Record demand for the German Federal Film Fund (DFFF) and the German Motion Picture Fund (GMPF) is a positive signal: film productions want to shoot in Germany. The fact that the high volume of applications has forced the German Federal Film Board (FFA) to curb demand by changing its funding criteria is not evidence that the funding system has failed. On the contrary, it demonstrates both its effectiveness and an underlying structural problem. The FFA is responding administratively to limits set by policymakers. Demand is not the problem. The problem is a funding system that shifts into stop-and-go mode precisely when it succeeds.
This is where the negative impact on Germany’s reputation comes into play, particularly beyond its borders. International productions plan far in advance and compare locations across Europe. Germany is one of the few countries in Central Europe without a tax incentive scheme and has therefore lost competitiveness to many neighbouring countries that are able to attract major international and US productions. If it remains unclear whether funding will still be available even when the eligibility criteria can be met, uncertainty becomes a competitive disadvantage for Germany as a production location—well before any formal suspension of applications is announced. The response, however, must not be a knee-jerk decision to prioritise only major international productions in future at the expense of smaller domestic ones. Both create employment and contribute to the utilisation of the film industry’s capacity. Moreover, in the absence of regulated vocational training in Germany, domestic productions play a vital role in enabling colleagues to develop the professional skills they need to work on international productions.
For ADU members, the consequences of unreliable funding conditions are painfully tangible. If production companies increasingly eliminate Germany from consideration because of uncertain conditions, enquiries and employment contracts never materialise in the first place. These lost productions remain invisible to the public—the film is simply made somewhere else—yet their impact on the German labour market is very real. The signal now being sent—that funding may be exhausted prematurely or that eligibility requirements may change at very short notice—costs us job opportunities, incomes that secure our livelihoods and, in the long term, the continued presence of highly qualified film professionals in the industry.
The mechanism behind the current situation was, however, foreseeable: an incentive system that depends directly on annual budget allocations will inevitably reach its limits. It is therefore all the more contradictory that the funding announced for 2026, increased to €250 million, is already set to be reduced to approximately €200 million in 2027. The Federal Government and the German Bundestag must maintain film funding at no less than its 2026 level, align it with actual demand and ensure that additional funds can be made available when required.
The Mediendienste-Investitionsverpflichtungs-Gesetz (Media Services Investment Obligation Act, MedienInvestVG) remains an important component of the reform—but only one component. It can replace neither a reliably financed incentive programme nor the missing competitive tax incentive scheme. Multi-year planning certainty urgently requires the reforms to be completed through the adoption of the MedienInvestVG, together with the introduction of an internationally competitive tax incentive scheme.
