China reportedly considering ban on US films in response to Trump tariffs
China is reportedly considering a ban on all US films in retaliation for Donald Trump raising tariffs on Chinese imports.
Earlier today, the White House confirmed that China will be hit with a 104 percent tariff rate from tomorrow after Beijing did not lift retaliatory tariffs on US goods.
Bloomberg News reports that in China, two widely followed bloggers with links to the local authorities shared identical lists of measures that could be introduced by Chinese authorities in response. These include 'reducing or banning the import of US films.'
The bloggers, Liu Hong, a senior editor at the Xinhua News Agency, and Ren Yi, grandson of former Guangdong Province Communist Party chief Ren Zhongyi, both attributed the plans to sources familiar with the Chinese state's planning.
In 2024, US films grossed around $585 million in China. This represents around 3.5 per cent of China's total $17.71 billion box office. A significant proportion of that haul was attributable to the success of Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire, which made $132 million in China.
The total US and Canada domestic box office for the same period was around $8.56 billion.
When global tariffs were initially announced, Trump imposed a 54 percent tariff on Chinese imports. The White House now says that will increase by an extra 50 percent.
The Chinese foreign ministry vowed its country would 'fight till the end' amid reports it is preparing for a US imports block, as it accused America of 'typical unilateralism and protectionist economic bullying.'
Along with the film industry, the US agricultural sector could also be impacted, with China reportedly mulling a total ban on poultry.
The film sector represents a sizeable US trade surplus with China, as Chinese films do not tend to be as popular overseas. However, last month, some American-based Chinese campaigned for animated hit Ne Zha 2 to get an IMAX release in the US.
The animated blockbuster has already landed a release date for 37 territories across Europe, including the UK and Ireland.
Ne Zha 2, made on an $80 million budget, has already become the highest-grossing animated film in history after making $2.06 billion in China, overtaking last year's US-made Inside Out 2, which made $1.7 billion worldwide.
The film is a sequel to the 2019 fantasy adventure Ne Zha, which follows a young boy born with unique powers who teams up with dragon prince Ao Bing to fight demons and save the very community that fears him.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
21 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Controversial Loch Lomond Flamingo Land plans recalled
In September 2024, the Yorkshire-based theme park operator, Flamingo Land Ltd, had their planning permission in principle rejected by all 14 board members of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs Planning Authority. Now, plans for the development at Lomond Banks have been recalled by Scottish Ministers reports our sister title The National. Minister for Public Finance, Ivan McKee (below), said he has recalled the plans as the proposed development raises issues of 'national significance'. He said: 'I have decided to recall the Lomond Banks appeal as the proposed development raises issues of national significance in view of its potential impact on Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park. 'This means that the appeal should be determined at a national level.' The news comes after more than 50,000 people wrote to McKee in just two weeks, demanding that the Scottish Government withdraw its approval of the mega-resort planning application. Scottish Greens MSP Ross Greer said the public's opinion on the proposal, which is the most opposed in Scottish planning history with more than 155,000 individuals lodging objections, 'couldn't be clearer'. He said: 'In just two weeks the Planning Minister has heard directly from over 50,000 people calling on him to block these proposals. Public opinion couldn't be clearer and it is backed up by experts including the Government's own environment watchdog.' Organisations such as the National Trust for Scotland, the Woodland Trust, the Ramblers, and the Scottish Government environment watchdog, SEPA, also raised objections against the plans.
NBC News
22 minutes ago
- NBC News
Harvard gets new legal backing from 5 Ivies and over 12,000 alumni
Twenty four universities, including five Ivy League schools, and more than 12,000 alumni took measures to back Harvard University in its legal battle against the Trump administration, which has threatened it with slashing billions of dollars in grants. Princeton, Yale, Dartmouth, Brown and the University of Pennsylvania, along with several other schools, filed an amicus brief on Monday in support of the nation's oldest university, arguing that the funding freeze would impact more than just Harvard, due to the interconnectedness of scientific research, and would ultimately hinder American innovation and economic growth. Also on Monday, the group of 12,041 Harvard alumni filed a separate brief describing the withholding of funds as a 'reckless and unlawful' attempt to assert control over the school and other higher education institutions. 'The escalating campaign against Harvard threatens the very foundation of who we are as a nation,' the alumni said in the brief. 'We embrace our responsibility to stand up for our freedoms and values, to safeguard liberty and democracy, and to serve as bulwarks against these threats to the safety and well-being of all.' The amicus briefs aim to provide expertise or insight to the court, but the schools and individuals are not parties in the lawsuit itself. The filings come after Harvard in April rejected the government's list of 10 demands, including auditing viewpoints of the student body, a move that the administration says is aimed at addressing antisemitism on campus. After the government threatened to freeze $2.2 billion in multiyear grants and $60 million 'in multi-year contract value,' Harvard hit back with a lawsuit. The brief filed by the universities included other prominent institutions like Georgetown, Johns Hopkins and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The only Ivy League schools missing were Cornell and Columbia universities. The schools argued that the partnership between the government and academia has long led to critical advancements, from the The Human Genome Project to the Covid-19 vaccine. And that funding cuts to one school could endanger research at others. Harvard, MIT and Princeton, for example, have received funding from the National Institutes of Health for a project that could potentially yield tools to treat Alzheimer's disease. 'The work cannot continue at individual sites; MIT cannot use machine learning to uncover patterns, for example, without data from Princeton and Harvard,' the brief said. The universities said in the brief that the cuts would only cause more harm to the United States' ability to compete in science and academia. 'These cuts to research funding risk a future where the next pathbreaking innovation — whether it is a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's, a military technology, or the next Internet — is discovered beyond our shores, if at all,' the brief said. Sally Kornbluth, president of MIT, said in a letter to the school's community that it was critical to make a legal argument against the funding cuts. 'Although the value to the public of federally funded university research feels obvious to us at MIT, we felt compelled to make the case for its countless benefits to the court and, in effect, to the American people,' Kornbluth said. The Harvard alumni filed their brief in support of the school's motion for a summary judgement submitted last week. If granted, the summary judgment would allow the court to decide the case without a full trial. The alumni, which include comedian Conan O'Brien, author Margaret E. Atwood and Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., wrote in the brief that the administration's 'end goal is to narrow our freedoms to learn, teach, think, and act, and to claim for itself the right to dictate who may enjoy those freedoms.' The alumni also slammed the administration's concerns over antisemitism as rationale over the funding freeze. 'We unequivocally condemn antisemitism and every other form of discrimination and hate, which have no place at Harvard or anywhere else in our society,' the alumni said in its brief. 'Yet charges of antisemitism — particularly without due process and proper bases and findings by the Government — should not be used as a pretext for the illegal and unconstitutional punishment and takeover of an academic institution by the Government.' The government's demands on Harvard, the alumni said in the brief, 'have little or nothing to do with combating antisemitism' or any other form of discrimination on campus. 'Rather, its demands stifle the very engagement, teaching, and research that bring communities together, heighten our understanding of one another, and advance solutions that directly benefit us all,' the brief said. The show of legal support comes amid a monthslong back-and-forth between the administration and Harvard University. Most recently, the school sued the administration after Trump issued a proclamation last week denying visas for foreign students trying to come to the U.S. to attend the prestigious school.
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
People in Los Angeles: share your reaction to the protests and military mobilization
Los Angeles is reeling after a series of immigration raids led to widespread protests over the weekend and Donald Trump took the extraordinary step of ordering thousands of US military troops to descend on the city, a move that California leaders have decried as 'inflammatory'. Raids on Friday in areas of the city with large Latino populations led to mainly peaceful demonstrations, but the protests turned violent when federal immigration authorities used flashbang grenades and teargas against demonstrators. Over the weekend, fiery and chaotic scenes played out in downtown LA, Compton and Paramount, with dozens of people arrested. Donald Trump has been accused of intentionally fanning the flames with his decision on Monday to send in 700 marines and another 2,000 national guard troops to LA, adding to 2,000 already sent to the city on Saturday. While Trump has said the deployment was essential for maintaining order, the Los Angeles mayor, Karen Bass, accused the administration of using the city as an 'experiment', while Gavin Newsom, California's governor, called the decision to send in troops without his permission 'purposefully inflammatory'. We would like to hear from people living in LA about the latest events in the city. How do you feel about the immigration raids? What is your reaction to the national guard and marines being deployed? You can send us your thoughts on recent events in LA using this form. Please share your story if you are 18 or over, anonymously if you wish. For more information, please see our terms of service and privacy policy. Your responses, which can be anonymous, are secure as the form is encrypted and only the Guardian has access to your contributions. We will only use the data you provide us for the purpose of the feature and we will delete any personal data when we no longer require it for this purpose. For true anonymity please use our SecureDrop service instead. If you're having trouble using the form, click here. Read terms of service here and privacy policy here.
