Some beer makers have been accused of decreasing the alcohol content material of their drinks to pay much less tax, conserving costs the identical and pocketing the distinction.
Drinks might be taxed by alcoholic energy from 1 August when a brand new alcohol obligation regime comes into impact.
In anticipation, standard brewers have diminished alcohol content material and stored costs the identical.
Under the brand new tax system, producers will save between 2p and 3p per bottle or can.
Brands which have allegedly already diminished alcohol content material embrace Spitfire, Old Speckled Hen, Foster's and Bishops Finger.
An analogous transfer has not been dominated out by massive brewers Heineken, Amstel, John Smith's and Newcastle Brown Ale.
Work from the alcohol analysis group on the University of Sheffield mentioned that if breweries diminished alcohol percentages by simply 0.35 they may save an estimated £250m on tax.
In a phenomenon being described as "drinkflation", the alcohol by quantity (ABV) for Foster's dropped earlier this 12 months, from 4% to three.7%.
Similarly, Old Speckled Hen's ABV fell from 5% to 4.8%, Spitfire Amber Ale dropped from 4.5% to 4.2% and Bishops Finger was lowered from 5.4% to five.2%.
Old Speckled Hen producer and pub chain Greene King mentioned it "continues to look at ways we can absorb those increasing costs to ensure we continue to offer our customers the same great value and taste".
The producer of Spitfire and Bishops Finger, Shepherd Neame, mentioned: "Consumers are increasingly choosing drinks with a lower alcohol content as part of a healthy lifestyle - we hope this will encourage more people to try our award-winning flagship beers."
Read extra enterprise:Vodafone chief executive says it is 'very early' to talk about job losses under Three mergerPinewood-owner Aermont joins list of Center Parcs suitors
Scepticism of well being motivations was expressed by a analysis fellow of the Sheffield alcohol analysis group.
"Sometimes brewers make the case that they have made these reductions in strength levels on health grounds. Given their historically strong opposition to public health policies, though, the motive is much more likely to be financial," Colin Angus mentioned.
Please share by clicking this button!
Visit our site and see all other available articles!