logo
Trump's Movie Tariff Appeals to Some in Hollywood Who Lost Jobs to Foreign Subsidies

Trump's Movie Tariff Appeals to Some in Hollywood Who Lost Jobs to Foreign Subsidies

Yahoo14-05-2025

Dave Rand, a retired visual effects artist, had just nodded off on May 4 when his phone dinged. At first he couldn't believe it. He read that President Trump wanted a 100% tariff on movies produced overseas.
'I thought I was dreaming,' he says. And then he got to work.
More from Variety
Cannes President Iris Knobloch on Female Directors Gaining Ground, Festival's 'Netflix Rule,' Relationship With U.S. Industry and Trump's Proposed Tariffs on Foreign Films
Italian Producer Andrea Iervolino Says He's Working With Trump 'Special Ambassador' Mel Gibson on U.S.-Italy Co-Production Treaty Amid Tariff Threats
Unions and MPA Urge Trump to Back Hollywood Tax Deductions
More than a decade ago, Rand organized VFX artists to protest Canadian subsidies, which were luring thousands of jobs abroad while bankrupting U.S. VFX houses. He and his friends wanted the government to fight back — not with more subsidies, but with tariffs.
The campaign sputtered out, failing to persuade anyone in power. But suddenly, years later, the most powerful person in the world was calling attention to the plight of Hollywood workers, demanding that movies be 'MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN,' and wielding a stick — not a carrot.
'He's gonna cut a fair deal,' Rand says. 'You're going to see a flow back to the U.S. It's going to be a little painful' — particularly, he says, for workers in other countries — 'but a lot of good is going to come in the long run.'
Across Hollywood, Trump's tariff proposal was met with bafflement and horror. At the Motion Picture Association, studio leaders brainstormed ideas to redirect his attention. The unions thanked him for identifying the problem — without endorsing his solution. Rand is among the few who like where this is going. Now he's trying to engage with 'the powers that be' — actor Jon Voight and others — to lend boots-on-the-ground support.
Rand isn't in Hollywood anymore. He once worked for Rhythm & Hues, the postproduction facility that won an Oscar in 2013 shortly after going bankrupt. (He is perhaps best known for hiring a plane to fly over the Oscar ceremony with a banner calling for a VFX union.)
Six years ago, he moved back to his hometown of Millinocket, Maine, and a couple years after that he retired. A lifelong Democrat, he voted for Trump last fall due to the promise of tariffs.
He also worked hard to get the president's attention. He sent postcards to those in Trump's orbit, highlighting the loss of VFX jobs and the need for action.
Rand argues that the studios are at fault, and that giving them more taxpayer money is not the answer.
'They're using this subsidy thing like a shell game to keep us nomadic and weak,' he says. 'We're all for Trump doing what he's doing to defeat that.'
Ever since Canada started attracting significant production volume in the late 1990s, Hollywood workers have been thinking about ways to fight back. In 2013, Daniel Lay, another former VFX artist, enlisted a law firm to brainstorm solutions.
The firm, Picard Kentz & Rowe, represents the U.S. lumber industry in its battle against Canadian timber. The firm saw a parallel with VFX — a free-market U.S. industry forced to compete against unfair Canadian subsidies — and offered parallel solutions, notably a 'countervailing duty' on VFX files. In essence, a movie tariff.
The problem was that, unlike the U.S. lumber industry, the film industry wanted no part of it.
'The studios liked the system where they get to benefit from subsidies on VFX,' says attorney David Yocis, who helped author the firm's report. 'Our feeling was most of these things wouldn't work, because the studios would have enough clout to make sure it didn't happen.'
But just maybe — thanks to Trump — that's not an obstacle anymore.
'At least at the moment, it appears they're not worried about the studios' reaction,' Yocis says.
Lay, who has since left the VFX industry, says he disagrees with '99.9% of everything Trump does.' But on this, they're aligned. Subsidies alone, he says, create a race to the bottom. 'You need a tariff to discipline the process.'
When Rand grew up in Millinocket, it was a thriving mill town. But the paper mill closed because of foreign competition in 2008. When Rand moved back, he found boarded-up storefronts. He bought his house for $40,000.
He worries a similar trend is unfolding in his industry.
'What I am for,' he says, 'is creating a level playing field.'
Best of Variety
New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week
Emmy Predictions: Talk/Scripted Variety Series - The Variety Categories Are Still a Mess; Netflix, Dropout, and 'Hot Ones' Stir Up Buzz
Oscars Predictions 2026: 'Sinners' Becomes Early Contender Ahead of Cannes Film Festival

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts

USA Today

time19 minutes ago

  • USA Today

4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts

4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts Show Caption Hide Caption Biden criticizes Trump administration's handling of Social Security Social Security overhaul sparks criticism from Biden over service disruptions, layoffs and automation as Trump defends changes as efficiency. Straight Arrow News Social Security is an important source of income for millions of Americans, but the program has a serious financial problem. Costs have increased faster than revenues in recent years because the aging population is growing more quickly than the working population. As a result, the trust fund, the financial account that pays benefits, is on track to be depleted within a decade. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. That would eliminate one source of revenue (i.e., interest earned on trust fund reserves), and the remaining tax revenues would only cover 77% of scheduled payments. That means a 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have several years to find a better solution. Here are four Social Security changes that could prevent deep, across-the-board benefit cuts. 1. Apply the Social Security payroll tax to income above $400,000 Social Security is primarily funded by a dedicated payroll tax, which takes 6.2% of wages from workers and employers. But some income is exempt from the payroll tax. Specifically, the maximum taxable earnings limit is $176,100 in 2025. Income above that threshold is not taxed by Social Security. Importantly, the Social Security program is projected to run a $23 trillion deficit over the next 75 years as it's strained by shifting demographics. But the deficit could be slashed by applying the payroll tax to more income. For instance, including income above $400,000 would eliminate 60% of the 75-year funding shortfall, says the University of Maryland. 2. Gradually increase the Social Security payroll tax rate to 6.5% over six years Under current law, the Social Security payroll tax rate is 6.2% for workers and their employers. But gradually raising that figure would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit. For example, increasing thetax rate by 0.05% annually over a six-year period would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Now that I've discussed two possible changes, let's step back and look at the big picture. There are basically three ways to resolve Social Security's financial problems: (1) increase revenue, (2) reduce costs or (3) some combination of the first two options. The changes discussed so far would increase revenue, but the next two changes would cut benefits. However, they are more subtle cuts than the 23% across-the-board reduction that would follow trust fund depletion. 3. Gradually increase full retirement age to 68 by 2033 Workers are eligible for retirement benefits at age 62, but they are not entitled to their full benefit — also called the primary insurance amount (PIA) — until full retirement age (FRA). Anyone that claims before full retirement age receives a smaller payout, meaning they get less than 100% of their PIA. FRA is currently defined as 67 years old for workers born in 1960 or later, but raising the figure would reduce the long-term deficit. For instance, increasing FRA to 68 years old by 2033, meaning it would apply to workers born in 1965 or later, would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. 4. Reduce benefits for retired workers with income in the top 20% Social Security benefits are determined as percentages of two bend points. Specifically, income from the 35 highest-paid years of work is adjusted for inflation and converted to a monthly figure called the average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) amount. The AIME is then run through a formula that uses two bend points to determine the PIA for each worker. Modifying the second (highest) bend point would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit by reducing benefits for high earners. For instance, the University of Maryland estimates that reducing benefits for individuals with income in the top 20% could reduce the 75-year funding deficit by 11%. Here's the big picture: The four changes I've discussed would eliminate 101% of Social Security's $23 trillion funding shortfall, which would prevent across-the-board benefit cuts in 2035. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store