How is this allowed to be called a bourbon?

At a guess, the authorities are not aware of this. Crown Royal is a huge brand and came to wider public attention via standard media.

I see labels now state, Kentucky Straight Bourbon or simply Bourbon, finished in...xxx casks. Angel's Envy, Belle Meade for example, Joseph Magnus states on the label "Straight Bourbon Whiskey". yet has a Sherry and Cognac cask finish and that info is on the back label. A play on words as the original juice was Bourbon to start I guess.

Re: Frost Yeah, could be as simple as that.

Re: Astroke That's interesting! I didn't know that... I wonder if they're technically breaking labeling rules, or if disclaimers like that are allowed...

I am waiting for @Victor to chime in. I am sure he can explain it to us. The following explanation is quite possibly wrong. Someone “straighten” me out.

My understanding is that “Straight Bourbon Whiskey” can have no additives. However, when you remove the word “Straight” you can add up to 2% of additives and still call it “Bourbon” (I think?).

I believe “Bourbon” is a category of things that are required.

It must use:

1. At least 51% corn in the mashbill
2. New charred Virgin oak barrels
3. Be aged longer than 2 years. (And if it is not aged longer than 4 years then the age must be on the bottle)

Putting the liquid through the Lincoln County Process (Jack Daniel’s) does not make it NOT Bourbon. After all I have been drinking Virgin Bourbon for years which is 7yo 101 Proof and has been charcoal filtered (Lincoln County Process). Still legally called bourbon.

My guess is that Joseph Magnus is still legal in calling their product Bourbon because it was made to the standards of “Bourbon” and then was finished in various casks. They can label it “straight” which means they can’t add anything else to the liquid.

So, all that to say, my guess is that they have add 2% or less of maple syrup to the formerly “Straight Bourbon Whiskey) which is why it can no longer be called “Straight” but can still be called Bourbon.

@Nock Technically if you transfer the Bourbon into another cask to "finish" it like Sherry or Cognac, the aging process continues. Would this not disqualify it from the "Straight" Bourbon category? Thus the label, Straight Bourbon Whiskey, finished in xxx cask.

@Astroke I don't think so. Yes, it continues to age. The key is, I believe, that it needs to be aged for a minimum of 2 years in charred new virgin oak casks. Once that standard has been satisfied I don't think moving the liquid to a previous used cask changes anything.

I could be very wrong, but there are enough "Straight Bourbon Whiskies" out there using a finish of some kind to make me think that they can't all be breaking the TTB regulations.

Joseph Magnus says "Straight Bourbon Whiskey" on the label and has nothing about it being finished . . . on the front! It does say the kinds of casks it is finished in on the back.

The fact that Crown Royal's Bourbon Mash (which it technically was a Bourbon mashbill) was quickly caught by the TTB and forced to change their name to "Blender's Mash" makes me think that they would have been all over groups like Joseph Magnus for advertising their produced as a "Straight Bourbon Whiskey" when it was not.

My guess is that there are loop holes in classification that simply haven't been exploited until recently. Nancy Fraley is the nose behind Joseph Magnus. I am sure she knows all the rule and regulations like the back of her hand.

@Nock Then they would not have to state it was finished in xxx cask, I still believe it is a play on words to maintain the "Straight" Bourbon on the label. Maybe I will ask Fred Minnock or Chuck Cowdery, they may have a better explanation.

@Astroke would like to read Chuck Cowdery's response to this/