Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies. Commitments The Company has grain supply agreements with a single supplier to purchase its corn requirements. These grain supply agreements expire December 31, 2014. At June 30, 2013, the Company had commitments to purchase corn to be used in operations through June 2014 totaling $35,165. The Company has commitments to purchase natural gas needed in production at fixed prices at various dates through December 2013. The commitment for these contracts at June 30, 2013 totaled $6,805. The Company has a supply contract for flour for use in the production of protein and starch ingredients. The initial term of the agreement, as amended, expires October 23, 2015. At June 30, 2013, the Company had purchase commitments aggregating $9,322 through December 2013. As of June 30, 2013, the Company had contracts of approximately $414 to acquire capital assets. At June 30, 2013, the Company had $2,000 outstanding on a letter of credit for a vendor, which reduced the amount available to the Company under its revolving line of credit. Contingencies There are various legal proceedings involving the Company and its subsidiaries. Management considers that the aggregate liabilities, if any, arising from such actions would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or overall trends in results of operations of the Company. On June 14, 2013, the Company filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas, against Richard B. Cray, Thomas Cray, Cloud L. Cray Jr., Karen Seaberg, Laidacker M. Seaberg, and Timothy Newkirk, as co-trustees of either MGP Ingredients Inc. Voting Trust or the Cray Family Trust. The Company has requested a declaratory judgment determining the parties' legal rights and obligations in the context of proxies for the Annual Meeting and the status of the Voting Trust. The Voting Trust holds the majority of the preferred shares of the Company. It is entrusted to three co-trustees. The Cray Family Trust holds the beneficial interest in the Voting Trust. The petition alleges that the co-trustees may be unqualified to serve as co-trustees and asks the Court to resolve the resulting controversy. On July 10, 2013, Cloud L. Cray, Jr. and Karen Seaberg filed a petition for inspection of corporate records pursuant to K.S.A. §17-6510 by a shareholder in the District Court of Atchison County. The plaintiffs as shareholders of the Company made demand to inspect corporate records pursuant to K.S.A §17-6510. The Company did not produce some of the records requested by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs filed the petition to compel the production of the remaining records. On July 26, 2013, the Atchison County District Court granted the plaintiffs' petition and ordered the Company to produce the remaining records. The Court also ordered the plaintiffs to submit their request for attorney fees and expenses. A separate hearing will be held to determine whether the plaintiffs should be awarded attorney fees and expenses in connection with the request of corporate records. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as the events leading to the potential award for plaintiff attorney fees occurred subsequent to June 30, 2013. Further, the amount of plaintiff attorney fees is estimated to be immaterial to the Company's financial statements. . On July 11, 2013, Cloud L. Cray, Jr. and Karen Seaberg filed a petition for an order requiring the Company to conduct the Annual Meeting on or before August 12, 2013 in the District Court of Atchison County, Kansas. Pursuant to K.S.A. § 17-6501(d)(1), the plaintiffs asked the Court to summarily order the Company to hold its 2013 annual meeting of stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) because the Annual Meeting was adjourned and was not reconvened within thirty days of the date designated for the Annual Meeting and within thirteen months of the prior stockholders' annual meeting. The plaintiffs sought an order requiring the Company to reconvene and hold the Annual Meeting. On July 26, 2013, the Atchison County District Court granted the plaintiffs' petition and ordered the Company to hold the Annual Meeting on or before August 26, 2013 at 9 a.m. The Court also ordered the plaintiffs to submit their request for attorney fees and expenses. A separate hearing will be held to determine whether the plaintiffs should be awarded attorney fees and expenses in connection with the litigation concerning the holding of our Annual Meeting. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as the events leading to the potential award for plaintiff attorney fees occurred subsequent to June 30, 2013. Further, the amount of plaintiff attorney fees is estimated to be immaterial to the Company's financial statements. . In its proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 10, 2013, the Cray Group has disclosed that it will seek reimbursement for the costs and expenses associated with the proxy solicitation in the event that any of the Cray Group's director nominees are elected to the Board of Directors of MGP, and intends to submit the issue of reimbursement to a vote of security holders. The Cray Group has estimated the total expenditures in furtherance of, or in connection with, the solicitation of proxies by the Cray Group to be approximately $400,000 in total. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as we do not believe reimbursement is probable in occurrence.

Commitments and Contingencies.

Commitments

The Company has grain supply agreements with a single supplier to purchase its corn requirements. These grain supply agreements expire December 31, 2014. At June 30, 2013, the Company had commitments to purchase corn to be used in operations through June 2014 totaling $35,165.

The Company has commitments to purchase natural gas needed in production at fixed prices at various dates through December 2013. The commitment for these contracts at June 30, 2013 totaled $6,805.

The Company has a supply contract for flour for use in the production of protein and starch ingredients. The initial term of the agreement, as amended, expires October 23, 2015. At June 30, 2013, the Company had purchase commitments aggregating $9,322 through December 2013.

As of June 30, 2013, the Company had contracts of approximately $414 to acquire capital assets.

At June 30, 2013, the Company had $2,000 outstanding on a letter of credit for a vendor, which reduced the amount available to the Company under its revolving line of credit.

Contingencies

There are various legal proceedings involving the Company and its subsidiaries. Management considers that the aggregate liabilities, if any, arising from such actions would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or overall trends in results of operations of the Company.

On June 14, 2013, the Company filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas, against Richard B. Cray, Thomas Cray, Cloud L. Cray Jr., Karen Seaberg, Laidacker M. Seaberg, and Timothy Newkirk, as co-trustees of either MGP Ingredients Inc. Voting Trust or the Cray Family Trust. The Company has requested a declaratory judgment determining the parties' legal rights and obligations in the context of proxies for the Annual Meeting and the status of the Voting Trust. The Voting Trust holds the majority of the preferred shares of the Company. It is entrusted to three co-trustees. The Cray Family Trust holds the beneficial interest in the Voting Trust. The petition alleges that the co-trustees may be unqualified to serve as co-trustees and asks the Court to resolve the resulting controversy.

On July 10, 2013, Cloud L. Cray, Jr. and Karen Seaberg filed a petition for inspection of corporate records pursuant to K.S.A. §17-6510 by a shareholder in the District Court of Atchison County. The plaintiffs as shareholders of the Company made demand to inspect corporate records pursuant to K.S.A §17-6510. The Company did not produce some of the records requested by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs filed the petition to compel the production of the remaining records. On July 26, 2013, the Atchison County District Court granted the plaintiffs' petition and ordered the Company to produce the remaining records. The Court also ordered the plaintiffs to submit their request for attorney fees and expenses. A separate hearing will be held to determine whether the plaintiffs should be awarded attorney fees and expenses in connection with the request of corporate records. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as the events leading to the potential award for plaintiff attorney fees occurred subsequent to June 30, 2013. Further, the amount of plaintiff attorney fees

is estimated to be immaterial to the Company's financial statements.

On July 11, 2013, Cloud L. Cray, Jr. and Karen Seaberg filed a petition for an order requiring the Company to conduct the Annual Meeting on or before August 12, 2013 in the District Court of Atchison County, Kansas. Pursuant to K.S.A. § 17-6501(d)(1), the plaintiffs asked the Court to summarily order the Company to hold its 2013 annual meeting of stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) because the Annual Meeting was adjourned and was not reconvened within thirty days of the date designated for the Annual Meeting and within thirteen months of the prior stockholders' annual meeting. The plaintiffs sought an order requiring the Company to reconvene and hold the Annual Meeting. On July 26, 2013, the Atchison County District Court granted the plaintiffs' petition and ordered the Company to hold the Annual Meeting on or before August 26, 2013 at 9 a.m. The Court also ordered the plaintiffs to submit their request for attorney fees and expenses. A separate hearing will be held to determine whether the plaintiffs should be awarded attorney fees and expenses in connection with the litigation concerning the holding of our Annual Meeting. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as the events leading to the potential award for plaintiff attorney fees occurred subsequent to June 30, 2013. Further, the amount of plaintiff attorney fees is estimated to be immaterial to the Company's financial statements.

In its proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 10, 2013, the Cray Group has disclosed that it will seek reimbursement for the costs and expenses associated with the proxy solicitation in the event that any of the Cray Group's director nominees are elected to the Board of Directors of MGP, and intends to submit the issue of reimbursement to a vote of security holders. The Cray Group has estimated the total expenditures in furtherance of, or in connection with, the solicitation of proxies by the Cray Group to be approximately $400,000 in total. This amount has not been reflected in the Company's financial statements as we do not believe reimbursement is probable in occurrence.