Native TTB Form 5120 monthly excise return
27 CFR Part 24 Subpart F, IRC § 5041
Cepaos vs InnoVint — US Winery Comparison
Cepaos vs InnoVint — which platform fits your US winery?
A plain-language comparison for US wineries evaluating their next platform. InnoVint (Napa, California) is mobile-first cellar-floor capture, designed by winemakers. Cepaos is the cross-market alternative when DTC, three-tier compliance, US GAAP and multi-entity consolidation need to live in the same platform as the cellar floor. Both have legitimate strengths.
Common Ground
What both vendors deliver
Both platforms cover the cellar-floor production workflow with mobile capture. Material differences appear in DTC depth, three-tier modeling, multi-entity consolidation and self-serve onboarding.
- Cellar-floor production data capture (crush, pressing, racking, fining)
- Lot history and chain-of-custody
- Mobile-first capture optimized for cellar workers
- Bond ledger and inventory in bond
- QuickBooks Online integration
- TTB-aligned record keeping for cellar movements
- Bench-trial and additions tracking
Where Cepaos Picks Up
The US-specific obligations Cepaos covers natively
Each item below maps to a US federal or state regime that Cepaos implements inside the platform rather than relying on third-party integrations.
COLA tracking with mandatory-statement archive
27 CFR Part 4 (wine labeling), 27 CFR Part 13 (COLA)
52-jurisdiction Direct-to-Consumer shipping matrix
Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460 (2005); state reciprocity
Three-tier franchise modeling for strict states
21st Amendment; TX ABC, CA ABC, MA ABCC, NJ ABC, IL LCC
Vendor W9 collection and 1099-NEC information returns
IRC § 6041, IRC § 6041A; backup-withholding flow
Economic-nexus tracking with NOMAD-state exemption flags
South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., 138 S. Ct. 2080 (2018)
Native NACHA ACH origination and return-code handling
Nacha Operating Rules (PPD, WEB, CCD, CTX, TEL)
Multi-entity consolidation for holding structures
FASB ASC 810 (consolidation of variable-interest entities)
State privacy obligations across the US
Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 (CCPA/CPRA), VCDPA, CPA, UCPA, TDPSA, OCPA
Cross-market export coverage across 19 native locales
EU, UK, LATAM, AU/NZ, ZA in one platform
Where InnoVint Shines
What InnoVint does particularly well
We hold this comparison to fair-use comparative-advertising standards. The items below reflect InnoVint’s public materials and recognized strengths on the cellar floor.
iPad-first cellar capture flow refined through close collaboration with practicing winemakers
Strong references across California and Pacific Northwest production cellars
Active customer community and engaged winemaker advisory board
Free craft and garage tier that lowers the entry barrier for small producers
Mature bench-trial and additions workflow embedded in the capture flow
Established integration with BSGwine and downstream commercial platforms
AgFunder-backed product organization with steady iteration cadence
This comparison is provided as fair comparative advertising under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and the FTC’s truthfulness standards under 16 C.F.R. Part 14. Trademark holders retain all rights to their marks. Statements reflect publicly available information as of the publication date.
Detailed Comparison
Twelve features compared across three themes
Each row carries the relevant US technical reference in smaller type below the plain-language label, so finance and compliance teams can align the comparison with their own statutory matrix.
Compliance and administration
| Feature | Cepaos | InnoVint |
|---|---|---|
TTB Form 5120 monthly excise return 27 CFR Part 24 Subpart F | Yes | Partial |
COLA tracking and mandatory-statement archive 27 CFR Parts 4 and 13 | Yes | Partial |
Vendor W9 collection and 1099-NEC filing IRC § 6041, IRC § 6041A | Yes | No |
State privacy obligations Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 (CCPA/CPRA), VCDPA, CPA | Yes | No |
Production and cellar
| Feature | Cepaos | InnoVint |
|---|---|---|
Cellar-floor mobile capture Production-floor data entry, iPad-class workflows | Yes | Yes |
Bench-trial and additions tracking TTB cellar record-keeping requirements | Yes | Yes |
Multi-vintage blend ledger and lot decomposition TTB lot-tracking and bond reconciliation | Yes | Yes |
US GAAP wine-specific chart of accounts FASB ASC 330 inventory cost capitalization | Yes | Partial |
Commercial and multi-market
| Feature | Cepaos | InnoVint |
|---|---|---|
52-jurisdiction Direct-to-Consumer shipping matrix Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460 | Yes | Partial |
Economic-nexus tracking across 50 states South Dakota v. Wayfair, 138 S. Ct. 2080 | Yes | No |
Multi-entity holding consolidation FASB ASC 810 consolidation framework | Yes | No |
Cross-market reach beyond US and AU 19 native locales: EU, UK, LATAM, NZ, ZA | Yes | Partial |
Decision Guide
When each platform is the better fit
When InnoVint is the better fit
- Pure-play production winery handing off DTC to a dedicated commerce platform
- Existing InnoVint deployment with cellar workers trained on the iPad capture flow
- Single-entity boutique producer with no holding consolidation requirement
- No cross-border export ambition beyond the US market
When Cepaos is the better fit
- Direct-to-consumer and Wine Club are primary channels and you want them native
- Three-tier franchise compliance is required across strict states (TX, CA, MA, NJ, IL)
- Wayfair economic nexus, NACHA ACH and AvaTax must be first-class capabilities
- Multi-entity holding consolidation under ASC 810 is a finance-team requirement
Run both platforms in parallel for fourteen days
Cepaos offers a fourteen-day free trial without a credit card. No sales call, no contact-form gating. Evaluate TTB Form 5120, the 52-state DTC matrix and the QuickBooks Online sync alongside InnoVint before you decide.
Comparison reflects publicly available information as of June 2026. Submit corrections via legal@cepaos.com — Cepaos updates the comparison within 5 business days. Trademark holders retain all rights to their marks.