Trump White House says ‘no final decisions' on foreign film tariffs
The White House said on Monday that no final decisions have been made about imposing tariffs on foreign films, just a day after Donald Trump declared a 100% tariff on all movies produced outside the United States – an announcement that sparked widespread alarm across the global film industry.
'Although no final decisions on foreign film tariffs have 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,' White House spokesman Kush Desai said.
The US president had announced the tariffs on his Truth Social platform, claiming he had authorized '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.'
In his Sunday post, Trump offered few details on how such a trade penalty would work, but warned that the US film industry was 'DYING a very fast death' and said that there was a 'concerted effort' by other countries to offer 'all sorts of incentives to draw our filmmakers and studios away from the United States' – which he said was a 'national security threat'.
Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick responded on X on Sunday evening, writing: 'We're on it.'
The announcement sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry.
On Monday, shares in US streaming platforms and production companies dropped as uncertainty loomed, especially because Trump's post did not say whether the tariffs would apply to films distributed on streaming platforms.
Netflix shares were down 1.7% by early afternoon, while Amazon dipped 1.5%. Warner Bros Discovery and Paramount dropped 1.1% and 1% respectively.
In Australia and New Zealand, which serve as major production hubs for global franchises such as the Lord of the Rings series, its Tolkienesque cousin The Hobbit, and various Marvel films, lawmakers in those countries responded that they would advocate for their respective film industries.
Australia's home affairs minister, Tony Burke, said that he had spoken with the head of the government body Screen Australia about the proposed tariffs and that 'nobody should be under any doubt that we will be standing up unequivocally for the rights of the Australian screen industry.'
And New Zealand's prime minister, Christopher Luxon, said: 'We'll have to see the detail of what actually ultimately emerges. But we'll be obviously a great advocate, great champion of that sector in that industry.'
In the UK, a parliamentarian also warned that such tariffs were 'not in the interests of American businesses' and the UK media union Bectu urged the UK government to protect the country's 'vital' film sector, warning tens of thousands of freelance jobs could be at risk.
The announcement on Sunday follows Trump's earlier pledges to revitalize the US film industry. But early on Monday afternoon, the White House began walking back Trump's announcement, according to the Hollywood Reporter.
Just before taking office, Trump appointed actors Jon Voight, Sylvester Stallone, and Mel Gibson as 'special ambassadors' to Hollywood tasked with bringing the industry back 'bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.'
The Associated Press reported that it is common for major blockbusters and smaller productions to film scenes in the US as well as internationally. Big-budget projects often span multiple countries.
For years, according to the AP, incentive programs have influenced where films are made, increasingly driving film production away from California to states and countries offering more favorable tax incentives, like Canada and the UK.
According to FilmLA, a non-profit that tracks production in the Los Angeles area, film and television production in LA has dropped by nearly 40% over the past decade.
Trump's announcement on Sunday comes after he triggered a trade war with China, and imposed global tariffs, unsettling global markets and sparking fears of a potential US recession.
In April, China, which is currently the world's second-largest film market after the US, responded to Trump's tariffs on Chinese products by reducing the quota of American movies allowed into the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
16 minutes ago
- Sky News
FTSE 100 hits record high on back of US-Iran tensions
Why you can trust Sky News The FTSE 100 has secured a new record closing high after riding out a US trade war-linked slump. The index of London's leading shares gained 20 points to hit 8,884, surpassing the 3 March peak of 8,771 and leaving its value more than 8.6% up in the year to date. It was achieved despite gloomy official figures covering April - when the impact of the US trade war started to be felt, household bills spiked and budget tax and wage rises hit employers for the first time. The Office for National Statistics reported that the . The FTSE 100 tumbled early in the spring when Donald Trump 's protectionist agenda gathered steam through a series of on-off tariffs against global trading partners, later exacerbated by his "liberation day" escalation. Stock market values were hit worldwide as the consequences for domestic economies - and global activity - were digested amid a slew of output downgrades by respected international bodies such as the International Monetary Fund. But the suspension or reductions of many trade tariffs, coupled with select deals to end hostilities with nations such as the UK, has helped values climb back since last month. 2:42 A new high for the UK's top flight shares was almost achieved on Wednesday, as a limited trade truce between the US and China was on the table following talks in London. But market analysts said on Thursday that the optimism was overtaken by nerves on whether the progress could be maintained and a surge, of up to 4%, in global oil prices due to growing tensions between the US and Iran. Mr Trump has repeatedly warned the country it is at risk of airstrikes by the US and Israel if it is found not to be complying with its nuclear obligations. A United Nations report has made such a finding - and some US personnel have been evacuated from the Middle East region as a result. The spike in oil costs late on Wednesday, which took the Brent crude international benchmark to a two-month high, lifted the values of energy-linked shares including those of BP and Shell early on Thursday. Precious metal miners were also doing well. Tesco was among the winners too, gaining almost 2%, thanks to a solid set of first quarter results. Weaker than expected US inflation figures yesterday, which kept the prospect for a summer interest rate hike by the Federal Reserve intact despite the continuing trade war, also helped prop up sentiment internationally. The outlook for UK and global stock market values, however, is very uncertain. FTSE 100 firms make the bulk of their earnings overseas so a deep-seated trade spat between the world's two largest economies is particularly damaging.
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Republicans fear the Mexican flag at the LA protests. But I see it as a symbol of our power
Republicans are using images of Ice protesters waving Mexican flags atop burning Waymo cars to foment fear among Americans. Like this photograph that Elon Musk tweeted on Sunday: a shirtless protester wielding the Tricolor atop a vandalized robotaxi as flames billow toward the weak sunlight backlighting the flag. His dark curls fall to his bare shoulders. He stares into the camera. Frankly, the image belongs in a museum. I understand my reaction is not the feeling Republicans hope to inspire in Americans broadly this week. Their messaging thus far about the protests against immigration raids in Latino communities has largely been alarmist – proof, they say, of an 'invasion' of 'illegal aliens'. 'Look at all the foreign flags. Los Angeles is occupied territory,' said Stephen Miller on X. According to Adam Kinzinger, a former congressman and more moderate voice, the Mexican flags carried by protesters are 'terrible… and feeding right into Donald Trump's narrative'. 'I just think that it would be much stronger if they were carrying American flags only,' he said on CNN this week. By this logic, Mexican flags are proof-positive that Mexican Americans are not really American; that we are somehow collaborating on a planned 'invasion'; that we harbor secret loyalties to Mexico; that we're here to displace white people and undermine the American way of life via some Plan Aztlan. In short, none of this is true. In front of Congress Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, cited the presence of 'flags from foreign countries' in LA to legitimize supporting Trump's deployment of the National Guard. This unilateral invocation of Title 10 by the Trump administration, without the consent of the governor, is exceedingly aggressive. So is the deployment of 700 US Marines to be used to crush American protest in an American city. The subtext here is that by many metrics, American's patience for Ice and its antics is wearing thin, even as Ice's deportation numbers are anemic compared to past administrations. The Trump administration realizes something has to change. Fanning outrage about a flag is both a legal pretext to pursue martial law and a diplomatic means of getting consent from the American populace to do unpopular things in the name of security. But what is it about the Mexican flag that triggers so many people? I'd argue that in the American context, the Mexican flag is not a nationalist symbol but something decentered from Mexico as a nation-state. Historically, it was a key banner of the Chicano movement, flown by supporters surrounding Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez during the California grape boycott in the 1960s. It flew alongside the United Farm Workers flag, the American flag and banners of the Virgen de Guadalupe as means of fomenting cultural unity. It also served as a reminder of a fundamental truth: we are from here; we are also from there. We're children of the in-between, or what the Tejanx writer Gloria Anzaldúa referred to as nepantla in her seminal work Borderlands/La Frontera. Nepantla is simply Nahuatl for the liminal space between cultures, identities and worlds. To this end, we might think of the Mexican flag as a symbol of double-consciousness in the Mexican American psyche specifically. We understand our middleness, yet we also understand how America sees and defines us: Mexicans. We take that prejudice and transform it into power. It's through this lens that I see the Mexican flag as just one banner among many, a remembrance of roots but also a shared experience between Mexican Americans and Mexican immigrants alike. Night after night, you can see captivating scenes with Mexican flags flying in the downtowns of Dallas and Houston and Atlanta and New York, as a solidarity grows between those explicitly targeted by Ice and those soon-to-be targeted by Ice. This is not hyperbole. Today, phenotype and politics are grounds enough for detention: in order for Ice to meet the Trump administration's goal of 3,000 arrests per day, targets have increasingly included student protesters, tourists and even American citizens. The only rule is to meet the metric at all costs. Amid these burgeoning protests, the Mexican flag is a bold articulation: we are like you; you are like us. We have struggled and persist in this place together. See me and don't be afraid; I see you and I am not afraid. To wield the flag amid a protest is to paint yourself a target, to take both your body and your future into your own hands. This is precisely why the Marines have been called in. To intimidate these bodies. Or to destroy them. What Trump fails to realize is that the bones of Mexican people are the metadata of the land in California and indeed the rest of the country. Our place here is in the food, in the street names, in the name of Los Angeles itself. Already, I can hear some within my own community admonishing my defense of Mexican flags at American protests as treasonous or ungrateful or something along those lines. To them I might ask: why is it that the protester's allegiances are held to higher standards than an American president who seeks to turn the US armed forces against American citizens? From Republican leaders, you'll never hear such questioning rhetoric surrounding other foreign flags that fly prominently in America. The Irish flag on St Patrick's Day instantly comes to mind. As does the Israeli flag at both political and non-political events. And, of course, the Confederate flag, though white supremacists have explicitly stated goals of both overthrowing the US government and taking back US land. Heritage is the most commonly used defense. Though wouldn't heritage apply to the Mexican flag as well? I'm reminded of James Baldwin when Mexicans Americans and Mexicans call for restraint from using Mexican imagery in US protests: 'In Harlem,' Baldwin wrote, '…the Negro policemen are feared more than whites, for they have more to prove and fewer ways to prove it.' We think our respectability will protect us. But we know historically and empirically that has not been true. Respectability did not protect Japanese Americans from being interned. Nor did it protect Vietnamese veterans who fought alongside Americans in Vietnam from facing discrimination in the US. Nor did it protect Afghan translators from having their visas revoked. Our American bonafides are not the things that will save us now. Not in the era of detention metrics and collateral targeting and now the prospect of authoritarian violence. It should be said: I don't go looking for these images. For my sins, having clicked on one, the algorithm floods me with them now. Protesters with Mexican flags getting a haircut in front of police. Protesters with Mexican flags forming a human chain. They just keep coming to me. But other images, too. Like one of a guy popping a wheelie past a ton of burning Waymo cars. I mean, come the fuck on – it's cool. The thing that immediately jumps out to me is the frivolity of the image. A body perfectly in balance, perfectly in motion. It moves of its own volition. It is completely in command of its trajectory and space in the landscape. It is beyond the fascist impulse to live so beautifully as this. Luckily, it also is beyond the fascist ability to remove the memory of this body from the land.
Daily Mirror
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Alarm as Donald Trump 'throws a grenade' at crucial defence deal with UK
The future of the crucial AUKUS deal - which sees the UK work with the US and Australia on nuclear submarines - has been thrown into doubt by the White House Donald Trump has sparked fears he could pull out of a crucial defence deal with the UK and Australia. The unpredictable US President is understood to have ordered a review into an agreement to build a new generation of nuclear-powered attack submarines. It will be headed by defence official Elbridge Colby, who has previously described himself as "sceptical" of the AUKUS partnership. The trio of nations reached the agreement in 2021, saying they would work together on advanced defence technology. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds branded it a "first class" partnership. He told a press gallery lunch in Westminster: "The US is reviewing a lot of its international relationships, whether those are with multilateral bodies or agreements like that. "AUKUS is, on both the defence and industrial level, a genuinely first class agreement of how we treat each other's suppliers and the supply chain, and what outcome we're seeking to do and the level of collaboration. "So I would have a lot of confidence in anyone looking at the various bits of that agreement and saying that it is an incredibly strong and important agreement for the future. "So US colleagues want to look at it? Okay, that's their right to do so. "I think it is an incredibly compelling and strong agreement. When they look at it, I'm pretty certain they'll be in agreement." A No10 spokesman played down the likelihood of US withdrawal, branding AUKUS "one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades". He added: "It is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach to such a major partnership, just as the UK did last year. "The UK will continue to work closely with the US and Australia at all levels to maximise the benefits and opportunities which AUKUS presents for our three nations." The Liberal Democrats said the US' decision to launch a review had "thrown another grenade into our security partnership" and urged the PM to "develop contingency plans". Helen Maguire, the party's defence spokeswoman, said: "Even in the face of an imperial Putin and the rising threat posed by China, this White House simply can't be relied upon to support our collective defence. Our national security demands that we ramp up talks with our Commonwealth friends and work to plug the gap that the US is threatening to leave in European and global security."
