CA AB 2375
enactedAlcoholic beverage control.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA AB 2375 pass?
Yes. CA AB 2375 has been enacted into law. Latest recorded action (2026-09-20): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 396, Statutes of 2026.
What is CA AB 2375 about?
Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses and generally makes a violation of the act a misdemeanor. Existing law defines "beer" for purposes of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act as any alcoholic beverage obtained by the fermentation of any infusion or decoction of barley, malt, hops, or any other similar product, or any combination thereof in water, as specified. This bill would revise the definition of "beer" for purposes of the act to provide that beer may be produced using other grain and to specify that fermentation occurs in drinkable water. Existing law requires specified licensees who sold and delivered alcoholic beverages to a retailer and did not receive payment within 42 days of the date of delivery to charge 1% of the unpaid balance on the 43rd day and an additional 1% for each subsequent 30-day period. This bill would instead require the above-described licensees to charge 1% of the unpaid balance on the 32nd day after 30 days without payment and an additional 1% for each subsequent 30-day period. The bill would make other nonsubstantive and conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a payment from a licensed retailer to a licensed wholesaler for the delivery of alcoholic beverages to be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT) pursuant to certain conditions, except as specified. Among other things, existing law requires the wholesaler to initiate the EFT and requires any service fees related to the EFT to be applied in an equitable manner. Existing law also provides for the selection of the third-party payment processor used to facilitate the EFT, including requiring the use of the processor used by the parties on July 1, 2025, if the parties cannot agree on a processor, and if no processor was used as of July 1, 2025, requiring the wholesaler to select the processor. This bill would revise and recast the above-described provisions to instead apply to the sale of alcoholic beverages. The bill would define "initiate" and "equitable manner" for these purposes. The bill would require the parties to either use the third-party payment processor used by the parties on July 1, 2025, or a payment processing service offered by a financial institution that held a deposit account of the licensed retailer on that date, and, if neither apply, would require the wholesaler to select the processor. The bill would make various other clarifying and nonsubstantive changes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors CA AB 2375?
Blanca Rubio is the primary sponsor of CA AB 2375.
Description
Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses and generally makes a violation of the act a misdemeanor. Existing law defines "beer" for purposes of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act as any alcoholic beverage obtained by the fermentation of any infusion or decoction of barley, malt, hops, or any other similar product, or any combination thereof in water, as specified. This bill would revise the definition of "beer" for purposes of the act to provide that beer may be produced using other grain and to specify that fermentation occurs in drinkable water. Existing law requires specified licensees who sold and delivered alcoholic beverages to a retailer and did not receive payment within 42 days of the date of delivery to charge 1% of the unpaid balance on the 43rd day and an additional 1% for each subsequent 30-day period. This bill would instead require the above-described licensees to charge 1% of the unpaid balance on the 32nd day after 30 days without payment and an additional 1% for each subsequent 30-day period. The bill would make other nonsubstantive and conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a payment from a licensed retailer to a licensed wholesaler for the delivery of alcoholic beverages to be made by electronic funds transfer (EFT) pursuant to certain conditions, except as specified. Among other things, existing law requires the wholesaler to initiate the EFT and requires any service fees related to the EFT to be applied in an equitable manner. Existing law also provides for the selection of the third-party payment processor used to facilitate the EFT, including requiring the use of the processor used by the parties on July 1, 2025, if the parties cannot agree on a processor, and if no processor was used as of July 1, 2025, requiring the wholesaler to select the processor. This bill would revise and recast the above-described provisions to instead apply to the sale of alcoholic beverages. The bill would define "initiate" and "equitable manner" for these purposes. The bill would require the parties to either use the third-party payment processor used by the parties on July 1, 2025, or a payment processing service offered by a financial institution that held a deposit account of the licensed retailer on that date, and, if neither apply, would require the wholesaler to select the processor. The bill would make various other clarifying and nonsubstantive changes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
- Introduced
- 2026-06-08
- Latest action
- 2026-09-20 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 396, Statutes of 2026.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Blanca Rubioauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-09-20
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 396, Statutes of 2026.
became-law
2026-09-20
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2026-09-08
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3:30 p.m.
executive-receipt
2026-08-28
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-28
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 6812.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-27
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2026-08-27
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-24
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-20
Action rescinded whereby the bill was read third time, passed, and to Assembly.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-20
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-08-20
Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-13
In Senate. Held at Desk.
2026-08-13
Ordered to the Senate.
2026-08-11
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2026-08-10
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-10
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 5323.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-04
Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
reading-1,reading-2
2026-08-03
From committee: Be ordered to second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to Consent Calendar.
committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-06-23
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (June 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-06-17
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on G.O.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-06-08
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on G.O.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-05-06
Referred to Com. on G.O.
referral-committee
2026-04-16
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-04-16
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 68. Noes 0. Page 4683.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-04-13
Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
reading-1,reading-2
2026-04-09
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 22. Noes 0.) (April 8).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-03-09
Referred to Com. on G.O.
referral-committee
2026-02-20
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
2026-02-19
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
Votes
Do pass. To Consent Calendar.
2026-04-08 · pass · 22-0
Member-level votes (22)
- Carrillo: yes
- Soria: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Davies: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Berman: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Solache: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Fong: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Ta: yes
- McKinnor: yes
AB 2375 Blanca Rubio Consent Calendar Second Day
2026-04-16 · pass · 68-0
Member-level votes (80)
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- DeMaio: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Ward: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Soria: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Krell: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Davies: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Bains: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Flora: other
- Berman: other
- Hart: other
- Papan: other
- Arambula: other
- Dixon: other
- Bonta: other
- Schiavo: other
- Celeste Rodriguez: other
- Irwin: other
- Hoover: other
- Harabedian: other
- Patel: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Ta: yes
- Lee: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Fong: yes
- Addis: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Haney: yes
- Wilson: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Chen: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Lackey: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Solache: yes
- Johnson: yes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
2026-06-23 · pass · 14-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Rubio: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Alvarado-Gil: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-09-21T21:33:52.744420Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 2375. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.