See Unsee summary
Donald Trump is once again shaking the film and television world. A recent post on his platform Truth Social threatens to impose a “100% tariff” on all movies made outside the USA. Though eclipsed by other political news, this proposal has the film industry, both in Hollywood and abroad, seriously worried.
Trump versus global filmmaking
On his account, Trump accuses foreign countries of “stealing” American film jobs and blames California Governor Gavin Newsom for letting productions flee Hollywood. For Trump, it’s not just about cinema. It’s another front in his long-running narrative of economic protectionism. But this time, the collateral damage could be creative, not just commercial.
In the last decade, global collaboration has become the norm: productions shot in Canada or Australia, post-production teams based in Germany or New Zealand, and actors flown in from all over the world. That’s not stealing—it’s how modern filmmaking works. It’s also why this threat feels so disconnected from how movies are made today.
These tariffs, if they actually turned into policy, wouldn’t just target names in the credits. They’d impact entire ecosystems: crews, studios, equipment suppliers, and local talent. To read Gwen Stefani headlines magical 2025 Disney Christmas Parade
Canada, a clear target for now
Lowell Schrieder, talent manager at CK Talent in Canada, was blunt. If tariffs like this were imposed, productions would dry up fast. Ontario, with its reputation for being affordable and efficient, could lose its edge overnight.
It’s not a theoretical risk. Hollywood has long relied on Canadian cities like Toronto and Vancouver to recreate American cities at a lower cost. Entire seasons of top TV series are shot up north. Pull that rug out and you’re not only erasing thousands of jobs, you’re also throwing industry partnerships into chaos.
What’s frustrating, as someone who loves how global filmmaking feels today, is the idea of losing what we’ve gained: diverse voices, cultural mixes, creative blends. The richness of recent films and shows often comes from that cross-border collaboration.
Confusion and unclear definitions
Even Trump’s definition of a “foreign-made” film is murky. A Marvel blockbuster might be financed in California, shot on location in Australia, have VFX done in London, and be edited in New York. So where was it “made”?
This blurry line is why studios are nervous. Executives are keeping close tabs on lawmakers and wondering whether this is just posturing or the early beat of a real policy shift. To read Toho expands into Europe with bold anime distribution moves
Rising defense from key allies
In Australia, Arts Minister Tony Burke didn’t wait to respond. He pledged to protect his country’s increasingly strong film sector. Ontario Creates, an agency that helps promote media production in the Canadian province, also stated they were on alert.
Nobody wants to be a pawn in a trade war, especially when it threatens soft power industries like entertainment. Culture travels through films—limiting that has consequences beyond box office totals.
California’s own counter-strategy
While Trump threatens, California is working on a more constructive fix: incentives rather than barriers.
- Governor Newsom has proposed a plan to double the state’s annual film and TV tax credits, from $330 million to $750 million.
- Representatives Laura Friedman and Adam Schiff are pushing for similar tax benefits at the federal level, hoping that more carrot, less stick, can bring productions home.
This strategy is based on attracting projects rather than punishing foreign partnerships. A much healthier logic, in my view.
Threats beyond economics
It’s not just about budgets and locations. Countries like Germany and Canada have cultural production laws that demand foreign streaming services invest locally. Trump’s move could be a leverage tactic to break or weaken those laws.
Nicholas Simon of Indochina Productions (they’ve been behind The White Lotus 3, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters, Meg 2) has already felt the tremors. Earlier this year, a similar threat from Trump caused a mild panic. And that was just a tweet. If real policies emerge, it could fundamentally reshape how—and where—modern stories are told.
What’s playing out is a familiar political tension: a push between national interests and global cooperation. But this time, the battleground is the movie set. And as someone who cherishes what the international nature of film brings us—from unexpected locations to narratives that cross borders—it’s a fight worth watching closely.
