
President Trump wants to slap tariffs on foreign-produced movies: What we know
President Trump wants to slap tariffs on foreign-produced movies: What we know
Show Caption
Hide Caption
'Superman,' Mission: Impossible,' 'F1' and summer's must-see films
USA TODAY film critic Brian Truitt releases his list of summer's must-see films. The highlights include "Superman" and "Mission: Impossible."
As summer movie season begins and the box office is finally getting some momentum, it's the one word Hollywood probably wanted to hear least: tariffs.
In a social media post May 4, President Donald Trump announced he's authorized his administration to slap a 100% tariff on movies produced outside of the U.S. because, as he put it, "the Movie Industry in America is DYING a very fast death." He called the incentives used to bring filmmakers and studio productions to other countries "a National Security threat" and "propaganda," and concluded his message by writing, "WE WANT MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!"
The post took the movie industry by surprise – director BenDavid Grabinski quoted Trump's post and added a "?????????" on X – but mainly it was met with confusion. Does the president actually want to bring film production back to the U.S. or is this a shot across the bow at Hollywood, a home for many Trump critics like George Clooney? Can he actually levy a tariff on a movie or will this random missive just die on the vine? (In context, the same night Trump also announced he was reopening Alcatraz as a prison and ripped into Republican strategist Karl Rove after a scathing appearance on Fox News.)
Let's try to make some sense of these potential movie tariffs:
What movies could be affected by President Trump's tariffs?
So, Trump actually is talking about two different things in his post: foreign films that are bought by studios and distributed here, and domestic films that go overseas or to, for example, Canada as part of production. Or he might be wanting to levy tariffs on both.
It could make international movies pricier, for sure, especially for those wanting to purchase a buzzy film from Cannes or another film festival. In theory, someone wanting to buy, say, the next "Parasite" out of South Korea could be levied that 100% tariff. Another important question here: Would this tariff just extend to movies or would it also affect TV? Netflix, which imports global series like "Squid Game" and "The Crown" and makes them binge-worthy hits, might pull back on that extensive part of their business model.
More worrisome for Hollywood is the fact that many of its biggest blockbusters are filmed partly outside of the U.S.: In 2023, about half of the spending by U.S. producers on movie and TV projects with budgets of more than $40 million went outside the U.S., according to research firm ProdPro.
The hit "A Minecraft Movie" filmed in New Zealand, and that's where James Cameron is working on the latest "Avatar" movie. Christopher Nolan is making "The Odyssey" in various places including Morocco. Marvel studios just started production on "Avengers: Doomsday" in London. Not to mention all the movies and TV shows that regularly use Canadian cities like Vancouver and Toronto.
Another aspect to be clarified: Would tariffs hit movies now in production or the ones already completed? That "Minecraft" movie is a huge hit – might it now owe Uncle Sam a hefty chunk of change? And Tom Cruise probably doesn't want to hear about tariffs with "Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning" – which filmed in Norway, Malta, South Africa and assorted other locales – a few weeks from releasing in theaters.
How might average movie lovers be affected by Trump's movie tariffs?
Many Americans are feeling tariffs in general, from the stock market to the increasing prices of everyday items. Tariffs on movies could conceivably hit Americans' pocketbooks in a whole new way, or change up their beloved entertainment escapism.
A lot probably depends on how and where tariffs get levied. It's not hard to imagine that if studios owe extra money on movies – which often cost hundreds of millions to produce and distribute – ticket costs could rise. Or streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ might raise subscription prices. Tim Richards, Vue Entertainment CEO and founder, told BBC Radio 4 that "a big part of this is what constitutes U.S. film: Is it where the money comes from, the script, the director, the talent, where it was shot?"
The number of movies that comes out could be affected. If it becomes inordinately expensive for studios to finance movies – and movies are already rather expensive – fewer films will get made. Maybe Disney goes all in on Marvel and "Star Wars" outings but doesn't pull the trigger on some mid-tier projects. And with so many movies currently underway (or getting ready to be), it would be difficult to shift productions back to America, not to mention figuring out where they would shift to.
Tariffs likely mean more chaos, not to mention how it might affect the global movie business. Studios depend on international box office for their films' success. Amid these tariff wars, China has already said that it will "moderately reduce" the number of U.S. films it imports. More reciprocal tariffs on Trump's new movie plan would add extra pain to an industry that still isn't back to its pre-pandemic heights.
But can President Trump actually levy a tariff on a movie?
The morning after Trump's movie tariffs announcement, stocks opened lower. That might not be shocking given the effects other tariffs have had, but what is startling is the lack of any detail about the president's plan for Hollywood. It's unclear who or what would have tariffs levied on them, and when they would take hold, or how they would be enacted.
But here's another of many questions: Can a movie even be taxed in such a way? It's not like "Sinners" or "Thunderbolts*" was a good imported on a ship from China. The World Trade Organization extended a moratorium on digital trade tariffs until 2026 – if film is considered a digital good, that could make the tariff hard to enact without some legal wrangling. Or would movies coming soon to a theater be subject in a different way than streaming content?
Then again, like with other announced tariffs, perhaps Trump rolls back his movie plan or just moves on to something else that garners his attention. From filmmakers and studios to movie fans everywhere, we'll all have to wait and see.
Contributing: Zac Anderson; Reuters
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump admin. cancels Moderna bird fu vaccine contract
The Trump administration has canceled a contract with Moderna (MRNA) worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The contract was supposed to help Moderna develop a vaccine for humans to defend against bird flu. Yahoo Finance Senior Health Care Reporter Anjalee Khemlani reports the details in the video above. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime here. Trump administration canceling more than $700 million awarded to drug maker Moderna to develop the vaccine against potential pandemic viruses. For more we're bringing in here Yahoo Finance Senior Health Reporter, Angeli Kamani. Ange. Yeah, like you mentioned, the NIH canceled more than $750, a million dollars, rather, in funding for Moderna. And this is something that the company found out just based on a notification to themselves, even though they were really expecting that to get into late stage development. They said in a statement, Moderna received notice that the Health and Human Services Department, remember led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy will terminate the award for the late stage development and rights to purchase the pre-pandemic influenza vaccines. Now, we went out to HHS to understand what their rationale was behind this. And among other things they mentioned that the MRNA technology remains quote, "under tested" and we are not going to spend taxpayer dollars repeating the mistakes of the last administration which concealed legitimate safety concerns from the public. And in that they're referring to the myocarditis that was evident in some males and some younger individuals. So, this is really just the latest setback for the company. We know it's been pummeled, the stock is down more than 30% on the year. This is one of the latest. So, we know that they pulled their filing of a combination flu and COVID vaccine earlier last week. Then we've got the NIH funding that's cutting the pandemic and bird flu. And then we've also got missing the Q1 estimates earlier this year. So, just really telling a really hard story for this company. We know it's been under pressure because of the waning COVID revenues, and these are just some of those areas that were supposed to sort of plug that hole. And now, without those in the way, it's a question on what Moderna's viability is. Now, on the flip side, you do have some good news, right? The company's still working on a number of clinical trials with Merck on cancer vaccine. It also has a partnership with Vertex on cystic fibrosis. So, they do have a few other things going for them, but this is really a longer play for the company rather than any near term that they would have otherwise been able to take advantage of. All right. Thanks, Angeli. Appreciate it. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk Slams Trump's Spending Bill: ‘A Disgusting Abomination'
A serious rift has erupted between Elon Musk and President Trump over the massive government spending bill the president has urged Congress to pass. Musk, who donated nearly $275 million toward Trump's 2024 election campaign, on Tuesday posted on X an unambiguous denunciation of the bill, which is called the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act. More from Variety London Mayor Sadiq Khan Hails 'Adolescence' for Having 'Mainstreamed' Conversation About 'Epidemic' of Violence Against Women Jon Stewart Tackles Elon Musk's Exit From the Trump Administration: 'This Guy Has Seen Some S--' Elon Musk Says New York Times Is 'Lying Their Ass Off' About His Alleged Drug Use; Newspaper Defends Coverage 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk wrote. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' The tech mogul wrote that the bill 'will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit' and that 'Congress is making America bankrupt.' Musk, the world's richest person, also posted a warning that voters would 'fire all politicians who betrayed the American people' in the 2026 midterm elections. On May 28, Musk announced the he would end his tenure as a 'special government employee' — leading the White House's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE — after 128 days. Per the U.S. Department of the Interior, a person cannot serve in such a role for more than 130 days in a consecutive year. Sen. Ran Paul (R-Kentucky) was among those chiming in to agree with Musk. 'We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake. We can and must do better,' he wrote, quoting Musk's post. Trump, on Truth Social, earlier in the day slammed Paul, writing 'Rand Paul has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming. He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not. The BBB is a big WINNER!!!' At a White House press briefing, Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy asked press secretary Karoline Leavitt 'how mad do you think President Trump is going to be' about Musk's comments? Leavitt responded that Trump 'already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it.' The One Big, Beautiful Bill Act passed the Republican-controlled House but has yet to clear the Senate. The legislation would make Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent (with wealthy Americans benefiting the most) and increase funding for the U.S. military and immigration enforcement. In addition, the version that passed the House cuts funding for health, nutrition, education and clean energy programs. Musk has criticized the 'Big Beautiful Bill' before, but using tamer terminology. Last week, for example, Musk criticized Trump's 'massive spending bill' in an interview with CBS's 'Sunday Morning,' saying the legislation 'undermines the work' of DOGE. Best of Variety What's Coming to Netflix in June 2025 New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts?


New York Times
30 minutes ago
- New York Times
There Are Limits to Republican Lawmakers' Reach, Even in Texas
For weeks, Republicans lawmakers in Texas had promised that they would require proof of citizenship to vote in most elections, hoping the 2025 Legislature would be a vanguard for other conservative states considering similar measures. Voting rights groups cried foul. An analysis showed that the bill could disproportionately harm Republicans, who were less likely than Democrats to have the required documents. Then, as the Texas legislative session ended on Monday, the bill died. Its failure was one of the many surprising results of this year's legislative session, which was among the most conservative in recent memory. The Legislature passed measures requiring the Ten Commandments in every classroom and creating publicly funded vouchers for private-school tuition. But the session also revealed the limits of right-wing governance, even in a state that President Trump won decisively and that is controlled by Republicans at every level of power. Lawmakers failed to pass strict curbs on wind and solar energy, and a tightened ban on abortion pills from out of state. Texas was a particularly good test case for the G.O.P.'s reach because for the first time in years, Republicans in the Legislature were not actively warring. Gone were the internal fights between House and Senate Republicans that had marred the last several sessions, which occur every two years. Instead, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who controls the State Senate with a firm hand, got mostly what he wanted, a more compliant Texas House. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.