Finlandâs controversial rule that dictates how 5.5% to 8% alcohol must be made has sparked a formal trade complaint to the European Commission. The Brewery and Soft Drinks Industry Association (Panimo- ja virvoitusjuomateollisuusliitto) has challenged the national legislation, arguing it lacks public health justification and creates unfair competition within the EUâs single market.
The Core of the Legal Challenge
This industry group has now submitted its complaint, and the EU Commission is actively processing it, having requested additional information from Finnish authorities. The law in question mandates that alcoholic beverages within this specific strength range sold in Finnish grocery stores must be produced through fermentation. This technical rule has created a market anomaly where an 8% foreign wine can be sold in a supermarket, but a milder 6% ready-to-drink mix, often called 'lonkero,' must be sold exclusively in the state-run Alko stores. The association contends this distinction is arbitrary and violates fundamental EU principles regarding the free movement of goods.
A Market Distortion with Real Consequences
The practical impact of this production method restriction is significant for both consumers and producers. It artificially segments the market for mid-strength alcoholic beverages based on manufacturing technique rather than alcohol content alone. Finnish consumers face reduced choice and convenience for products like strong ciders or mixed drinks that fall into this bracket but are not fermented. For beverage companies, especially those innovating with new product types, the rule acts as a non-tariff barrier to trade. It effectively protects certain traditional fermented products while excluding others that are legally sold elsewhere in the European Union. The complaint argues this protectionism cannot be upheld under EU law without clear and evidence-based public health reasoning.
EU Scrutiny and the Principle of Proportionality
The European Commissionâs review will focus on whether Finlandâs rules are proportionate and necessary to achieve a legitimate public health objective. EU law allows member states to maintain stricter regulations on alcohol, but those rules must be justified and not act as disguised restrictions on trade. The industry associationâs position is that the production method restriction fails this test, as it does not coherently target health outcomes. A beverageâs alcohol by volume (ABV) is the primary health-related factor, not whether it was fermented or mixed. The Commission will examine if less restrictive measures, such as clear labeling or ABV-based sales limits, could achieve the same public health goals without hindering intra-EU trade.
Historical Context and National Policy
Finlandâs alcohol policy has long balanced strict control with gradual liberalization, notably with the 2018 reform that allowed the sale of beverages up to 5.5% ABV in regular stores. The current dispute highlights the tension at the next threshold. The existing law is a legacy of a time when production methods were more standardized. Its persistence now creates legal and commercial friction in a modern, integrated European market. The complaint forces a reevaluation of whether historical regulatory models are still fit for purpose under contemporary EU treaty obligations. It also questions the consistency of applying rules to domestically popular products like 'lonkero' differently from imported wines of higher strength.
What Happens Next in Brussels
The European Commissionâs investigation is a meticulous process. After gathering information from Finland, it will assess the complaintâs merits. Should the Commission find Finnish law incompatible with EU treaty rules, it would initiate a formal infringement procedure. This starts with a reasoned opinion requesting Finland to change its legislation. Failure to comply could lead to the case being referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Finnish government would then face a choice: amend the Alcohol Act to remove the production method restriction or prepare a robust, evidence-based defense of its necessity. The outcome will set a precedent for how national public health regulations interact with EU single market rules for alcoholic beverages.
A Broader Implications for Finnish Retail
The resolution of this complaint has direct implications for Finlandâs retail landscape. A change in the law could eventually see a wider array of mid-strength products, particularly popular mixed drinks, move from Alko shelves to grocery store coolers. This would represent another step in the gradual deregulation of alcohol sales in Finland, a politically sensitive topic. It would also intensify competition in the beverage sector, potentially benefiting consumers through greater availability and choice. However, any change would likely be met with caution from public health advocates who favor the high-control model offered by the Alko monopoly for stronger products. The debate, now elevated to the EU level, underscores the constant evolution of Finnish alcohol policy within a European framework.
The Path Forward for Finnish Lawmakers
The complaint places Finnish legislators in a familiar bind between national policy autonomy and European legal integration. Parliament may soon need to reconsider the specifics of the Alcohol Act, regardless of the EU Commission's final decision. A proactive revision could demonstrate alignment with EU principles while allowing Finland to shape the new rules. The core question for the Eduskunta will remain whether the goal of limiting access to mid-strength alcohol is best served by a production method filter or by a simpler, strength-based system. The industry's challenge has made the current system's inconsistencies untenable in the long run, guaranteeing that Finlandâs alcohol regulations will remain a live and contentious political issue.