Trump Plans to Impose 100% Tariff on All Movies Produced Outside of the U.S.
Writing on Truth Social, Trump said, 'The Movie Industry in America is DYING a very fast death. Other Countries are offering all sorts of incentives to draw our filmmakers and studios away from the United States. Hollywood, and many other areas within the U.S.A., are being devastated.'
More from IndieWire
'Rosario' Review: Crispy 'Drag Me to Hell' Riff Gets Swallowed by David Dastmalchian and an Air Fryer
Bruce Springsteen Calls 'Adolescence' Star Stephen Graham 'Amazing' as His Father in 'Deliver Me from Nowhere'
Trump went on to claim that production moving overseas was part of a 'concerted effort' by foreign countries to undermine American business, calling it 'a national security threat.'
'It is, in addition to everything else, messaging and propaganda!' Trump wrote. 'Therefore, I am authorizing the Department of Commerce, and the United States Trade Representative, to immediately begin the process of instituting a 100% Tariff on any and all Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands. WE WANT MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!'
Hollywood has been on the President's hit list from the very start of his second administration. One of his first actions in office was to name Mel Gibson, Sylvester Stallone, and Jon Voight as 'special ambassadors' to help fix an ailing Hollywood. Though not much has been heard from Gibson or Stallone on this effort, Voight has been making the rounds with different union reps and studio executives (as per Deadline). Many were hopeful this might lead to a possible federal tax incentive for production throughout the U.S., but as it's become Trump's new favorite toy, it seems a tariff is what we'll get.
It's unclear whether this tariff will apply to films alone or also include other media such as television, music videos, or commercials, but if so, it may end up doing more damage than good. The stated goal is to incentivize bringing production back to the States and in particular, Hollywood — but this doesn't actually reduce the cost of production in the way federal U.S. Tax incentives would. This just makes production outside the U.S. more expensive. The net result may be that the studios would just reduce production across the board.
As far as tax incentives, in October 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom put forth a proposal to increase the state's tax program to $750 million, over twice as much as it's doling out currently. Others have offered further increases, suggesting no cap be placed on this figure. Voting for this initiative will take place this summer.
Best of IndieWire
Guillermo del Toro's Favorite Movies: 56 Films the Director Wants You to See
'Song of the South': 14 Things to Know About Disney's Most Controversial Movie
The 55 Best LGBTQ Movies and TV Shows Streaming on Netflix Right Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
7 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
EPA says President Donald Trump's big bill should help in its fight to take back billions in green bank funds
WASHINGTON — The sprawling tax and policy bill that passed Congress repeals a multibillion-dollar green bank for financing climate-friendly projects, and the Trump administration should be allowed to freeze its funding and cancel related contracts with nonprofits, federal officials said in a court filing. Climate United Fund and other nonprofits in March sued the Environmental Protection Agency, its administrator Lee Zeldin and Citibank, which held the program's money. The lawsuit argued the defendants had illegally denied the groups access to billions awarded last year through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, commonly referred to as a 'green bank.' The program was created by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But the bill that passed Congress on Thursday would repeal the part of the 2022 law that established the green bank and rescind money that hadn't already been obligated to its recipients. The EPA said the bill should hand them a victory in their court fight that is being heard by a federal appeals court in Washington. Now that Congress has rescinded funding, an earlier federal judge's decision forcing the EPA to release money to the groups should be reversed, the agency said in its Thursday court filing. Climate United Fund disagrees. It acknowledges that the bill in Congress is a 'significant policy setback' but argues that most of the money had been disbursed and is unaffected by the bill. And if the EPA wanted to take the money back, there's a different process the agency would need to follow. 'Our funds have already been obligated and disbursed. Any effort to claim otherwise is simply a lie to justify illegal attempts to claw back funds intended to benefit communities across the country,' CEO Beth Bafford said in a statement. According to the EPA, when the agency terminated the grants the funds 'became unobligated.' 'Grantees have desperately performed legal gymnastics to hold tens of billions of taxpayer dollars hostage. In the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill, Congress made their intent crystal clear in repealing the program entirely and returning those billions in unobligated funds to the U.S. Treasury,' EPA spokesperson Brigit Hirsch said in a statement. The green bank's goals run counter to the Trump administration's opposition to policies that address climate change and its embrace of fossil fuels. Zeldin quickly made the bank a target, characterizing the $20 billion in grants as a scheme marred by conflicts of interest and potential fraud. In February, Zeldin told Fox News that he suspected the green bank 'was a clear cut case of waste and abuse' that 'in my opinion, is criminal.' The following month, Zeldin terminated the grants. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has previously said that when the federal government was asked for evidence of fraud, the agency didn't provide it and shifted its position. Chutkan decided the government can't terminate the contracts and that the groups should have access to some of their frozen money. That order was put on hold during the EPA's appeal. The agency argues the nonprofits are making constitutional and statutory arguments that don't apply in what it sees as a simple contract fight. If the government successfully argues the case is a contract dispute, then the EPA says it should be heard by a different court that can only award a lump sum – not force the government to keep the grants in place. Federal officials argue there is no law or provision in the Constitution that compels the EPA to make these grants to these groups. In its court filing, the EPA also pointed to comments by Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, chair of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, as supportive of the agency's position. Capito said previously the bill intended to rescind billions in funding that had been frozen. 'This action reflects not only Congress's deep concern with reducing the deficit, but EPA's administration of the (green bank) under the Biden administration, the agency's selection of grant recipients, and the absence of meaningful program oversight,' the agency quotes the senator as saying.
Forbes
9 minutes ago
- Forbes
Elon Musk Suggests His New Political Party Will Target Key Senate, House Seats
Elon Musk suggested a third political party, which he's floated as the 'America Party,' will hold significant sway in the Senate and House under slim Republican margins, as he aspires to form a competing party after breaking with the GOP over President Donald Trump's signature policy bill. Elon Musk during a news conference with President Donald Trump on May 30, 2025 inside the Oval ... More Office at the White House in Washington. (Photo by Tom Brenner For The Washington Post via Getty Images) The Washington Post via Getty Images Musk tweeted a poll to his X followers Friday asking if they want 'independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system.' In a subsequent tweet, he said 'one way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,' noting the party could have significant sway under a slim majority that 'would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.' Friday's tweets are the latest threats from Musk this week to form a new political party, as he feuded with Republicans over Trump's signature policy bill that passed the House Thursday: 'If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day,' he wrote Monday. 55%. That's the share of Americans who have an unfavorable view of Musk, compared to 37% who hold a positive opinion, according to a dashboard from statistician Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin aggregating hundreds of polls on Musk. Key Background Musk and Trump have engaged in a heated back-and-forth over Musk's criticism of what's known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act that passed the House Thursday and now heads to Trump's desk for signage. Musk—who spearheaded cost-cutting measures at the Department of Government Efficiency—took issue with the bill over the estimated $3.3 trillion it would add to the deficit over the next 10 years. Trump has responded to Musk's threats by making veiled threats to revoke the government subsidies his companies receive and to 'look into' deporting him. House Passes Trump's Signature Spending Bill, Meeting July 4 Deadline (Forbes) Elon Musk (And Tesla) Became Much More Unpopular —As Unfavorability Soars To 55% (Forbes) Musk-Trump Feud Timeline: Trump Goes After Tesla CEO Over Bill Criticism (Forbes)
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump prepares to sign his agenda bill, with a flyover and fireworks to mark the occasion
It's the celebration President Donald Trump has been waiting for. After weeks of cajoling Republicans into backing his domestic mega-bill — despite lingering concerns about its Medicaid cuts, deficit expansion and political pitfalls — Trump will sign the measure into law on the White House South Lawn on Friday afternoon. He's turned the traditional July 4 picnic into a celebration of the country's independence and of his win in Congress, seizing upon the day's fanfare to salute the most decisive legislative victory of his second term. The festivities will include a bomber jet flyover – a nod to the military's recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities – and a fireworks show on the National Mall. It's all how Trump envisioned it when he first set the July 4 deadline to get the bill approved weeks ago. Even some of his own allies thought the timeline was overly ambitious. But Trump's iron grip on his own party, combined with what a White House official described as an 'omnipresent' effort by the president to get Republicans on board, culminated in the bill's passage in the House on Thursday with only two GOP defections in the chamber. In many ways, the event marks the payoff for weeks of effort by the president and his team to get the bill across the finish line. Trump invited members of Congress to come to the event, which will also be attended by military families who are the usual guests for the Independence Day picnic. In other ways, however, the moment is just the start of Trump's efforts to sell his bill to an American public that, according to polls, remains skeptical of its contents. The bill extends tax cuts Trump first approved in 2017 during his first term, along with creating new ones, totaling in cost of $4.5 trillion. It also boosts funding for immigration enforcement and defense. To pay for the new spending and declines in tax revenue, the measure cuts $1 trillion from Medicaid, along with cuts to food assistance. But it will still, according to an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office, add $3.3 trillion to the federal deficit, which does not include the cost of servicing the debt. Many Republicans had feared the bill's cuts to social safety net programs, like Medicaid and food stamps, could open them to political attacks ahead of next year's midterm elections. According to the CBO, almost 12 million Americans could lose health coverage as a result of the bill's changes to government programs. Other analyses put the number higher, taking into account new paperwork burdens on recipients to prove their eligibility. Democrats have already begun pointing to the bill's overwhelming tax rewards for wealthy Americans to accuse Trump of snatching away benefits from the poor to reward his rich backers. Some of Trump's allies have conceded they have some catching up to do in messaging what they view as the benefits of the bill, including eliminating taxes on tips and bolstering money for Trump's immigration enforcement agenda. Trump said Thursday that he wanted Republicans to message on it during the midterm campaign. 'Not one Democrat voted for us, and I think we use it in the campaign that's coming up the midterms, because we got to beat them,' Trump said. Recent history is littered with presidents who, after using congressional majorities to push through major legislation meant to burnish their legacy, later lamented not doing enough to sell the bill to the American public – after their party members paid the price at the ballot box. For Trump, however, the bill he'll sign into law Friday is less about helping Republicans win and more about his own legacy. He has framed the package as codifying the promises he made to voters on the campaign trail, and used it to punctuate what he's called the most successful start to any presidency in history. Friday's flyover of the B-2 bombers — used to drop bunker-busters on Iranian nuclear facilities last month — underscores the consequential stretch of days punctuated by passage of Trump's bill. Aside from the Iran strikes, Trump successfully convinced NATO allies to spend more on defense at a leaders' summit last week; secured a major victory at the Supreme Court that expands his executive powers; and generated new momentum toward a ceasefire in Gaza that could materialize in a matter of days. A day ahead of his July 4 celebration, Trump basked in the string of victories. 'This had to be the best two weeks,' he said. 'Has anybody ever had a better two weeks?'
