2025 NDAA Will Lead to DJI & Autel Ban

Yesterday, December 9, the final text of the 2025 NDAA was published. It contained a slightly modified version of Rep. Stefanik’s H.R. 2864, which will all but certainly ban DJI and Autel drones from operating in the U.S. and likely result in a ban on some drones already purchased, based on comments in FCC Report 22-84 from 2023 (NDAA § 1709). Section 1709 of the 2025 NDAA directs ‘an appropriate national security agency’ to determine whether Autel and DJI ‘pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States.’

Given that the DOD has barred the use of DJI over its bases and by its personnel since 2018, combined with the high level of anti-CCP and anti-DJI sentiment in Congress, it is nearly inconceivable that whichever agency is appointed returns a positive finding for DJI and Autel to continue to operate in the U.S. Furthermore, if the appointed agency finds either company to not be a threat, § 1709 gives other agencies 180 days to perform their own evaluations and place that company on the Entities List. This makes it a near certainty that at the end of the year, DJI, Autel, and Anzu drones will all be on the FCC’s Entities List (a ban on DJI would cover Anzu Drones as well, as they have been functionally identified as a DJI subsidiary by the House of Representatives).

What Does § 1709 Say?

1) DJI and Autel (and their subsidiaries) are to be evaluated by a yet-to-be-named agency for their threat to U.S. national security (§ 1709(a)(1)).

2) If said evaluation finds DJI and Autel are threats to national security DJI and Autel will be placed on the FCC’s Entities List within 30 days of that finding (§ 1709(b)(1)(A)).

3) If there is a favorable finding for either company that they should not be put on the list, any other agency has 180 days to submit a report that they find either company to be a threat (§ 1709(b)(2)). In some ways this is the most damning provision, even if one agency lets them off, many other agencies get a de facto bite at the apple.

4) If said evaluation does not occur, DJI and Autel will be placed on the FCC’s Entities List by default in December of 2025 (§ 1709(a)(2)).

What Else Was in The NDAA?

The two other significant sections were in the 2025 NDAA for the agricultural drone industry: §162 and § 7812. Section 162 contained language expressing Congressional desire to onshore and further support American drone manufacturing. This points to an appetite on the Hill to drive support for our industry.

Section 7812(h) extended the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act’s (UHRPA) life-span from five to ten years. This is important because the UHRPA is what is used to justify the current temporary DJI import ban and will likely be used to pursue other Chinese drone companies as they rise in prominence to replace DJI.

What About Currently Owned DJI and Autel Drones?

This is a harder question to answer immediately, but the prospects do not look good. First, for all equipment on the FCC’s Entities List, any license granted after February of 2023 would be revoked automatically, with other, older licenses potentially being revoked later (the FCC has clearly determined they have the authority to revoke licenses, but have not decided to act on that authority yet). 

Second, once on the Entities List, the import of covered equipment will be banned. While batteries and other ancillary hardware will not be banned by placement on the Entities List (they are not ‘communications equipment’ technically) they may be barred under the other import restrictions DJI is already facing (such as the UHRPA import challenge and the current soft-ban). Of course, once the available battery supply is exhausted, the drones will be useless. 

While many outlets are reporting that the language in the NDAA is not a ban on equipment currently owned and operated in the U.S., that analysis ignores FCC Report 22-84, published in February 2023, in which the FCC stated that any license granted after February of 2023 to a company on the Entities List would be revoked. As such, there is a real chance that DJI and Autel licenses which were issued after February of 2023 will be revoked once they are on the list. Further the FCC held that they had the right to retroactively revoke any historic licenses which have been granted to companies on the Entities List (pg. 46, § III(B)(6)(102-03) & (b)(114-118)). This is a major concern, as drones are the first equipment on the entities list not hardwired into the national telecommunications infrastructure, and the language in 22-84 makes clear that the FFC sees license revocation as an authority that will continue to expand retroactively as the scope of the Entities List expands (pg. 47 - §III(C)(121)). Finally, by relegating authority to the FCC, the capacity to modulate regulations regarding these drones will become more flexible, more opaque, and changes will occur faster.

ADI projects that DJI and Autel products will be on the Entities list by mid-year, and expects the FCC to take action against some, if not all licenses already issued to DJI and Autel, once on the list. These will be the first companies to be placed on the Entities List where none of the equipment is mobile and not directly integrated into our national communications network. While the FCC has, to date, made a point of not pursuing on non-critical / non-embedded technologies made by companies on the Entities List (see FCC 22-84 pg. 60, note 374), because DJI and Autel do not produce any equipment that is integrated into the telecoms grid, a more aggressive treatment of their products should be expected. This is because if the FCC is trying to attack the ‘critical’ products a company makes, but none of the products a new addition makes fits the current definition of ‘critical’ the two choices are to make the addition meaningless or expand the definition of ‘critical’ (see also Lib. of Cong. ISBN 0737902906, No. 5, parag. 3, Line 11). Put differently, if they present a threat sufficient to bar their future operation, there is potentially a strong argument that they should be barred from currently operating. 

A final note - ADI does not claim to be omniscient, and other sources should be consulted and, as with any prediction, we may be wrong, that said, be wary of any analysis that does not reference FCC 22-84, as that is where much of the meat of the Entities List’s rules lay. While the Agricultural Drone Initiative will never advocate for any drone company to be banned, it is important to pragmatically consider the likely impacts of these policies and it is our assessment that a blanket operational ban should not be counted out.

What’s Next

While it is unclear when the final determination will be made, it is likely to be some time in the late spring or early summer.

The most critical next step for the agricultural drone industry is to engage with Congress to support American drone companies and advocate for tax incentives and rebate programs to ensure that the early advocates for agricultural drones that bought these products are not left behind, unintentionally harmed by larger national security concerns. There is an appetite in Congress to help, and we can make a difference - if we join together and present our arguments as a unified group. 

Additionally, the FAA expects to release the Part 108 BVLOS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in January of 2025. This may be pushed back (again) because of the outsized attention the FAA will receive from Elon Musk and DOGE, but it is hard to tell. ADI will be submitting a comment on BVLOS for the agricultural drone industry - if you have objectives and arguments to include in a Part 108 comment, we would be happy to discuss it with you.