FCC Adds All Foreign-Produced Advanced Robotic Devices to the Covered List

On July 28, 2026, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) added “foreign-produced advanced robotic devices” to the Covered List maintained under Section 2 of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (Secure Networks Act).¹ The Bureau also added “foreign-produced power inverters”; this Update primarily addresses the robotics entry.

The listing implements a National Security Determination (NSD) transmitted to the Commission the previous day by a White House–convened Executive Branch interagency body.² Because equipment on the Covered List may not receive an FCC equipment authorization,³ the listing bars new models of covered robots — humanoids, quadrupeds, autonomous mobile robots, and other wheeled or tracked ground platforms — from being imported, marketed, or sold in the United States absent a Conditional Approval from the Department of War (the Department).

The robotics and power inverters listings are the third and fourth categorywide, place-of-production listing in eight months, following foreign-produced uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) and UAS critical components in December 2025 and foreign-produced consumer-grade routers in March 2026.⁴ The Commission treats such listings as nondiscretionary once a qualifying determination arrives, and because the equipment is identified by place of production rather than by entity, the entity-focused rules and programs elsewhere in Part 2 are not triggered.⁵ The robotics listing resembles the UAS and routers listings, but three departures matter: “Foreign-produced” is now defined by the Buy American Act (BAA) “domestic end product” standard; components are not separately listed; and relief runs through the Department alone and closes to new applicants on January 1, 2028. Together they shift the compliance burden from consulting a government list to performing — and certifying to — a component cost calculation.

Two features of the broader federal landscape frame the action. First, it is the most consequential measure yet directed at the hardware layer of artificial intelligence, or AI. The determination opens by invoking the Administration’s AI Action Plan and its identification of robotics as a next-generation technology essential to national security,⁶ and the definition of a covered device expressly incorporates AI and machine-learning model weights, whether running onboard or remotely.⁷ Yet coverage turns entirely on hardware provenance, and federal AI policy has otherwise addressed the model and infrastructure layers in a deregulatory posture.⁸ Second, the closest existing analog is the Commerce Department’s connected vehicle rule, from which the robotics definition borrows, addressing the same class of networked, sensor-laden mobile platforms. The policies diverge: Commerce turned on a nexus to China or Russia and phased its prohibitions in by model year, while this listing turns on place of production regardless of nationality and took effect immediately.⁹ Companies expecting connected-vehicle-style phase-ins and authorization machinery will not find them here.

A. “Foreign-Produced” Now Means “Not a Domestic End Product”

The Robotics NSD defines “foreign-produced” as any article that would not qualify as a “domestic end product” as that term is defined in 48 CFR § 25.101(a).¹⁰ That provision applies the familiar two-part BAA test: The article must be manufactured in the United States, and the cost of its domestic components must exceed a specified percentage of the cost of all components.¹¹ The threshold is 65% for items delivered through 2028, rising to 75% in 2029.¹² This is the first time a Covered List entry has been defined by reference to a trade-law standard.

The prior actions differed. The inclusion of UAS on the Covered List left “produced in a foreign country” undefined, although the Department later determined that UAS meeting the BAA standard would be given a temporary exception subject to a sunset now set at January 1, 2028.¹³ The designation of routers as covered equipment swept in devices for which “any major stage” of production, including design and development, occurred abroad.¹⁴ Three consequences follow.

• Structural rather than temporary. A robot that qualifies as a domestic end product is not covered equipment at all: no exception, no Conditional Approval, and no Department action is required, and nothing expires. That is a more durable position than the sunsetting exception in the UAS policy. However, FCC Equipment Authorization may still be required.
• Foreign design and development are no longer disqualifying — but are relevant if a waiver is needed. Section 25.101(a) asks where the article was manufactured and what its components cost, not where it was designed. Similarly, the FCC Equipment Authorization process does not require an assessment of where equipment is designed and developed. But the annex describing the waiver process asks separately for the country of origin of the robot’s design and onboard software,¹⁵ so the Department will weigh provenance in the Conditional Approval assessment even though it does not bear on the threshold definition.
• Allied content does not count. Section 25.101(a) credits domestic components under the BAA standard; the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) counterpart at 48 CFR § 225.101, which credits “U.S. and qualifying country” components sourced from treaty partners, is not incorporated.¹⁶ Manufacturers seeking a waiver should carefully ensure that they are applying the BAA standard rather than the DFARS standard.

Components are treated differently as well. The UAS entry separately covers “UAS critical components” through an open-ended list of eight categories;¹⁷ the robotics entry lists none. Components appear only as scoping criteria within the device definition, which requires a ground-mobile machine operating at a distance from a human operator, weighing more than 4.4 pounds including any dock, and containing a sensor, connectivity of at least 200 kbps, and controlling software.¹⁸ An actuator or battery sold on its own is not covered. But because “foreign-produced” turns on domestic component cost, foreign components remain determinative in the aggregate and by value: The question shifts from whether a part is listed to whether foreign parts exceed the applicable percentage of total component cost.

B. Scope and Exclusions

The definition excludes, among other things, connected vehicles as defined in the Commerce Department’s rule; rail vehicles; uncrewed aircraft and UAS; unmanned underwater vehicles; devices regulated under Section 513 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; and fixed, stationary industrial robots.¹⁹ The connected vehicle exclusion extends to vehicles “of any gross weight,” reaching above the 10,000-pound ceiling in Commerce’s own definition. What remains squarely in scope is broad: consumer household robots above the weight threshold, warehouse autonomous mobile robots, sidewalk delivery robots, inspection quadrupeds, and humanoid platforms. Consumer devices are intended targets rather than collateral; the determination’s evidence rests in part on a 2026 vulnerability that exposed camera feeds and interior maps from thousands of household robots.²⁰

C. Relief: Narrower for New Models, Prompter for Fielded Ones

The Conditional Approval process is more challenging for advanced robotics than for other recent additions to the Covered List in three ways. The Department acts alone, where the UAS, router, and power inverter entries each permit the Department of War or the Department of Homeland Security to act. There is no categorical safe harbor, as no analog to the drone policy’s Blue UAS Cleared List exists for ground robots. And an application deadline replaces the 18-month approval term used for routers: The robotics guidance states no term and instead requires applications by January 1, 2028,²¹ so missing the deadline forecloses the individualized pathway altogether. The formalities are also stricter, requiring a machine-readable PDF and an officer certification.²²

One element runs the other way. Amendments to 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b) and 2.1043(b) effective in December 2025 exclude Covered List equipment from the permissive change procedures, so grandfathering an authorization does not by itself preserve the ability to modify the device; absent relief, a robot authorized before July 28, 2026, could not have received even a Class I security patch.²³ The FCC Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) waived those prohibitions the same day for Class I and Class II software and firmware updates that mitigate harm to U.S. consumers, at least until January 1, 2029.²⁴ That relief issued contemporaneously with the listing, where the UAS and router waivers came afterward and were extended and expanded in May 2026.²⁵

D. Conditional Approval as Industrial Policy

The robotics waiver annex tracks the router annex closely on corporate structure and supply chain disclosure. The onshoring section, however, is expanded: Applicants must now quantify additional hiring, planned expansion of domestic manufacturing space in square feet, and planned investment.²⁶ These are commitments about capital allocation and employment, made to a national security agency, secured by an officer certification, enforced by termination and permanent preclusion from reapplying, and reviewed at the Department’s discretion with all decisions final.²⁷ The plan filed becomes the benchmark for the quarterly reports.

E. Practical Implications

• Verify grandfathered status at the model and FCC ID level. The listing operates prospectively, but a product developed or placed in inventory before July 28, 2026, that had not yet received its authorization is not grandfathered.
• Map planned device changes against the OET waiver. The ability to modify a previously authorized robot rests entirely on the July 28 OET waiver, which suspends only the prohibitions; the ordinary permissive change requirements continue to apply, and hardware changes fall outside it.²⁸
• Run the domestic content analysis now and document it. The certification that equipment is not covered now embeds a Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 25 conclusion.
• Decide on a Conditional Approval application against the January 1, 2028, deadline. Weigh the disclosure exposure — bill of materials, sourcing detail, ownership information, and multiyear capital commitments — against the value of the U.S. market for affected models.

The listing is best read as the current iteration of a template the Executive Branch continues to adjust and as the point at which AI industrial policy became operative in a licensing regime. Companies with connected mobile hardware should not assume they fall outside it but should carefully evaluate how the definition applies to particular products and consider whether to submit a Conditional Approval request.

---

¹ FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Addition of Foreign-Produced Power Inverters and Advanced Robotic Devices to FCC Covered List, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA 26-786 (PSHSB rel. July 28, 2026) (Public Notice); see 47 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1609; 47 CFR §§ 1.50002, 1.50003.

² National Security Determination on the Threat Posed by Foreign-Produced Advanced Robotic Devices (July 27, 2026) (Robotics NSD), attached as Appendix C to the Public Notice.

³ 47 CFR § 2.903(a); see also id. § 2.911(d)(5)(i).

⁴ Public Notice at Appx. A (entries dated December 22, 2025, and March 23, 2026).

⁵ Public Notice at 4 (citing 47 CFR §§ 2.903, 2.906, 2.907, 2.911, 2.929, 2.932, 2.938, 2.1033, 2.1043).

⁶ Robotics NSD at 1 & n.1 (citing The White House, Winning the Race: America’s AI Action Plan (July 2025)).

⁷ Robotics NSD, Definitions (Advanced Robotic Devices) (A)(iv)(iii).

⁸ See Exec. Order No. 14365, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence (Dec. 11, 2025).

⁹ See 15 CFR §§ 791.301-.304 (prohibitions phased in beginning with model year 2027 for covered software and model year 2030 for connectivity hardware).

¹⁰ Robotics NSD, Definitions (Foreign-Produced).

¹¹ 48 CFR § 25.101(a)(1)-(2).

¹² 48 CFR § 25.101(a)(2)(i) (65% for items delivered through 2028; 75% starting in 2029).

¹³ Public Notice at Appx. A (UAS entry, exceptions (a) and (b), as updated).

¹⁴ National Security Determination on the Threat Posed by Routers Produced by Foreign Countries at 2 (Mar. 20, 2026) (Routers NSD).

¹⁵ Annex A: Guidance on Submissions for Conditional Approval for Foreign-Produced Advanced Robotic Devices Subject to the FCC’s Covered List § 2(b), (f) (July 27, 2026) (Robotics Annex A).

¹⁶ Compare 48 CFR § 25.101(a)(2) with 48 CFR § 225.101(a)(1)(ii)(A).

¹⁷ UAS NSD, Definitions (Dec. 21, 2025).

¹⁸ Robotics NSD, Definitions (Advanced Robotic Devices) (A)(i)-(iv).

¹⁹ Id. (B)(i)-(vi); see 47 CFR § 88.5; 21 U.S.C. § 360c; 15 CFR § 791.301 (excluding vehicles over 10,000 pounds; Commerce has stated that it intends to address commercial vehicles separately).

²⁰ Robotics NSD at 3.

²¹ Robotics Annex A at 1; Routers NSD, Annex A.

²² Robotics Annex A at 1.

²³ 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b), 2.1043(b); see 90 Fed. Reg. 53227 (Nov. 25, 2025) (effective December 2025).

²⁴ OET Announces Waiver of Prohibitions on Certain Class I and Class II Permissive Changes to Covered Foreign-Produced Advanced Robotic Devices and Power Inverters, Public Notice, DA 26-789 (rel. July 28, 2026) (Robotics Waiver).

²⁵ Public Notice, DA 26-69 (Jan. 21, 2026); Public Notice, DA 26-286 (Mar. 23, 2026); Public Notice, DA 26-454 (May 8, 2026).

²⁶ Compare Robotics Annex A § 3(d)(i)-(iii) with Routers NSD, Annex A § 3(d).

²⁷ Robotics Annex A at 1.

²⁸ Robotics Waiver at 2; see 47 CFR § 2.1043(b)(1)-(2).