Fair Trade for the Film Trade

Congressional issues blow in and out of the capital, and few of them leave an impression on the life of the nation more durable than the tracings of dry leaves in the wind. But there is one issue that has a legitimate claim to both longevity and urgency: “fair trade”--or, rather, the lack of it.

During the last session of Congress, there were more than 300 trade bills pending. Many of them were wrapped in generalities, and many of them will likely re-emerge next session to ricochet noisily in the congressional corridors. But some go to the anxious heart of the problem, which is the maintenance of a fair trading level for those American products that want to compete in the world market but are faced with unscalable walls of non-tariff trade barriers.

One need not go into the details of the bleak state of our trading position, which can best be described as miserable. Our trade deficit is like a rampant tumor that may be incurable unless we tend to first priorities: shrinking the value of the dollar, increasing American productivity and demolishing trade barriers in other lands.

The first two of the priorities are difficult and long-term goals. The third is attainable now. This means throwing down a spiked gauntlet to all nations that roam our marketplace with freedom and profit but construct the most ingenious hedgerows barring their marketplace to Americans who want to trade there. Unless these obstacles are dismantled, Americans will be feebly and imperfectly represented in foreign markets, no matter how emaciated the dollar becomes.

By no means does this define “protectionism.” Protectionism throws up sandbags of tariffs and quotas to protect native industries.

“Fair trade” is different. Fair trade affirms that the hospitality and lack of restrictions that foreign business interests find so seductive in our country should be visible and active in theirs.

The American film and television industry is a prime example of a home-grown enterprise that asks for no special privileges--no tariffs, no quotas, no barriers in this country--and wants no more than the right to compete fairly and energetically in those countries that are afforded a notably attractive welcome here.

The American film and television industry has a global reach. We return to this country more than $1 billion in surplus balance of trade each year. By whatever gauge you use, this is an asset of considerable worth. It ought to be preserved. That is, it ought not to be barred or constricted or diminished in foreign countries for reasons other than lack of customers.

If movies and television programs are the U.S.A.’s most-wanted exports, it is not because of government subsidy, or because we have a secret that we yearn to shield, or because our product is cheaper to make (in fact, our movie and television production costs are the highest in the world). We have succeeded because we create a special magic that citizens in other lands find bewitching. The stories that we tell on film or tape are sought-after because we tell stories better than most.

Because of our success, a number of friendly nations are affronted. They believe that if they can restrict American films, their film industries will spring up full-blown, flourish and spread. That the theory is spurious makes it no less alluring to government officials.

In Taiwan, for instance, there are no effective copyright laws. Pirates who steal our creative material have full and free rein. Bulky restrictions are inflicted on our films in the form of import quotas, stern limits on the number of films that we can re-release in the country, a large and discriminatory fee imposed on each film, a squeeze on our distribution offices to force us to move our films through Taiwanese distributors, and a hefty box-office tax that is levied only on foreign films. All this from a country with an anticipated trade surplus in 1985 of $13 billion.

In Colombia, we are saddled with onerous taxes and burdened with quotas of all kinds. In Canada, U.S. television programs are snatched from the air by Canadian cable systems with zero payment to those who own the programs. In Quebec, regulations are pending that would effectively seal off the theatrical marketplace to U.S. film distributors in that province. In Spain, in Indonesia, in India, barriers stand guard against us. And the list goes on and on.

In short, one of America’s most precious trade assets is endangered. However, if we demonstrate, without hesitation, that our country will insist on fair trading principles, “competitive marketplace” will become more than a phrase; it will be a reality.