By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent Truth Social post, Donald Trump announced plans to impose a 100% tariff on movies produced outside the United States, though details on implementation remain unclear. This move, targeting a service rather than a good, follows similar threats made earlier this year and singles out California for its perceived impact. The proposed tariff has raised concerns within the entertainment industry, as it could potentially halt foreign film production, which benefits from cheaper labor and tax incentives. Despite the impact on the industry, share prices for some movie-related companies opened higher after the announcement.
Read the original article here
Trump announces 100% tariff on foreign-made movies – well, that’s a headline, isn’t it? It’s hard not to immediately think, “How?” because, let’s be honest, movies aren’t exactly shipped in on a boat like bananas. They’re intellectual property, digital files, experiences that don’t neatly fit into the traditional import-export framework. The immediate reaction is a mixture of bewilderment and a touch of dark humor. Someone quickly pointed out that the announcement itself didn’t offer any specifics on *how* this would actually work, or even *when* it would be implemented. It’s the kind of policy that sounds more like a political statement than a practical plan, and that is concerning.
This whole idea brings up so many practical questions. For starters, how do you even *tariff* a movie? Is it on the production budget? The box office revenue? Does it apply to streaming services, where movies are delivered digitally across borders without physical “importation”? And what about films that are made by American companies but filmed overseas, using international crews and talent? Where does the line get drawn on what constitutes a “foreign-made” movie? It’s easy to see that this is anything but clear-cut.
Then the questions of enforcement come to mind. How would this even be audited, considering it’s dealing with intangible intellectual property? It feels like a logistical nightmare, almost intentionally so. Others immediately began to speculate about the motivations behind this sudden pronouncement, hinting at potential political plays. Some believe it is designed to target and damage Hollywood, perhaps to force them to fall in line with Trump’s political goals. It’s seen as a move against a powerful industry that has often been critical of him.
The ripple effects are not immediately clear. Some point out the potential for reciprocal tariffs from other countries, which could severely damage the US entertainment industry. Others raise concerns about the impact on American audiences, who might end up paying higher prices to watch movies due to the tariffs. The implication here is more taxes for American consumers. Still others ask how this will affect movies that are filmed in multiple countries with talent from all around the world. It’s a global industry, this movie business.
Another thing that pops up is the potential for unintended consequences. For example, some people raise the idea of a significant impact on Canada. After all, many Hollywood productions are filmed in Canada, which could be a huge boom for the country. Maybe this is a move that’s meant to have the opposite effect of what the administration claims to be trying to achieve.
And what exactly would constitute a “foreign movie”? Would a film set in Wakanda, with a predominantly black cast and crew be considered foreign? What about movies that use some foreign actors or film in different countries?
The frustration is palpable. This comes across as a slap in the face to the rest of the world, who are already struggling to understand the US. It feels as if the USA is acting erratically and irresponsibly, and that this situation is being mishandled.
The announcement has left many people questioning whether the policy is even enforceable. The questions include: How does this affect movies that have already been shot? What does 100% tariffs mean in this context – is that on production budget or box office? Does it apply to streaming and home video? Is it retroactive? How will this be audited and applied, given its I.P. rather than a physical good?
The consensus seems to be that this is another chaotic move from the administration. It seems to be a misguided, and ultimately unworkable policy. It’s a lot of questions, and not a lot of answers.