Structure · Decided July 2026

For-profit brand + fiscally-sponsored charitable event series

LiveSwell (LLC, Benefit Corp / SPC as a later mission-lock) is the earned-revenue brand. Kegs for a Cause launches under fiscal sponsorship so giving is tax-deductible on day one. This mirrors the Finnegans template. Not legal or tax advice — confirm with counsel before forming anything.

The two entities

What each one is, and why

Near-term

Kegs for a Cause

A branded, recurring charitable event series: a different local brewery hosts a ticketed night; proceeds go to a rotating nonprofit. $3–10K to launch, months to first event, San Diego pilot → Monterey.

Structural advantage: the brewery holds the liquor license. K4C never possesses, serves, or sells alcohol → no separate ABC license required.

Entity — fiscal sponsorship to launch. Tax-deductible day one; ~5–10% sponsor fee. Alternatives on record: standalone 501(c)(3) (~$2.5–4K, 3–6 mo IRS); program under an existing nonprofit; for-profit LLC (simplest, but tickets aren't deductible).

The brand

LiveSwell

For-profit LLC. Benefit Corp / SPC is an optional later mission-lock, not a launch requirement. Low-ABV (1–4%) session beers — a lane no California brewery owns as a primary identity. Sustainability-forward.

Launch model: private-label / brand-house. LiveSwell owns brand, recipes, and sales; a contract brewer produces. $15–40K, first sale in 3–6 months. Retain full recipe ownership — non-negotiable.

Proven model: Mikkeller, Evil Twin, Stillwater. Community taproom is the eventual, not initial, form.

Funding reality

Neither track is an investor courtship

$3–10K
K4C — self-funds from tickets; net is donated
$15–40K
LiveSwell private-label entry
Savings + F&F
Kiva / Kickstarter — small-business raise

K4C essentially self-funds — ticket revenue covers production costs; the net is donated. LiveSwell's entry is a small-business raise (savings + friends and family + Kiva / Kickstarter), not an investor courtship. See Master Tracker capital rows in the study.

Why this shape

Three constraints picked the structure

The brand can't be a nonprofit

A beverage brand's primary activity is making and selling beer — earned revenue, not philanthropy — so the IRS won't allow nonprofit status. They told Finnegans exactly this. For-profit is the honest home for the brand.

The charitable arm carries the mission

Pairing a charitable vehicle lets the giving live in a tax-appropriate home without dragging down the brand's ability to take investment. K4C's launch answer: fiscal sponsorship + rotating beneficiaries. Standing up LiveSwell's own 501(c)(3) fund (the full Finnegans model) stays a later option if giving volume grows.

Contract-first proves demand

Launch light and prove the brand before committing capital — the same sequencing logic as Groundworks' fiscal-sponsorship-first call. Mikkeller, Evil Twin, and Stillwater built international reputations this way.

Build in from day one

Two things that make or break this model

Tracking + accountability

The collab-beer precedents (Resilience IPA, Black is Beautiful) show that follow-through is where cause-beer models fail. Track and publicly report what's given, from event one.

Licensing (verify each)

LiveSwell (private-label): holds its own TTB Brewer's Notice + per-label COLA + CA ABC Type 17/23. No facility permits at this stage; ~3–6 months decision-to-first-sale.

K4C events: no separate ABC license (host's covers them) — but confirm each brewery's license and insurance actually cover a ticketed charitable event.

Full brewery (later): adds CUP + building + health permits; 12–24 months decision-to-first-pour.

Disclaimer

A structure sketch, not a filing plan

Finnegans is a Minnesota benefit corp — the shape transfers to California; the specifics differ. Entity choice, CCV registration, liquor licensing, and any fiscal-sponsor agreement should be confirmed with a California attorney experienced in both alcohol and nonprofit law before anything is formed or filed.