royal assent on 18 June 2026, the annual adjustment to beer excise duty rates remains capped at 2 percent for two years and the rates on the first 15,000 hectolitres brewed in Canada remain cut by half for two years; that the amendment changes only the rates in effect as of 1 April 2026 for the first 15,000 hectolitres, all other rates having already been adjusted by 2 percent; that the reduced rates are determined in accordance with Part II.1 of the Schedule to the Excise Act; and that they apply to the first 75,000 hectolitres of beer brewed in Canada each calendar year by a licensed brewer and any person related to or associated with that brewer. Note: the CRA's own page and our source for the statutory framework and the legislative history. canada.ca
3. Canada Revenue Agency, Excise Duty Circular ED212-11, Application of Rates of Excise Duty on the First 75,000 Hectolitres of Beer Brewed in Canada, June 2022, replacing the version dated July 2018. States that its purpose is to provide information on the reduced rates imposed on the first 75,000 hectolitres brewed per calendar year in Canada by a licensed brewer and on how to calculate the duty to be remitted; that a reference to beer includes malt liquor; that all statutory references are to the Excise Act and that the publication does not replace the law; that where a brewer is related to or associated with one or more brewers, the reduced rates are available only to an aggregate total of 75,000 hectolitres brewed by all of the related or associated brewers and not to each brewer in that group; that pursuant to subsection 170.1(5) such brewers must make an election in the form of an agreement showing how the production volume limit is allocated among them and which brewer will claim production at which rates; that each brewer must file the election agreement with their regional excise office and keep a copy on file at each brewery; that Form RC627, Agreement Among Related or Associated Brewers for the Allocation of Production Volume Limit, may be used or a brewer may create their own based on Excise Duty Circular ED212-12; and that since every separate premises must be issued a licence under subsection 14(2), some brewers operate more than one licensed brewery. Note: a CRA excise duty circular and our source for the aggregation rule, the election obligation and the licensing point. Dated June 2022; we did not confirm whether it has since been superseded. canada.ca
4. Department of Finance Canada news release, Government extends excise duty relief, provides direct support to Canadian breweries, distilleries and wine makers, 1 April 2026, stating that effective that date the annual inflation adjustment on beer, spirit and wine excise duties will remain capped at two per cent; that the excise duty rate on the first 15,000 hectolitres of beer brewed in Canada will remain cut by half; that together the measures are expected to provide more than $30 million in total relief through to 2028; and that for a craft brewery, reducing the rate by half on the first 15,000 hectolitres represents up to about $90,000 in additional tax savings in the 2026-27 fiscal year alone. Note: a Department of Finance release and one source of the relief figures this article reproduces. canada.ca
5. Department of Finance Canada backgrounder, Supporting Canadian businesses with alcohol excise duty relief, March 2024, recording the origin of the measures: that Budget 2023 announced a temporary cap on the inflation adjustment for excise duties on beer, spirits and wine at two per cent for one year as of 1 April 2023; that the government first implemented the cap to provide tax relief for small businesses, given that the Excise Act and the Excise Act, 2001 require alcohol excise duties to be automatically indexed to total Consumer Price Index inflation at the beginning of each fiscal year on 1 April; that no excise duty is imposed on alcoholic products containing not more than 0.5 per cent alcohol by volume; that rates for beer are per hectolitre with reduced rates applying to the first 75,000 hectolitres brewed in Canada each calendar year; and that 94 per cent of Canadian brewers have total production below 15,000 hectolitres. Note: a Department of Finance backgrounder and our source for the indexation mechanism, the 0.5 per cent exemption and the share of brewers below the threshold. canada.ca
6. Department of Finance Canada, Extending alcohol excise duty relief to support Canadian businesses, April 2026, stating that on 1 April 2026 the federal government announced an additional two-year extension of the two per cent cap and of the 50 per cent reduction on the first 15,000 hectolitres; that the 50 per cent reduction was first announced on 9 March 2024 effective 1 April 2024, with one hectolitre equal to 100 litres; that the extension would continue to lower excise duties on all beer brewed in Canada below the 15,000 hectolitre threshold and would benefit all producers; that Canadian brewers benefit from lower rates on the first 75,000 hectolitres per year, which in fiscal year 2026-27 would have provided relief of up to $921,521 for each brewer; and that the proposed reduced rates would provide additional tax relief of up to $90,456 for each brewer in 2026-27. Note: a Department of Finance publication and the source of the two figures this article reproduces from the rate table. canada.ca
7. Trade publication report on the 2024 extension of the duty cap and the 50 per cent reduction, quoting the chair of a coalition of Canadian independent craft brewers welcoming the announcement while stating that more work remains to modernise the excise tax schedule to support larger independent craft brewers, and that more than 60 per cent of the country's craft beer production comes from breweries over 15,000 hectolitres. Note: a trade publication, NOT a government source, flagged. Cited only for the industry's stated position on the threshold, not for any rate or rule. just-drinks.com

This article discusses federal excise duty on beer and is not tax, legal or accounting advice. All rates were verified on 29 August 2026 and are subject to annual indexation on 1 April; the current relief measures are legislated for two years and are scheduled to end. Provincial markup, licensing and sales tax are not covered and are a larger cost than federal excise duty for most Canadian breweries. All arithmetic is the authors' own; every rate is the CRA's and every production volume is invented.