The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has expanded its “Covered List” to include mobile, communicating robots weighing more than 2 kilograms, a move designed to restrict the import of foreign-produced technology deemed a threat to national security. Effective as of the July 28, 2024, announcement, the regulation bars new products from foreign countries that incorporate on-board sensing, communications, and autonomy from receiving FCC authorization, unless the Department of Defense (DOD) determines they do not pose an unacceptable security risk. The measure is part of a broader federal effort to limit U.S. reliance on sensitive technology, with the FCC requiring manufacturers to submit a detailed, time-bound plan for establishing or expanding U.S.-based production to gain potential clearance.
While the FCC characterizes its action as “country neutral,” the policy is widely viewed as a targeted effort to curb the integration of Chinese robotics into critical U.S. infrastructure. The Department of Defense, which drove the expansion of the list, cited reports—including analysis of vulnerabilities in robots manufactured by the Hangzhou-based company Unitree—as evidence of the cybersecurity risks posed by foreign mobile platforms. Government officials argue that because mobile robots are increasingly essential to both the national economy and military operations, the United States must foster a domestic industrial base to avoid dependence on potentially compromised foreign supply chains.
The Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China responded to the ruling during a press conference on July 29, 2024, criticizing the U.S. for “overstretching the concept of national security.” The Chinese government stated that the measures discriminate against and suppress Chinese enterprises, arguing that such protectionism will ultimately harm the interests of U.S. companies and consumers. Beijing maintains that it will take the necessary actions to defend the rights and interests of its domestic firms.
Regulatory Definitions and Industry Impact
The FCC’s updated restrictions apply specifically to “advanced robotic devices,” which the agency defines as mobile systems that incorporate sensing and communication capabilities with a degree of autonomy. The mandate includes two notable exceptions: devices weighing less than 2 kilograms and systems that communicate at speeds lower than 200 kilobits per second. Importantly, the regulation applies only to new device certifications; robotics equipment already authorized for sale or use in the United States is not subject to these new import bans. Any company seeking future FCC authorization for a restricted device must submit applications to both the FCC and the DOD by the January 1, 2028, deadline.
Industry reaction has been varied, with some U.S.-based companies viewing the ban as an opportunity to strengthen the domestic market. Brendan Schulman, vice president of policy at Boston Dynamics, described the move on LinkedIn as potentially the first in a series of policies that will define the industry’s growth for decades. Similarly, Gavin Kenneally, CEO of the U.S.-based quadruped manufacturer Ghost Robotics, supported the decision, stating that the move encourages stronger cybersecurity and a more level competitive environment. Kenneally noted that the industry faces a challenge not just from other companies, but from a coordinated national strategy by foreign competitors, which he alleged has led to the deployment of “active and purposeful spyware” within the United States.
Perspectives on Supply Chain Sovereignty
Not all industry leaders anticipate that the ban will fundamentally alter the market. Nic Radford, CEO of the U.S.-based humanoid robotics firm Persona, suggested that many American customers already prioritize the ability to audit technology and maintain systems without relying on fragile overseas supply chains. For these customers, the regulatory shift may simply align with existing procurement preferences. Philipp Frey, vice president of strategy for the Swiss company ANYbotics, noted that their enterprise customers increasingly evaluate robots based on long-term reliability, software capability, and safety certification rather than hardware cost alone. ANYbotics has indicated it intends to pursue conditional approval for future products, a process that will require disclosing company ownership, supply chain risks, and plans for U.S. manufacturing.
The broader strategy of using blanket import bans has faced academic scrutiny. In a report published on July 9, 2024, Kyle Chan, a sociologist at the Brookings Institution, described current U.S. approaches to Chinese technology risks as “ad hoc and fragmented.” Chan argued that a more centralized, proportionate process—managed by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security—would be more effective. He suggested that such an approach could allow American industry to benefit from partnerships with foreign manufacturers in less sensitive areas of the supply chain while still mitigating well-defined security threats. Chan cautioned that “crude bans” could inadvertently hinder innovation for American startups and researchers by cutting off access to essential software and components.
As the January 1, 2028, deadline for new FCC and DOD submissions approaches, companies will be forced to weigh the costs of establishing U.S.-based manufacturing against the potential loss of access to the American market. Because a significant portion of global robotics components currently originates in China, even firms that shift final assembly to the United States will face complex negotiations regarding their supply chain dependencies. The ongoing implementation of these rules remains subject to further DOD review and potential updates to the “Covered List” as the federal government refines its criteria for assessing national security risks in the robotics sector.