The proposed budget cut risks shrinking domestic production to just 8–10 features a year, wiping out 200-300 jobs and shutting dozens of small-town cinemas in Finland.

The Finnish Film Foundation (FFF) has issued a stark warning after the government unveiled plans to reduce public investment in film production by nearly €7 million - a cut amounting to about 35% of the organisation’s current budget.

In a statement released on 3 September, the Foundation stressed that production support should not be mistaken for business subsidies, as the government’s budget proposal suggested. “Production support is project funding for individual films that would not be completed without it,” the Foundation wrote, adding that every euro invested “returns to the state coffers, at best doubled”.

The statement outlined the broader consequences of the cut, including a collapse in the number of domestic premieres, widespread job losses, and the closure of cinemas - particularly in smaller towns where Finnish films make up the majority of ticket sales. The Foundation also noted that such a decision would “knowingly hand over market share from domestic production to foreign content” while weakening Finland’s cultural identity and reducing tax revenues.

Speaking to Nordisk Film & TV Fond, Lasse Saarinen, Managing Director of the Finnish Film Foundation, underscored that dialogue with the government has been ongoing. He recalled that just ten days before the budget decision, three key ministers had been on set observing the shooting of Aku Louhimies’ Lapland War (Lapin Sota). “So our message has been delivered and understood,” he said.

Saarinen described the government’s framing of film funding as “business subsidies” as an “intentional misunderstanding” coming from the Ministry of Finance, and one that undermines basic cultural funding.

If the proposed cuts move ahead, the immediate effect will be fewer films produced from 2026 onwards, with other support schemes also at risk. “If we have to cut up to €7 million out of the €21.5 million we have this year, it of course means less films produced,” Saarinen explained. Looking ahead, he warned that the Foundation may only be able to support 8–10 feature films annually, which would drastically reduce diversity and limit producers’ ability to attract foreign investment.

The knock-on effects across the sector could be devastating. Saarinen estimated that “around 200–300 persons will lose their jobs, and that goes evenly to all areas of filmmaking”. He also anticipated bankruptcies among production outfits and a wave of cinema closures. Out of Finland’s 195 cinemas, 103 rely on domestic films for over 50% of their ticket sales. “Probably around 50 cinemas will close their doors,” he cautioned, especially in small towns.

The international dimension is also critical. Without a national financing share, Finnish producers will struggle to secure European and international co-production funds. “This cut will severely damage possibilities of our production companies to build bigger budgets with foreign investments,” Saarinen said, pointing out that Finland’s participation in minor co-productions - key for maintaining relationships across borders - would also shrink.

Asked about alternative solutions, Saarinen admitted there are none in the short term. “Our government will very probably change in 2027, and then we will hopefully have the possibility to regain our funds,” he said.

He described the upcoming implementation of the EU’s AVMS Directive, which introduces a streaming levy, as a “very positive signal”. However, he noted that the process will take at least 18 months, meaning funds would not be available before 2028. “I have high hopes that the working group from concerned ministries will make the right decisions… So that the Finnish AV industry will benefit mostly out of it,” he added. Yet he expressed scepticism that international streaming platforms such as Netflix or Disney+ would voluntarily step in to support local cinema before then. “It would be nice, but not likely,” he remarked.

Despite the bleak outlook, Saarinen stressed that the Foundation’s role will remain significant, albeit with much fewer resources. His message to decision-makers was unequivocal: “They should understand that although the cut was named as a cut of business support, it is the most severe cut of cultural basic funding of one whole sector of culture and arts.”