Donald Trump has announced plans to impose a 100% tariff on all foreign-made films entering the U.S., citing national security concerns and the need to revitalize the domestic film industry. While the White House has since clarified that no final decision has been made, Trump has directed the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative to begin evaluating the policy.
The announcement has triggered immediate concern across the entertainment industry, especially given the lack of clarity on how such a tariff would function in today’s globalized, digital-first production landscape. Modern film production spans multiple countries, taking advantage of tax incentives and diverse locations abroad. A sweeping tariff could inflate costs, disrupt content pipelines, and impact both theatrical releases and streaming platforms.
Despite Trump’s claims that the U.S. film industry is in decline, data from the Motion Picture Association paints a different picture: American movies generated a $15.3 billion trade surplus in 2023, with exports far outpacing imports. Hollywood’s global dominance—particularly international box office revenue, which accounted for over 70% of total earnings—makes it one of the few U.S. industries with a strong trade advantage.
Still, the tariff threat introduces wide-ranging uncertainty. Studios like Netflix, Warner Bros. Discovery, Disney, and Paramount could face significant cost pressures, especially as international productions make up an increasing share of their content pipelines. Industry analysts also warn of potential foreign retaliation—screen quotas, reciprocal tariffs, or restrictions that could limit access to key global markets.
It’s also unclear whether the tariff would apply to streaming-only films, how “foreign-made” would be defined, or whether partial U.S.-based production would exempt certain titles. The Motion Picture Association has yet to issue a public response.
The Take
Trump’s proposed 100% tariff on foreign-made films may sound like a patriotic effort to revive Hollywood—but in practice, it threatens to destabilize both the theatrical and streaming ecosystems.
A Blow to Theatrical Releases
Theatrical film production depends on global partnerships: overseas locations, international crews, and financial incentives that reduce costs and expand creative scope. A tariff of this scale could force studios to either absorb higher expenses or abandon international shoots altogether. That would mean fewer large-scale productions, inflated ticket prices, and a stalled box office recovery just as the theatrical market is trying to stabilize.
And the consequences won’t stop at U.S. borders. Other countries could retaliate with screen quotas or tariffs of their own—shrinking Hollywood’s most lucrative revenue stream: its international box office.
Streaming Services Face New Ambiguities and Risks
For streaming services, the uncertainty runs deeper. Platforms like Netflix, Prime Video, and Apple TV+ rely on global content strategies, producing and acquiring content across dozens of countries to serve diverse audiences and control costs. Netflix, for instance, produces more than 70% of its content outside the U.S., with major investments in studios in Canada, the U.K., India, and South Korea.
The key issue is enforcement. Streaming content is delivered digitally—not physically imported. So how would a tariff be applied? Would it hinge on where a show was filmed, who financed it, or where it was uploaded? Would licensing deals for foreign content be taxed even if the titles never had a theatrical release? None of these questions have been answered.
Beyond the technical ambiguity, there’s a risk to content diversity. Streaming services may reduce investment in international productions, limiting the breadth of content available to U.S. audiences. That would undermine one of streaming’s biggest strengths: its global reach.
Critically acclaimed titles like Squid Game and Made in Heaven aren’t just regional hits—they’re proof that global storytelling resonates. If streamers are forced to deprioritize international content, it could ripple across the creative economy and stunt the very innovation that has fueled the rise of streaming platforms.
Innovation May Slow Across the Industry
Streaming platforms have doubled down on regional talent, multilingual dubbing, and culturally specific stories. These investments have created breakout successes and helped platforms gain global relevance. But a tariff-driven shift toward exclusively U.S.-based production could roll back that progress, weakening competitiveness abroad.
Independent filmmakers and international studios that rely on U.S. distribution would also suffer—cutting off access to one of the world’s largest audiences and revenue sources. And that, in turn, would damage America’s soft power and cultural leadership in global media.
The Bottom Line
A 100% tariff on foreign-made films may appeal to economic nationalism, but the downstream effects would hit hard: higher costs, reduced content diversity, foreign retaliation, and fractured global collaboration.
Hollywood and streaming services don’t just make movies. They tell global stories, employ global teams, and serve global audiences. That’s exactly what makes them thrive—and what this policy puts at risk.
