California residents, businesses consider bailing on Golden State over taxes

[Xithras]

12. Napa wineries don't need to be located in California

The grapes have to be sourced from the Napa AVA, but there's nothing stopping the winery itself from relocating out of state. If you relocate the winery to a place like Reno, the vineyard simply becomes a California property owned by an out-of-state corporation. You could grow the grapes in Napa, do the crush in Napa, and then tanker the juice three hours up the freeway to Reno for aging and bottling. If the winery office is in Reno, it's legally a Nevada company, and not a California company.

The winery would still be on the hook for California property taxes, but the company would only have to pay California income taxes for sales within California itself, and it's owners would pay no income taxes to California whatsoever.

On edit: FWIW, this is simply an extended version of what Gallo already does with some of its "Napa" and "Sonoma" wines. The grapes are sourced from those AVA's, but are trucked two hours away to Modesto in the Central Valley for actual fermentation and bottling (they have a plant in Healdsburg for some of it, but a lot of it ends up in Modesto). A wines appellation doesn't tell you where the wine is MADE, but where the grapes are GROWN. There is nothing stopping an out of state company from buying Napa grapes and making Napa wines elsewhere.