‘They’re playing with people’s lives’: Rye whisky under siege as Scandi makers hit by ‘new’ law
European rye whisky brands can no longer call themselves Rye Whisky
European whisky producers find themselves ensnared in a regulatory quagmire as a 2003 trade agreement between the EU and Canada – enforced with sudden rigour earlier this year – prohibits the use of the term ‘rye whisky’ on their labels. Tom Pattinson reports
Where comes to mind upon hearing the phrase ‘Rye Whisky’? Maybe the USA, home to iconic heritage brands like Old Overholt and Rittenhouse Rye. Perhaps the recent explosion of award-winning Nordic rye whisky producers? Perhaps The Heart Cut might have introduced you to Stork Club German Rye Malt Whiskey? Or maybe it’s the recently launch English rye whisky maker Fielden?
Wrong. At least legally. According to a long overlooked EU-Canadian agreement, ‘Rye Whisky’ is a protected term, strictly limited to Canadian products (with an obscure exemption for US rye). And for European brands using the term ‘Rye Whisky’ on their labelling, an unexpected clampdown is putting their brands at risk.
This new regulatory madness is rooted in the EU-Canada Agreement on Trade in Wines and Spirit Drinks, which reserves ‘rye whisky’ exclusively for Canadian spirits, despite the fact that Canadian rye whisky is not required to contain any rye. By contrast, European distillers, who often use significant amounts of rye grain, are now barred from accurately labelling their products, facing inconsistent and stringent restrictions across EU member states.
The seeds of this controversy were sown on 17 September 2003, when the European Community (now the EU) and Canada signed an agreement to protect geographical indications (GIs) for wines and spirits. The EU sought to safeguard terms such as Champagne, Cognac and Ouzo, while Canada secured exclusive rights to the designation ‘rye whisky.’ The deal stipulated that, after a two-year transitional period, only Canadian spirits could use the term in the EU market. At the time, this provision attracted little attention from European whisky producers. Many, such as Austria’s Destillerie Haider, which has produced rye whisky since 1995, continued to label their products as such without issue.
“Rye whisky is exclusively reserved for Canadian spirits, despite the fact that Canadian rye whisky is not required to contain any rye”
For nearly two decades, the rule remained dormant, allowing European distillers to build their brands around rye whisky. However, in January 2025, EU authorities began enforcing the 2003 agreement with unexpected zeal, catching the industry off guard. The enforcement has not been uniform across the EU, leading to a patchwork of restrictions. Finland now prohibits the words ‘rye’ and ‘whisky’ from appearing together on the same label, forcing distillers to find convoluted ways to describe their products. Denmark has taken an even stricter stance, banning the word ‘rye’ entirely from whisky labels, leaving producers unable to highlight the primary ingredient in their spirits.
The belated enforcement of the legislation has sparked frustration and fury among European whisky producers, who argue that it undermines both transparency and fairness.
“We founded Kyrö Distillery in 2014 with the idea of making single malt rye whisky. In 2019, the term single malt was reserved for spirits made with barley, and now we find out that we can’t call our whisky rye whisky,” says Mikko Koskinen, co-founder of Finland’s Kyrö Distillery. “It’s akin to producing extra virgin olive oil and being unable to call it ‘extra virgin’ or ‘olive oil’.” This comparison underscores a critical issue: the inability to use accurate terminology erodes the transparency that consumers expect from food and drink labelling.
Rye is at the heart of Kyrö, the heart of Finland you could say. The country’s national dish is Ruisleipä, a kind of rye bread voted for by the nation. Fittingly, then, Kyrö have made nothing but rye whisky for over a decade now, and has built its reputation on 100% rye malt whisky (finished, naturally, in a Finnish sauna). They scored an impressive 98 points out of100 and outstanding medal from the IWSC in 2020.
Now, 1.5 million litres of spirit is quietly ageing in their warehouses. The liquid isn’t going anywhere, but labels are in the process of being re-designed and messaging re-worked. “We’re changing our main communication to be centred on ‘whisky born in the sauna’, talking about our origin story. Sauna feels like a safe haven,” Mikko Koskinen says. Whilst Kyrö have been planning for this in recent months, it’s taking its toll. “They’re playing with people’s lives,” he says. “The EU is actively working against EU rye whisky.”
Before and after. Kyrö can not have the words ‘Rye’ and ‘Whisky’ next to each other on the same line
Many European rye whiskies contain rye grain as the majority ingredient, reflecting its prominence in their recipes. Canadian rye whisky, however, is not required to include any rye – a historical anomaly dating back to the 19th century, when Canadian distillers used the term to describe a style of whisky that often included only a small amount of rye for flavour. This means that European producers, who are often more faithful to the literal meaning of ‘rye whisky,’ are now barred from using the term, while Canadian producers can market their products under the same designation regardless of rye content.
The financial and competitive implications are stark. In 2022, Canadian whisky exports to the EU were valued at £11.8 million, highlighting the significance of the European market for Canadian producers. European distillers, particularly those who have spent years building their brands around rye whisky, now face the costly task of rebranding overnight.
“It’s akin to producing extra virgin olive oil and being unable to call it ‘extra virgin’ or ‘olive oil’
“We can’t put ‘rye’ on our label, but we need to state the ingredients,” says Alex Munch of Denmark’s Stauning Whisky. “And in the US, our label has to have the words ‘rye whisky’ on it.” This regulatory contradiction places European producers in an untenable position, navigating conflicting rules across markets while risking their competitive edge.
The Nordic region has been a driving force behind the resurgence of rye whisky in Europe, with distilleries such as Kyrö and Stauning gaining international acclaim. Rye, a staple crop in the region for centuries, lends a bold, spicy flavour to whisky, distinguishing it from the more common barley-based varieties. It also raises questions around whether British rye-first whisky producers such as Fielden, may be affected by the rules or whether – post-Brexit – they are outside of EU jurisdiction.
Danish whisky maker Stauning may no long be able to call their whisky Rye Whisky
These brands have played a pivotal role in elevating rye whisky as a category, attracting a growing following both in Europe and globally. However, the 2025 enforcement threatens to derail this progress. The inability to use the term ‘rye whisky’ – or even the word ‘rye’ in some cases – hampers their ability to market their products effectively, potentially driving consumers towards Canadian alternatives that may not contain rye.
The rye whisky crisis is not an isolated incident but part of a broader history of trade disputes over whisky and geographical indications. The EU and North America have long clashed over GIs, with agreements often reflecting a delicate balance between regional traditions and global trade. In 1994, the EU and the US agreed to protect terms such as ‘Scotch whisky’ and ‘Bourbon whiskey,’ ensuring that only spirits from those regions could bear the names. The 2003 EU-Canada agreement followed a similar logic but left some issues unresolved, such as ‘Highland Whisky,’ which recognised as a sub GI within the Scotch Whisky framework.
“The EU is actively working against EU rye whisky”
The EU’s relationship with Canada has also seen tensions under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which provisionally took effect in 2017 and incorporated the 2003 agreement. CETA protected 143 European GIs in Canada, including Scotch Whisky and Grappa, while reaffirming Canada’s claim to ‘Rye Whisky.’ However, the agreement has been criticised for its uneven treatment of GIs, with European distillers arguing that it prioritises Canadian interests over their own.
Beyond the EU, the US and Canada have had their own whisky-related disputes. In the early 2000s, the US challenged Canada’s excise tax regime, which imposed higher taxes on imported spirits, including American whiskey, while offering preferential treatment to Canadian producers. The dispute was resolved through negotiations, but it highlights the ongoing challenges of ensuring fair competition in the spirits market – challenges that the EU’s rye whisky ban has brought to the forefront once again.
The sudden enforcement of the 2003 agreement fits a broader pattern of the European Commission revisiting and enforcing old rules, often to the surprise of affected industries. In 2015, the EU Court of Justice ruled on a case brought by the Scotch Whisky Association against a Scottish law that set a minimum price for alcoholic drinks based on their alcohol content. The court found that such measures could be justified on public health grounds but needed to be proportionate, demonstrating the EU’s willingness to uphold strict regulations even when they conflict with industry interests.
More recently, the EU has intensified its enforcement of GI protections. At a 2022 CETA Committee on Wines and Spirits meeting, Canada reported success in removing terms alleged to infringe GI rights in its market, reflecting the EU’s growing focus on intellectual property. However, the timing and consistency of such enforcement remain contentious and questions arise as to whether Trump’s active tariff-first questions later has been instrumental in awakening this slumbering ruling. Kyrö’s Koskinen has suggested that over cautious rye whisky producers in Eastern Europe might have alerted EU authorities to the seemingly forgotten rule when launching their own products. The 20-year delay in enforcing the rye whisky provision, combined with the varying interpretations across member states, has however, left European distillers questioning the EU’s approach.
European whisky producers are now calling for urgent action to address the imbalance created by the rye whisky ban. The most direct solution would be to renegotiate the relevant provisions of CETA, allowing European distillers to use the term ‘rye whisky’ for their products. At a minimum, the EU should ensure consistent enforcement across member states, preventing overly restrictive interpretations like those in Finland and Denmark.
The broader issue is one of fairness and transparency, principles the EU has long championed in its trade and labelling policies. By prohibiting European producers from accurately describing their products, the EU risks not only harming its own industry but also confusing consumers who rely on clear labelling to make informed choices. The history of CETA suggests that renegotiation is possible – the 2017 agreement revisited and expanded earlier protections, demonstrating a willingness to adapt. European distillers are urging policymakers, trade officials, and stakeholders to push for a revision that recognises rye whisky as a legitimate category for their products.
For European distillers, particularly those in the Nordic region, the stakes are high. The regulations threatens to undo years of progress in building a vibrant rye whisky category. Until a resolution is reached, European rye whisky producers remain caught in a regulatory bind, their future hanging in the balance as they navigate the fallout of a trade agreement that has aged poorly.
Additional reporting by Heather Storgaard
