Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
AI: Jobs, Power & Money
22MAR

Hollywood unions push royalty to beat AI

4 min read
12:34UTC

SAG-AFTRA is negotiating a 'Tilly Tax' — a royalty on AI-generated performers designed to make synthetic actors cost the same or more than human ones. It is the first US labour strategy that attacks AI displacement through pricing rather than prohibition.

← Back to 45,000 tech layoffs, half may be reversedJump to analysis ↓
EconomicDeveloping
Key takeaway

The Tilly Tax is the first union attempt to price synthetic labour at contractual parity with human labour.

SAG-AFTRA is negotiating a "Tilly Tax" in its 2026 contract talks with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers — a royalty on AI-generated performers structured so that using a synthetic actor costs studios the same as, or more than, hiring a real one. Revenue from the levy would flow into the Union's healthcare and pension funds. Brendan Bradley, a member of SAG-AFTRA's AI task force, told Variety: "Is that a perfect solution? No. But it's under the category of the best bad idea we've got in 2026" 1.

The mechanism is distinct from every other AI labour response currently in play. Sanders' robot tax (a per-position levy applied after displacement) and the Warner-Rounds commission (a study-first approach) both operate at the macro-policy level. California's SB 951 requires 90 days' notice for AI-driven mass layoffs . The United Steelworkers in Pittsburgh sought to block AI-based monitoring outright but settled for sub-inflation wage increases and no binding job guarantees . The NYT NewsGuild demanded human oversight for AI-generated content and a share of licensing income, winning an AI impact committee but not the licensing revenue . Each of these either regulates AI use or compensates after the fact. The Tilly Tax does neither — it eliminates the cost advantage that makes substitution attractive in the first place.

The entertainment industry is a natural testing ground because AI replication of individual performers is already technically feasible and commercially tempting. Studios can generate synthetic likenesses, voice performances, and background actors at a fraction of scale rates. The 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike secured initial protections against unauthorised digital replicas, but those provisions addressed consent, not economics. The Tilly Tax closes that gap: even with consent, the studio pays.

Whether AMPTP accepts the structure is another question. Studios are spending heavily on AI production tools, and the $650–690 billion AI infrastructure commitment across major tech firms is partly premised on content generation at lower marginal cost. A royalty that neutralises those savings undermines the business case. Bradley's candid framing — "the best bad idea" — reflects the Union's own awareness that the tax is a holding action, not a permanent settlement. If AI-generated performances improve to the point where audiences cannot distinguish them from human work, the pressure to erode or circumvent the royalty will intensify. For NOW, it is the most inventive labour-side response to AI displacement in any US sector: not a ban, not a study, not a disclosure requirement, but a price floor that makes the human option competitive by design.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

SAG-AFTRA wants a rule requiring studios to pay a royalty on AI-generated performers equivalent to hiring a real union actor. If a studio wants a digital version of an actor — or a synthetic performer — they pay union rates regardless. The goal is to remove the cost incentive to go synthetic while generating revenue for actor healthcare and pensions whether studios choose human or AI performers. The model is less a prohibition than a price signal: make the choice cost-neutral, then let quality and consent govern decisions.

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

The negotiator's own characterisation — 'best bad idea we've got in 2026' — is analytically significant. It signals union awareness that the Tilly Tax is a second-best instrument adequate for the current cycle but not a durable solution as synthetic performance scales. This honest acknowledgement of inadequacy is unusual in labour negotiations and may reflect internal tension between members favouring consent frameworks (protecting identity rights) and those prioritising revenue mechanisms (protecting pension funds). The two objectives are not fully compatible: a royalty system that makes synthetic performance cost-equivalent to human performance may legitimise synthetic use rather than deter it.

Root Causes

The structural driver is an asymmetric cost architecture: without parity pricing, AI performance has near-zero marginal cost versus union minimum day rates of $1,000–$3,500. The substitution incentive is unbounded. The Tilly Tax is a market-design intervention — using price rather than prohibition to neutralise the incentive — which is structurally more durable than consent-only frameworks because it does not require individual actors to negotiate their own digital rights case-by-case.

Escalation

The 2026 AMPTP negotiations follow a 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike that already produced interim AI consent provisions. The Tilly Tax represents a step-change from consent frameworks to pricing mechanisms — an escalation in ambition. SAG-AFTRA's demonstrated willingness to sustain a prolonged strike in 2023 gives this demand credible backing. If AMPTP resists, a second strike in a two-cycle span would signal the creative labour movement has concluded that consent-only frameworks are insufficient.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    If adopted, the Tilly Tax creates the first contractual parity-pricing mechanism for AI-displaced labour in any sector, with replicable architecture for other unions.

    Medium term · Assessed
  • Opportunity

    Royalty revenue could materially offset declining residuals income and stabilise union pension and healthcare funds under structural stress from streaming-era distribution changes.

    Medium term · Suggested
  • Risk

    Studios may accelerate production in non-SAG-AFTRA jurisdictions — UK, UAE, India — to avoid the levy, exporting displacement rather than pricing it.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Consequence

    If successful, the model is likely to be imported by musicians', voice artists', and games performers' unions within 2–3 contract cycles.

    Medium term · Suggested
Sources:Variety·IndieWire
Mentions:SAG-AFTRA →Brendan Bradley →Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) →Abu Dhabi →Persian Gulf →Iran-Azerbaijan Conflict (2026) →SB 951 →New York Times →Gulf States (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain) →Mike Rounds →Variety →robot tax →Tilly Tax →Senator Mark Warner →NATO →Bernie Sanders →ServiceNow →AI Job Displacement →AMPTP →NewsGuild →
First Reported In

Update #2 · 45,000 tech layoffs, half may be reversed

Variety· 22 Mar 2026
Read original →
Different Perspectives
European Commission
European Commission
The European Commission's draft Annex III guidelines, closed for comment on 23 July, treat algorithmic scoring in recruitment, pay and termination as high-risk regardless of whether a human signs off, echoing Spain's Audiencia Nacional ruling 101/2026 on concealed scheduling algorithms. Brussels is shifting the fight from counting AI job losses to assigning legal liability for the tools themselves.
Office for National Statistics
Office for National Statistics
The Office for National Statistics recorded UK vacancies rising to 712,000 on 21 July, the first quarterly increase this beat has tracked, with payrolled employment down 85,000 on the year against May's 210,000 fall. The bulletin names no AI cause anywhere, and that is the point: nothing in the release confirms the displacement story it gets cited to support.
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein told investors on 23 July that SAP's research headcount will not grow for twelve months because AI agents and their token costs are absorbing the work, not because SAP is cutting jobs. He frames it as commercial arithmetic: the cost of AI-assisted coding tokens plus the salaries specialist AI hires command, not people being replaced by machines.
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson argued that the 187,000 jobless-claims reading describes a market that hires little and fires little, not one AI is emptying. She said the real damage hides in eligibility rules and suppressed job postings, not in the headline layoff counts employers keep denying.
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee blamed Microsoft's push toward AI self-service for the 80 redundancies unions signed off on 22 July, not unavoidable business cause. A second Coruña procedure covering 80 more jobs runs to a 31 August deadline, and the unions want the state, not the employer, setting the pace of AI-driven cuts.
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
More than 200 academics, including 16 Nobel laureates, published a 13 July letter warning of AI-driven labour disruption, citing Daron Acemoglu's NBER estimate that AI's total factor productivity gain stays under 0.66% over ten years. The letter's own cited economics sit well below Goldman Sachs Research's 1.5-percentage-point estimate published the same week.