As Donald Trump and the White House toned down tariff talk on Monday, the conversation shifted to the notion of a federal incentive and other meas
As Donald Trump and the White House toned down tariff talk on Monday, the conversation shifted to the notion of a federal incentive and other measures as “Hollywood ambassador” Jon Voight outlined a plan that was airy on detail.
Voight, who won the Oscar for Coming Home in 1979, attended Trump’s Mar-A-Lago residence to present his plan after reportedly meeting with Hollywood guilds, studios, and streamers.
According to a press release issued on behalf of Voight and his special advisor Steven Paul on Monday afternoon, the actor is proposing federal tax incentives, “significant changes” to several tax codes, the establishment of international co-production treaties, and infrastructure subsidies for exhibitors, film and television production companies, and post-production outfits.
The proposal also includes a focus on job training, and “tariffs in certain limited circumstances”.
Without further elaboration, the proposal has done little to provide clarity for a film industry community that was rocked on Sunday night when the US president declared he was considering 100% tariffs on non-US films. Trump softened his tone on Monday when he said he wanted to support, not hurt, the US film industry, and would consult with Hollywood, while the White House added there have been no final decision on tariffs.
“We look forward to working with the administration, the unions, studios, and streamers to help form a plan to keep our industry healthy and bring more productions back to America,” said Voight. “By creating the right environment through smart incentives, updated policies, and much-needed support, we can ensure that American production companies thrive, more jobs stay here at home, and Hollywood once again leads the world in creativity and innovation.”
SP Media Group/Atlas Comics president Scott Karol, who joined Voight and the actor’s special advisor and producer Steven Paul, added that the associates have “spent months meeting with top leaders across the film and television industry, and there is broad agreement that runaway production has become a serious issue that needs to be addressed now”. The press release said the White House and relevant policy advisors are reviewing the proposal.
Trump’s two other Hollywood ambassadors are Sylvester Stallone and Mel Gibson, both of whom have been involved in productions outside the United States throughout their careers. It has been reported that in August Gibson will start production on The Resurrection Of The Christ, his follow-up to the 2004 $610m global smash The Passion Of The Christ, at Rome’s Cinecittà Studios in Italy.
Federal incentive
IATSE, the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees that represents around 170,000 below-the-line crew workers from all sectors in the US and Canada, has been in favour of a federal incentive ”to level the playing field for American workers”.
While it is engaging with the administration and wants to see what international president Matthew D. Loeb called a ”balanced federal response to return film and television jobs”, the union does not want to see its Canadian members disadvantaged.
California Senator Adam Schiff, who has been campaigning for a federal production incentive for some time, issued his own statement on Monday. “I share the administration’s desire to bring movie making back to the United States. While blanket tariffs on all films would have unintended and potentially damaging impacts, we have an opportunity to work together to pass a major federal film tax credit to re-shore American jobs in the industry. I welcome the opportunity to work with the administration and my Republican colleagues to pass a globally competitive federal film incentive to bring back run-away production.”
Uncertainty over what happens next
While the mood was less anxious on Monday, nobody was any the wiser as to what happens next.
It remains to be seen whether there will be bipartisan support for a federal incentive in a US Congress where the Republicans enjoy a slim majority. Up until now the issue has not been regarded as a priority. International co-production treaties and infrastructure subsidies would take time to negotiate and implement.
And while such measures might mitigate to some extent the higher relative cost of filming in the United States, union costs and logistical demands will still contribute to the challenges of production.
Executives have remained tranquil since Sunday night, although it is understood the prevailing view with regard to tariffs on non-US films is that studios and streamers own their films, regardless of where they shoot, and would not in effect be buying from themselves to incur taxes, were they to be imposed in some form. There is uncertainty over who would bear the burden of any levies, and California Governor Gavin Newsom has challenged the Trump’s administration’s legal right to impose them.
Executives are also looking into the idea of how films qualify for an American certificate of origin attesting to the nationality of a film, which would be a critical factor with regard to potential tariffs on international films. They are asking whether a film qualifies as American if it is owned by an US company, even if shoots outside the United States. Or does it qualify through financial commitments, or the involvement of key roles like director, producer, screenwriter, and executive producer.
Sources opined that ultimately it is American distributors of non-US films who could stand to lose the most were tariffs to come into effect. Examples were cited of petite arthouse buyers of festival films like those on offer in Cannes, which are often acquired for a circumscribed theatrical release and potential awards campaign.
COMMENTS