.png)
NordAN submits comments to the Commission on Finland’s latest alcohol law reform
- Nordic Alcohol and Drug Policy Network
- 18 minutes ago
- 3 min read
05.03.2026 - NordAN has submitted a contribution to the European Commission on Finland’s TRIS notification 2025/0782/FI, which concerns a new amendment to the Finnish Alcohol Act. The case is part of Finland’s wider alcohol policy changes, where new exceptions and new sales channels have gradually been added around the monopoly system. In its contribution, NordAN argues that this latest proposal should be seen in that broader context, not as an isolated technical adjustment.
The Finnish government’s plan is to widen what has so far been a relatively narrow exception to Alko’s monopoly. The current separate exceptions for farm wine and craft beer would be replaced by a broader small-producer exception, allowing a wider group of producers to sell stronger alcohol directly to consumers from the production site, including products that have until now remained within Alko’s exclusive retail sphere. Finland presents this as a limited, tourism-linked model, but in practice it opens a new sales channel for products that have traditionally remained within the monopoly system. It also comes in a wider political context: Finland already liberalised the sale of 5.6 to 8.0 percent fermented beverages in grocery stores in 2024, and a separate bill on distance sales is still under consideration in Parliament.
In our contribution, we argue that the key issue is not this one proposal in isolation, but the cumulative effect of several reforms. The Finnish government itself acknowledges in its explanatory material that the recent and pending alcohol law changes have combined effects on Alko’s position, its sales, and the justification for its monopoly status. Our concern is that each change is presented as small and limited, but together they gradually reduce the practical scope of the monopoly. We also point out that this proposal would remove some of the current limiting features of the existing exceptions, including the legal and financial independence requirement, and that the proposed 100,000-litre annual threshold, which EHYT has also highlighted, makes this much broader in practice than a narrow artisanal exception.
A central part of our argument to the Commission is that Finland cannot simply defend this reform by pointing to its separate pending distance-sales bill. In the notification, Finland argues that foreign operators are not treated unfairly because they may get access to Finnish consumers through distance sales, including up to 80 percent alcohol by volume. We argue that this does not fully answer the problem, because cross-border distance sales are not the same as on-site, tourism-linked retail sales from production sites. We also refer to newly released Commission documents from earlier exchanges with Finland, which show that in November 2022 the Commission services were satisfied with a much narrower model in which cross-border distance selling above 5.5 percent would still remain prohibited and reserved to the monopoly. That matters because it shows that Finland’s current broader 80 percent model is a political choice, not something EU law forced it to adopt.
So, in simple terms, our message to the Commission is that this is not just a technical tweak for small producers. It is another step in a broader shift that keeps opening more space outside the monopoly, while Finland still relies on Alko as the main public health safeguard. The real problem is the contradiction Finland is creating for itself: it keeps weakening the monopoly in practice, while at the same time claiming to defend it in principle. That is exactly what the Commission should state clearly and examine closely under the single market rules, especially in terms of equal treatment, non-discrimination, necessity and proportionality.