EU bans the term "non-alcoholic gin"

The EU has banned the term ““non-alcoholic gin” but for us it doesn’t protect consumers as it claims. It helps big spirits brands, and it makes it significantly harder for new alcohol-free brands to stand a chance.

The ruling is simple: if it has no alcohol, it cannot be called gin. Many in the industry have welcomed this as a win for purity and category integrity. We see it differently.

This decision disproportionately benefits the household names. Tanqueray, Gordon’s and others can launch alcohol-free products and instantly signal flavour profile, occasion and expectations because the parent brand does all the heavy lifting. Consumers already know what a Tanqueray experience should feel and taste like. They do not need the word gin on the bottle to understand what they are buying.

New brands do not have that luxury.

If you are a young alcohol-free brand entering BWS, you already face one of the most confusing and over-segmented retail environments. You have seconds to communicate what your product is, who it is for, and how it should be used. Language is your most important tool.

Removing familiar terms forces new entrants into a position where they must educate the entire category before they can even sell their first product.

And the idea that “alcohol-free gin” confuses shoppers simply does not reflect real behaviour. Most consumers are not obsessing over terminology. They want clarity, not technical definitions in those few seconds at point of purchase.

If a product is in the alcohol-free section and labelled alcohol free gin, shoppers know exactly what they are getting: a juniper-forward, gin-style alternative without alcohol.

Take that language away and we risk:
• Slowing down adoption of the entire alcohol-free category
• Making BWS navigation harder, not easier
• Creating unnecessary friction at the point of purchase
• Reducing confidence for shoppers who are already unsure where to start
• Undercutting the ability of challenger brands to compete with legacy names

The alcohol-free space is still young and still fragile. It needs accessibility, familiarity and clear signposting. Restricting terminology at this stage does not support growth. It limits it.

We support creativity. We support innovation. We support originality. But we also support giving consumers the straightforward cues they need to understand what they are buying.

We're interested to hear how others see this. Is this really about protecting consumers, or are we unintentionally making it harder for the next generation of alcohol free brands to survive?