A beer stripper that is used in typical large scale US whiskey distilleries is used for efficiency, yes.....but also because the whiskey wash is loaded with solids. Mr. Cowdery will no doubt tell you that Woodford Reserve has tried to use pot stills for bourbon production, and the burn on in those massive stills affected the spirit, and not in a positive way. Now they blend, blend, blend. You've got all the corn, rye, and malt husks together with the yeast coming in direct contact with steam-filled pipes.
A beer stripper, continuous still, or whatever you wish to call it, makes a softer spirit because there aren't any heated surfaces.
I don't see how using a beer stripper, (or even a continuous vodka still IMHO), is any less of a craft than a regular ol' potstill. You have to know what you're doing regardless of what you have.
I do think, though, that you should at least have a still of some kind to qualify for this tax break. Kinda defeats the purpose a bit to call someone a craft distiller if they don't have a still. Those that don't have to fire up the still are saving a bunch of $$ in labor, so why give them a tax break?
Make a ceiling for proof gallons, and make the distiller have to own a still. Nice and easy, cut and dry, and the smaller distiller gets the tax break, while the larger distiller does not. Even a US Congressman should be able to figure that legislation out.
Just my opinion.
