Trump Wants 'Movies Made In America Again', But How Will The Tariffs Work?

US President Donald Trump's proposal to impose a 100 per cent tariff on films produced overseas has left many in confusion. The idea, introduced via a fiery social media post on Sunday evening, triggered confusion and concern across Hollywood.

Citing national security and cultural integrity, Trump claimed the American film industry is “DYING” and blamed foreign productions for weakening domestic output. “WE WANT MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!” he wrote.

By Monday, the former president was already promising to hold discussions with studio heads. “So we’re going to meet with the industry,” he told reporters. “I want to make sure they’re happy with it, because we’re all about jobs.”

Yet despite the reassurance, the details of how the tariff would be structured remain vague, with industry leaders and investors scrambling to understand the implications, reported Bloomberg.

Uncertainty Clouds a Globalised Industry

Trump's unexpected announcement sent media stocks tumbling. Companies like Netflix Inc., Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., and Paramount Global saw immediate declines as analysts and filmmakers alike tried to determine what the tariff would actually target.

The modern film production process is deeply global: from shooting in international locations to outsourcing visual effects and editing, even Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters are often the product of multinational collaboration.

As Stephen Follows, a writer and producer, put it: “Trump lit a fire under an issue the industry has rarely confronted head-on. What does it actually mean for a movie to be made in America?”

Follows pointed out that today’s production chain is no longer limited by geography. “And while Trump’s proposal assumes a clear line between foreign and domestic, the modern reality of filmmaking is a blur.”

The proposal seems to take aim at countries offering attractive tax breaks and subsidies to lure American film crews abroad. In a follow-up comment on Monday, Trump doubled down, saying, “Our film industry has been decimated by other countries. I want to help the industry. But they’re given financing by other countries.”

He didn’t hold back in blaming political leadership either, calling California Governor Gavin Newsom “a grossly incompetent man” who “just allowed it to be taken away from, you know, Hollywood.”

Also Read : Tariffs Aftermath: China Sees Slight Surge In Holiday Spending, Services Sector Loses Momentum

Legal Grey Zones and Economic Risks

Although Trump directed the Commerce Department and the US Trade Representative to initiate the process “immediately,” the administration offered few clues about the legal pathway for implementing such tariffs. Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson, acknowledged that no final decisions had been made. “The Administration is exploring all options to deliver on President Trump’s directive to safeguard our country’s national and economic security while Making Hollywood Great Again,” he said.

Some observers suggest the administration could invoke Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, a legal tool Trump previously used to impose tariffs on steel, aluminium, and autos. This mechanism allows the Commerce Department up to 270 days to assess the national security implications of imports before the president can act. Applying it to films, however, would be unprecedented and potentially fraught with challenges.

The complexity doesn’t end with legal authority. Industry insiders have raised critical questions: Would the tariff apply to movies partially filmed abroad? What about projects already completed but awaiting release? Would post-production work done overseas be penalised too? Without clearer guidelines, these uncertainties are fueling panic among producers and financiers.

Hollywood at a Crossroads

Hollywood has already been grappling with what industry veterans refer to as “runaway production”—the trend of US filmmakers choosing foreign locations over domestic ones. Between 2021 and 2024, American film and television production dropped by 28 per cent, according to data from research firm ProdPro. Other nations, such as Canada, Australia, and the UK, have outpaced the US in post-pandemic content recovery, offering more competitive incentives and quicker turnarounds.

Veteran actor Jon Voight and his manager Steven Paul have been pushing a different solution: federal production incentives that could complement existing state-level support. Voight, Paul, and Paul’s deputy Scott Karol spent the weekend outlining such a proposal with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, while watching the Kentucky Derby. Yet instead of leading with incentives, Trump opted for a punitive approach—tariffs.

Economists and policy experts warn that the backlash could be substantial. Heeyon Kim, an assistant professor of strategy at Cornell University, highlighted the broader stakes: in 2024, more than 70 per cent of Hollywood’s box office revenue came from international markets. “Tariffs could spark rounds of retaliation from other countries that result in billions in lost earnings, impacting not only major studios but also thousands of jobs in production, marketing, and distribution,” Kim said.

A 2023 report by the Motion Picture Association noted that the U.S. entertainment sector generated $22.6 billion in exports and ran a $15.3 billion trade surplus. It was one of the few US industries with a consistent positive trade balance worldwide. Should the tariff move forward, experts warn, the policy could backfire not only economically but diplomatically.

In what may be a glimpse of things to come, China announced it would “moderately reduce” the number of Hollywood films permitted in its theaters—a possible early sign of retaliatory action.

As Hollywood waits for more clarity, the debate ignited by Trump’s proclamation has opened a broader question: Can America make movies “at home” without compromising global reach and artistic ambition? Or will protectionist policies only dim the lights on an already struggling industry?

business