On Monday, September 29, 2025, President Donald Trump reignited controversy across the entertainment and manufacturing sectors by declaring his intent to impose a sweeping 100% tariff on all movies produced outside the United States. Posting on his Truth Social platform, Trump also threatened substantial new tariffs on foreign-made furniture, aiming to revive domestic industries he claims have been "stolen" by other countries. The proposals, which echo earlier threats made in May, have already sent shockwaves through Hollywood, Wall Street, and political circles, sparking fierce debate over their feasibility, economic impact, and underlying motivations.
Trump’s latest salvo began with a familiar refrain. “Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing 'candy from a baby.' California, with its weak and incompetent Governor, has been particularly hard hit,” Trump wrote, referencing Governor Gavin Newsom, a frequent target of his criticism. “Therefore, in order to solve this long time, never ending problem, I will be imposing a 100% Tariff on any and all movies that are made outside of the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
The president’s statement, while bold, left many details unclear. No executive order was signed, and the White House offered no immediate clarification. In fact, the Motion Picture Association, representing major Hollywood studios, declined comment, and the administration did not respond to queries from multiple news outlets, including Deadline and CNBC.
The entertainment industry has heard this threat before. Back in May, Trump called runaway production a “national security threat,” and claimed that foreign incentives were luring away Hollywood’s signature business. He authorized the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative “to immediately begin the process of instituting a 100% Tariff on any and all Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands,” as quoted by The Independent. Yet, no action materialized at the time, and industry insiders dismissed the threat as both unworkable and outside the president’s jurisdiction. As one Hollywood executive told CNN in May, “It has the ability to bring the movie business to a standstill – which is the last thing Hollywood needs after dual strikes and a content recession.”
Monday’s renewed threat comes as several high-profile productions, such as Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey and Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ sequel, are being filmed at least partly outside the U.S.—projects that could be directly affected by such tariffs. However, the global nature of modern filmmaking, where shoots and post-production often span multiple countries, makes the practicality of enforcing such a tariff exceedingly complex. As Yahoo Finance noted, “It’s unclear how the movie levies would be imposed, given that global productions are often shot in various locations around the world.”
The potential impact of the tariffs was not lost on Wall Street. Shares of major entertainment companies like Netflix and Disney remained relatively stable, but Warner Bros. Discovery dipped 1% following the announcement, according to Yahoo Finance. Meanwhile, furniture manufacturers RH and Williams-Sonoma saw their stocks drop nearly 5% after Trump’s parallel pledge to impose tariffs on countries that do not manufacture furniture in the U.S. Trump specifically cited North Carolina’s loss of furniture business to China as a justification, promising, “Details to follow!!!”
This is not Trump’s first foray into aggressive trade policy. Over the past week, he has announced a battery of new tariffs: 100% on branded drugs, 25% on heavy trucks, 50% on kitchen cabinets and bathroom vanities, and 30% on upholstered furniture, with many taking effect October 1, 2025. The cumulative effect has been a wave of price hikes by companies across numerous sectors—from Adidas and Nike to Walmart and Target—seeking to offset the increased costs of doing business in a more protectionist environment. As The Daily Beast reported, “Countless companies have already introduced price hikes on consumer goods to offset the cost of doing business under the president’s unconventional economic plan.”
Trump’s critics were quick to respond. Governor Gavin Newsom, writing on X (formerly Twitter), lambasted the proposed tariffs: “You’re already paying more for eggs, coffee, toys, shoes, electricity, furniture, cars, and flights. Now, Trump wants to raise taxes to see the movies. PAY MORE AND ENJOY NOTHING. That’s Donald Trump’s America.” Newsom argued instead for expanding California’s $750 million film tax credit program into a national incentive, saying, “Instead of just waving his arms and yelling ‘TARIFFS,’ how about we do something that will actually work?” His press team was even more blunt, stating, “The Governor tried to explain this to Trump months ago — when this was initially proposed — that his actions will cause irreparable damage to the U.S. film industry. Today’s move is 100% stupid.”
Representative Laura Friedman, a Democrat whose district includes much of Hollywood, echoed these concerns. “I’m relieved President Trump recognizes that we are losing a signature American product: the domestic film & TV industry. However, his 100% tariff on foreign films will raise costs for consumers,” she said, as quoted by The Independent. “As the representative of nearly every major producer in Hollywood and a former film producer, I know what will work, without harming consumers: a national film tax credit.” Friedman pledged to continue working with lawmakers and industry leaders to advance such incentives, arguing they would level the playing field with international competition without harming consumers or jobs.
Industry experts have also sounded the alarm. Kathryn Arnold, a veteran film producer, told Yahoo Finance that the proposed levies were “insane and devastating,” especially for lower- and mid-budget productions. “If films are forced to be made here, the pricing of labor and goods and services is higher. Budgets will go up,” she warned. Another industry insider, speaking to Deadline, predicted, “He will kill the U.S. industry quicker as this will increase the cost of U.S. films that already weren’t selling well internationally. Creating an incentive for shooting in the U.S. would have been smarter but I’m not sure he has that much intelligence.”
Meanwhile, legal and procedural questions abound. Movies are listed as an exception to presidential authority under the International Emergency Powers Act, which governs how the president can address national security threats. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing Trump’s broader tariff authority, with oral arguments scheduled for November. Furthermore, as Deadline pointed out, “There also is the question of how tariffs would work on services, not actual goods, as such a levy would set a precedent.”
Amid all the commotion, some industry representatives, including studios, unions, and figures like Jon Voight and Sylvester Stallone, have lobbied for expanded production incentives rather than punitive tariffs. They argue that positive incentives are more likely to bring jobs and investment back to American soil without sparking trade wars or raising prices for consumers.
As the debate continues, one thing is clear: Trump’s tariff threats have once again thrust the intersection of trade, culture, and politics into the national spotlight. Whether these proposals move beyond rhetoric remains to be seen, but the uncertainty alone is enough to keep Hollywood, manufacturers, and consumers on edge.
