In March 2025, the Mexican Tequila Regulatory Council (CRT) sued the Alcohol Free Additives Association (AFA) and its parent, S2F Online, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division. CRT alleges that AFA is misleading consumers with an “unauthorized” tequila certification program. The lawsuit seeks to stop AFA from infringing CRT’s tequila trademarks and creating market confusion.
CRT’s Claims of Trademark Infringement and Consumer Confusion
CRT, which oversees tequila certification and label approvals under the Mexican Official Standard (NOM), argues that AFA unlawfully presents itself as a tequila certifier. CRT says this harms both consumers and the broader tequila industry. In its complaint, CRT states that:
AFA’s program falsely claims to verify “no additives” in tequila.
Consumers may be misled into thinking AFA has the same authority as CRT.
AFA’s actions infringe CRT’s federal trademark on the term “Tequila.”
AFA’s Defense: Free Speech and Consumer Protection
In recent filings, AFA counters that CRT’s lawsuit aims to suppress a voluntary, consumer-focused program. Key points in AFA’s defense include:
AFA never represented itself as a Mexican regulatory body. It clearly promotes an “independent, voluntary, and optional” assessment of additive content.
The program, renamed from “Verification” to “Confirmation” in 2021, was approved by CRT at the time.
CRT allowed the “no additives” term on labels for years and cannot now claim it is misleading.
Tequila producers may legally use up to 1% additives—glycerine, caramel color, oak extract, or syrup—without listing them on the label.
AFA also invokes the First Amendment, arguing its labeling assessments are protected speech. It claims CRT’s trademark rights do not extend to regulating U.S. commercial speech.
Questioning CRT’s Exclusive Authority
AFA further challenges CRT’s claim to exclusive certification rights by pointing to a new Mexican government body, Certificación Mexicana, established in May 2022 to test and certify tequila under the same NOM standards. AFA notes:
CRT’s legal challenge to Certificación Mexicana was dismissed in June 2023 for lack of qualifications.
Multiple certification bodies can operate under Mexican law, undermining CRT’s exclusive claim.
Only Mexico’s government can legally authorize the use of the “Tequila” appellation.
Based on these facts, AFA argues CRT’s federal trademark registration is invalid and should be cancelled.
Allegations of “Unclean Hands” and Industry Bias
AFA accuses CRT of favoring large producers who fund the council and failing to police adulterated products. In its defense, AFA presents third-party lab tests showing some CRT-certified “100% agave” tequilas contained non-agave alcohol. It claims these practices harm consumers, agave farmers, and the local economy.
AFA also contends that CRT knew about AFA’s changes and did not object for nearly four years, invoking the doctrine of laches to argue CRT’s delay bars its lawsuit.
Broader Debate over Additives and Label Claims
The dispute comes amid ongoing industry debate over additive disclosures. In August 2024, CRT and Mexico’s consumer agency PROFECO warned that “no additives” claims could confuse consumers unless verified. Some producers—Bacardi (Patrón), Mijenta, and Proximo Spirits (Jose Cuervo)—support transparent use of “no additives” labeling and are in dialogue with CRT to resolve the issue.
What’s Next
The U.S. court will now consider CRT’s motion for injunctive relief and AFA’s motion to dismiss. The outcome will shape how tequila certification and additive claims are handled in both the U.S. and Mexico.
The Spirits Business has reached out to CRT for comment.
Related Topics
