Why Trump was persuaded to back a US federal production incentive: “That really moved the president”

S P Media Group president Scott Karol remembers the three occasions when he joined company CEO and veteran producer Steven Paul and actor Jon Voight to lobby Donald Trump on a suite of measures to bolster US production.

The first encounter in spring 2025 at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida led to the now-notorious Truth Social post on tariffs after the US commander-in-chief fixated on punitive measures to support the industry. When the trio met the president again in February 2026 at a White House screening of 2004 feature National Treasure, they focused specifically on a federal production incentive. Trump was made aware of the robust bipartisan political and industry support coalescing around a bill and paid attention. The clincher came in August, when Paul, Karol and Hollywood special ambassador Voight brought persuasive topline data on the likely economic benefits of an incentive from an upcoming Olsberg SPI report. Paul relayed his disappointment over having to take his historical thriller Nixon’s Gamble to the UK because he could not afford a US shoot.

“That really moved the president,” says Karol. Trump summoned his executive assistant Natalie Harp and “they just started writing”, recalls the SP Media Group exec. “Natalie put it on Truth Social while we were sitting in the room.”

It was August 14 and Trump had just called for bipartisan support for a federal incentive — “Let’s get this done!” — casting aside political rivalries in a manner that has both surprised and delighted the US film and television industry. Six weeks later, on September 24, bills sponsored by politicians from both sides of the aisle were introduced to the US Senate and House of Representatives.

The Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act proposes a 20% transferable tax credit supporting wages above and below the line, post-­production and VFX. Films, scripted and unscripted television shows and pilots with a minimum $1m spend where at least three-quarters of the shoot takes place in the US are eligible. The credit can be stacked with existing state incentives, as in Canada and other jurisdictions, and productions will be able to access 5% bumps, up to a maximum combined credit of 30%, for qualifying shoots that are independent or take place in a disaster zone, like parts of Greater Los Angeles after the 2025 fires.

Members of the US Film and Tele­vision Production Coalition — an alliance of Producers United and the Film­USA commissioner group, politicians, guilds and the Motion Picture Association (MPA) — stress the legislation is designed to boost the production sector and create jobs across the entire country and not just in the geographical enclave of Hollywood. The Olsberg SPI study that Trump got to preview came out in September. It found that an incentive would generate approximately $125bn in additional production spend from 2027 to 2035, while the US share of global production spend could nearly double from current levels to 65% by 2030.

The Cato Institute think tank estimates the incentive will cost between $3.3bn and $4.9bn a year or up to $49bn over a decade.

The credit works by allowing a production company to sell a certified, unused tax credit at a discount to a bank or lender that uses the credit to offset its tax liability, while the producer gets immediate access to production funds.

Competitive streak

After decades of watching Canada, the UK, Eastern Europe, Australia and other regions lure US projects overseas, there is uniform excitement in the US about the incentive. And not a little urgency. The authors of the Olsberg report said the US share of $13.7bn in global film spend in 2025 reached 34%, noting that it could drop to 25% were the incentive bill to not pass through Congress.

“The biggest thing is we can finally be competitive again,” says Tony Armer, vice president and co-founder of FilmUSA, which was formed in 2021. “As someone who’s [been] a film commissioner in Texas and Florida, where there is no [statewide] film incentive, states that don’t have incentives are finally going to be able to compete again.” Thirty-nine US states currently have incentives and the hope is that revitalised production could spark incentives in the remaining 11 states.

“Everybody says it’s the five-year overnight success story,” says Film USA co-founder Katie Pryor of the incentive bill, citing years of advocacy on Capitol Hill by members of the coalition. Trump’s Truth Social post was the accelerator. “The issue was no longer debatable.”

Following this week’s midterm elections, which saw the Democrats retake both branches of Congress, enacting the bill into law during the lame duck session running from November 9 through the end of the year is a distinct possibility. If not in December, then sometime after the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.

Coalition members and MPA officers have gone on the road with actors and producers to sell the incentive to congresspeople across the country. So far they say they have not encountered resistance to what could be perceived as a liberal Hollywood agenda to subsidise A-list stars’ salaries through the bill’s above-the-line provision covering the wages of actors, producers, writers and directors. Trump’s Truth Social edict has pulled Republicans into line.

“The message is this is a 50-state deal that will bring work to everyone,” one Washington insider tells Screen International. “Tom Cruise brings with him a thousand jobs, and hundreds of millions dollars of investment, and we’d like that investment to be in this country. We would like him to pay taxes in this country. The current model subsidises runaway production and Tom Cruise ends up paying taxes to France.”

The US studios and streamers declined to comment until there is further clarity. However, the feeling is that were the bill to be enacted by early 2027, it could influence physical production decisions by the second half of the year. “You could start seeing the fruits of this as early as Cannes,” says one independent source.

“I’ve shot in several parts of the US and I find the crews to be wonderful, with a great work ethic, and I’d love to do more business here,” says producer Trevor Macy of Intrepid Pictures, whose credits include The Life Of Chuck and Prime Original series Carrie. “It’s a little unfortunate that a lot of shooting in the US has been taken off the table, sometimes due to exchange rates, but more because of a lack of incentives. I’d love to see that trend reversed.”

Laura Lewis, CEO of Rebelle Media, adds: “When stories are set in the US, we’d love to be able to keep them the US. It’s the same with a neutral location. I have one movie [Hot Mess] that we’ve budgeted for Arkansas, New Jersey and Kentucky — and Canada kept coming out cheaper. So this could maybe help us pull it back here. It’s set in Pennsylvania and we’d love to film it in the US.”

High labour rates and demanding guilds and unions can be a turn-off to working in the US. “Our unions can overreach and do things that actually hurt their members,” says a source. “Things are so much cheaper overseas.”

However, another notes: “The DGA or SAG-Aftra have expectations about working with their members, regardless of where you’re working in the world. Those expectations are more ingrained when you’re working in the US than they are in many overseas locations, but the guilds can be a good thing because of the quality of their members.”

US producers who have worked in Canada and further afield recognise the world-class facilities, incentives and expertise north of the border and in far-flung jurisdictions, but there are compelling arguments for creating opportunities for local US workers and ensuring filmmakers do not have to leave their families for long stretches. Predictably, industry professionals in Canada, the UK and other locales are paying close attention. The depth of international ties will ensure US companies continue to operate overseas — especially given US companies’ ownership stakes and long-term lease agreements with international facilities — but a US federal incentive is expected to have a noticeable impact.

Tyler Levine is a producer on the US drama Don’t Go Gentle starring Andra Day, which shot in the Greater Toronto Area. “If the US is able to have a nationalised tax credit, it will be a benefit to producers throughout the US and as their neighbours and friends, we wish the very best for them,” says Levine, whose Carousel Pictures served as the production services company. “But of course we hope they continue to bring their talent and projects north of the border.”

Helped by a favourable exchange rate for Americans, Canadians like Levine may well see a robust continuation of business.

“Vancouver is where I have the most experience and my sense of them is, Americans come and Americans go. The lesson from Canada is that they’ve been incredibly steady,” notes a US producer. “The crew bases are remarkable because they’ve invested over time, steadily with predictability. In Canada you don’t have to have the biggest incentive in the world; you just have to have a good crew base, steadiness and predictability.”

• California governor proposes $1bn film and TV tax credit