President Donald Trump has announced plans to meet with top Hollywood executives following his proposal to impose a 100% tariff on films produced outside the United States, a move that sent ripples through the global film industry and raised fears of economic retaliation.
Speaking from the White House on Monday, Trump appeared to ease his earlier stance, saying he intends to consult with industry leaders to ensure they are “happy” with the direction of the policy.
The comments come just a day after Trump authorized the U.S. Commerce Department to begin exploring tariffs on foreign-made films, citing what he described as a “very fast death” of America’s film industry.
“It is, in addition to everything else, messaging and propaganda,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, doubling down on the cultural implications of the issue. “WE WANT MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!”
While Trump’s statement has drawn support from his administration—Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick responded, “We’re on it”—it has also triggered backlash and confusion across the entertainment world. Specifics remain unclear, including whether the proposed tariffs would apply to U.S. studios filming abroad or to content released via streaming platforms like Netflix.
White House spokesman Kush Desai told the BBC that “no final decisions” have been made but emphasized that the administration is considering “all options” to protect national and economic interests.
For years, U.S. studios have outsourced productions to countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand in pursuit of lower costs and tax incentives. Films like Deadpool & Wolverine, Wicked, and Gladiator II were all produced outside the U.S., despite backing from American companies.
Timothy Richards, founder of the European cinema chain Vue, questioned how a “U.S. film” would even be defined under such a tariff regime. “Is it where the money comes from? The script, the director, the talent, where it was shot?” he asked in an interview with BBC Radio 4.
Richards also pointed out that California, once the heart of global film production, has become increasingly expensive. Meanwhile, countries like the UK offer not only financial incentives but also highly skilled crews, making them more attractive for major projects.
In the UK, the media union Bectu called the proposed policy a potential “knock-out blow” to international production networks and freelance workers already reeling from pandemic disruptions and a recent slowdown in activity.
“The government must move swiftly to defend this vital sector,” said Bectu head Philippa Childs. “Supporting the freelancers who power it is a matter of national economic interest.”
The British government responded by reiterating its commitment to the film industry and said further details would be released in its upcoming Creative Industries Sector Plan. It declined to offer specific comments on the trade negotiations currently underway with the U.S.
The British Film Institute (BFI) also said it was working closely with officials on both sides of the Atlantic to fully understand the implications of the proposal. “We want to keep collaboration at the heart of our sectors,” the BFI said in a statement, emphasizing continued partnership with U.S. counterparts.
International reactions were swift. In Australia, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said his country would “stand up unequivocally” for its screen industry, while Screen Producers Australia warned the plan, though vague, was already “sending shock waves worldwide.”
New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon also expressed concern but withheld judgment pending more information.
The film industry’s economic footprint remains significant despite recent challenges. A report by research firm ProdPro showed that U.S. production spending reached $14.54 billion in the past year—a 26% drop from 2022. Meanwhile, spending in countries like Australia, Canada, and the UK has increased.
Some experts warn the U.S. could face consequences if the policy is implemented. NPR film critic Eric Deggans told the BBC the move could prompt retaliatory tariffs that might limit the global reach of American films, ultimately harming the very industry Trump says he’s trying to protect.
“It may create a situation where the tariffs in America are causing more harm than good,” Deggans said.
Even before this latest proposal, Trump’s aggressive trade strategy had already affected the entertainment sector. In April, China reduced its quota of American films, citing “abuse of tariffs” by the U.S. government.
The Motion Picture Association, which represents the five largest U.S. film studios, declined to comment when asked about the potential tariffs.
Trump’s campaign to restore the domestic movie industry has been a recurring theme since his return to office. Earlier this year, he named actors Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone as special envoys to promote Hollywood, which he described as “a great but very troubled place.”
“They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood… BACK—BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!” Trump wrote.
As policymakers and studio heads await further clarification, one thing is clear: the battle over where and how movies are made has become a political flashpoint with global implications.
Related Readings:
