Trump’s Tariff on Foreign-Made Films Is on Shaky Legal Ground: ‘How on Earth Are They Going to Enforce This?’

by

As a movie enthusiast, I’d say it feels like walking a tightrope for President Trump if he decides to slap a 100% tariff on films hailing from foreign lands. Legal experts seem to think this move is more of a legal stretch than a leap, and it’s also likely to encounter some pretty significant logistical obstacles along the way.

Schuyler Moore, a partner at Greenberg Glusker, wonders aloud, “How on the planet will they implement this?” He finds the entire concept absurd and struggles to conceive of a practical way it could be carried out.

Ever since February, Trump has been utilizing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, a law that grants him extensive power to control international trade during periods deemed as national emergencies, as his basis for action.

However, the legislation also contains particular exceptions – known as the Berman amendments – that facilitate the unimpeded dissemination of informational resources such as movies.

According to Anupam Chander, a law professor at Georgetown University, the 1994 amendment unequivocally established that the president does not possess the authority, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), to impede the transmission of foreign audiovisual media.

The matter arose in 2020, as Trump attempted to apply IEEPA to prohibit TikTok. A federal judge issued an order preventing this action, determining that it contravened the Berman amendments. It was necessary for Congress to pass a distinct law granting authority for the TikTok ban.

“There’s nothing in the law that allows him to bar movies instead of short videos,” Chander says.

The White House hasn’t clearly defined the legal basis for Trump to impose tariffs on foreign films. Shortly after announcing this decision via Truth Social, the president began to soften his stance. The administration has stated that no definitive decisions have been made regarding this matter, and Trump plans to meet with industry representatives before taking any further action.

Emily Kilcrease, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, points out that using IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) could be the most legally precarious option, due to the Berman amendments. However, she suggests that President Trump might opt to impose tariffs on foreign films through Section 301, designed for addressing unfair trade practices, or Section 232, which enables tariffs in situations involving national security concerns.

Kilcrease suggests that if he were offering advice, he believes the task could be accomplished using a 301 method. To him, this seems to be the most straightforward legal justification.

However, she noted it would take several months of investigation to authorize such tariffs.

Marney Cheek, an international trade lawyer from Covington & Burling, points out that the situation appears complex. They mention that this isn’t an area where tariffs have been applied before, which means there isn’t a well-defined path forward.

In his first communication, Trump hinted at potential national security risks, stating that films made abroad could present problems related to “communication and propaganda.” However, the issue of film production moving overseas has been a topic of discussion since the 1950s, making it challenging to portray it as a new or imminent danger.

Steven Bank, a law professor from UCLA, comments that the idea of this being a security threat seems quite distant,” he said. “It’s challenging to envision it holding up in court as a valid argument for national security concerns.

If Trump decides to implement tariffs, film studios or other affected parties might apply for an injunction to halt the tariffs. Although these tariffs could potentially be implemented, there are operational concerns about which transactions would actually be subjected to them. Generally, tariffs apply to goods, while films represent services that are digitally transmitted and don’t pass through customs ports. Other nations have imposed restrictions on Hollywood film imports or enforced a theater tax on foreign films.

Representative Howard Berman, hailing from Los Angeles as a Democrat, was a staunch advocate for Hollywood throughout his 15-term tenure. In 1988, he introduced the first amendment under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), following the government’s confiscation of books and magazines from countries under embargo.

Berman stated that it’s important not to let our disagreements with a certain country’s government hinder our conversations with its people who are struggling under those regimes. We hold the most power and influence when we demonstrate the very freedoms that others strive for.

Read More

2025-05-06 02:53