CCP drones, the NDAA audit, and what it means for buyers — A clear, calm explainer
Updated December 11, 2025
TL;DR: Congress has moved to block certain Chinese-made drones from U.S. infrastructure over national-security concerns.
A high-level bill called the Countering CCP Drones and Supporting Drones for Law Enforcement Act (S.4792 / H.R.2864) would more directly restrict the sale and operation of some Chinese systems. Instead, key language in the FY2025 National Defense Authorization Act created a one-year window for a U.S. security agency to review companies such as DJI. If no agency performs and clears that audit by the statutory deadline, the Federal Communications Commission must add those companies to its “covered list,” which effectively prevents new device approvals and imports of radios/camera-equipped devices from those manufacturers.
The audit deadline that’s been widely reported is December 23, 2025 — if nothing changes, enforcement actions tied to that process could follow.
Below is a straightforward, non-hype guide: what the law and the debate actually say, what has happened so far, and what’s happened recently.
If you’re up to speed on the history, skip directly to the pragmatic steps organizations and buyers can take now — including an FAQ and other resources that aim to reduce uncertainty.
We’ll also cover why U.S.-made, auditable platforms (like Vision Aerial’s systems) are a practical alternative for teams that want supply chain transparency and long-term operational certainty.
Quick facts first
The Countering CCP Drones bills in Congress seek to limit or ban certain Chinese-made drone models from U.S. networks and infrastructure.
The FY2025 NDAA instead set a process: an “appropriate national security agency” should review certain vendors; if the audit isn’t done by the deadline, the FCC will put them on a covered list. That action has been interpreted widely as a path that could lead to practical import/approval restrictions.
A lot of the media and industry conversation has focused on DJI (as the market leader), but the legislation and follow-on proposals have broader implications for other non-U.S. vendors with similar supply chain or ownership concerns, such as Autel.
Short history — major actions since Fall 2024
Sept 2024: The House passed a version of the Countering CCP Drones Act aimed at restricting certain Chinese vendors from U.S. infrastructure. The bill had bipartisan support in the House. (#1)
Late 2024 (NDAA FY25): The conference text for the FY2025 NDAA included Section 1709 (or similar language) directing an analysis/review of some foreign UAS entities rather than an immediate statutory ban; this effectively created a one-year “review window.” (#2)
2025 (legislative & policy push): Multiple legislators introduced and promoted additional restrictions and phased ban proposals (e.g., “Drones for America”-style bills) that would phase out some Chinese systems over time and incentivize U.S. manufacture. Similarly, the Drones for First Responders Act was passed in June 2025. Those initiatives vary in timeframe and scope. (#3 and #4)
Recent developments since Oct 1, 2025
Oct/Nov 2025: The FCC expanded its authority over companies on the covered list by closing what it called “loopholes”. This authority now allows them to retroactively ban previously authorized devices, ban affiliates, tighten supply chain, and block modular components. This led to Operation Clean Carts, which scrubbed banned devices from manufacturers' websites. (#5)
Some states already have CCP drone procurement limits or bans in place, including Texas, Nevada, Florida, Arkansas, and Mississippi. (#6)
Media outlets and industry analysts have been reporting intensifying timelines and attention on the NDAA deadline — with growing concern that no audit had been announced and therefore an automatic covered-list action could occur at year-end. Coverage in outlets such as The Verge and TechRadar summarized the situation and warned about the practical consequences of adding major vendors to the FCC covered list (e.g., import restrictions, restricted approvals). (#7)
Congress and some senators continued proposing companion or follow-on measures to tighten controls or set longer phase-out dates for Chinese components in the drone market. These are proposals and remain subject to committee and floor action. (#3)
Upcoming high-impact dates to watch
December 23, 2025: Widely cited date tied to the NDAA audit window — if no official audit and clearance are recorded by an appropriate U.S. agency, the FCC could be directed to add certain vendors to its covered list, which would materially restrict future approvals and imports. (This is the milestone that has driven much of the 2025 press coverage.) However, a restriction is not necessarily automatic. While there is an automatic trigger in the legislation, also note the 75-day pause on the TikTok ban that was implemented in January 2025, but it is still in play.
2026 and beyond: Expect continued legislative proposals and hearings. Some lawmakers have proposed phased bans (e.g., 2028 for devices and later for components); those bills are proposals and would take time and votes to implement. Keep an eye on bills like “Drones for America” variants and related committee activity.
Bottom line: the regulatory landscape has tightened and is actively evolving. The end-of-year audit deadline and other proposed legislative moves have pushed many organizations to evaluate alternative suppliers, compliance posture, and continuity plans.
FAQ — practical questions answered
Q: Is DJI (or other Chinese drones) already banned in the U.S.?
A: Not universally banned today in normal consumer/enterprise use. However, the NDAA’s audit process can lead to being added to the FCC’s “covered list,” which would create meaningful restrictions on new device approvals and imports of new drones with radios or cameras from listed vendors. That’s why many organizations are concerned about supply continuity and future procurement options. Furthermore, several popular models of DJI drones have not been readily available for some months, just recently coming back into stock in the U.S.
Q: Does being on the covered list mean I can’t use my current DJI or Autel systems?
A: Being on the covered list doesn’t necessarily flip a single switch to “illegal” for every deployed aircraft, but it does block new equipment approvals, complicate imports, and prevent products from being used on FCC-regulated networks. Over time, the practical effect is a de facto market restriction and difficulty maintaining vendor support and firmware updates — which are critical for safety and security.
It is worth noting that the FCC recently established the power to retroactively pull radio licenses, which has caused some fears that they could functionally ground currently deployed system, however there is no evidence so far that they intend to. (#4)
Q: Who’s affected — government, industry, small business?
A: Broadly speaking: government agencies (federal, state, local), public safety, utilities, agriculture, AEC, and many commercial users rely on these platforms. If a vendor is limited, it affects vendors’ ability to ship new hardware, offer services, and provide software updates — all of which impact operations and long-term sustainment. The impact will vary by organization size and mission.
Q: Should we ground existing fleets?
A: No. Panic is unhelpful. Most existing equipment will not instantly stop working or be banned from flying. In fact, the current legislation is about imports and sales, not about actually flying. But you should act prudently: assess inventory, software updates and support windows, and create a near-term risk-mitigation plan. Consider alternative platforms (especially U.S.-made or auditable supply chain options) for future purchases and mission-critical deployments.
Q: What steps should a procurement or operations leader take now?
A: Practical checklist:
Inventory: Log models, serials, firmware versions, and support contracts.
Support status: Identify warranties, parts availability, and timeline for end-of-life notifications.
Operational risk: Flag the most mission-critical operations that would be hardest to replace or suspend.
Explore alternatives: Evaluate U.S.-made or auditable platforms and vendors with strong supply chain transparency.
Plan a staged migration: Prioritize mission-critical roles (e.g., public safety, strict contracts) for replacement or dual-vendor strategies to avoid reliance on a single supply source.
Talk to vendors: Ask direct questions about parts inventories, software update policies, and contingency plans.
Q: If I buy a non-Chinese drone today, am I guaranteed stability?
A: No vendor can guarantee future global politics. But buying from vendors with U.S. support, spare-parts inventories in the U.S., and auditable supply chains greatly lowers your operational risk and gives procurement teams clearer documentation for grants and public contracts.
Q: Can my small business afford to pivot?
A: Short-term costs exist, but factor in the risk of downtime, unsupported hardware, and lost contracts. For many organizations, it’s better to plan a phased migration and use pilot projects to spread cost and risk.
Q: How can Vision Aerial help?
A: Vision Aerial builds U.S.-based systems engineered for the field, with modular payload support and domestic support channels. That combination helps teams sustain operations while meeting procurement transparency expectations. (If you want a tailored migration checklist for your fleet, reach out to our team and we’ll walk through a pragmatic plan.)
Why American-made, transparent platforms matter now (and what to look for)
If you need continuity for public safety, utilities, AEC, or mission-critical roles, vendor transparency and on-shore or allied-country manufacturing become practical risk-management criteria.
Look for:
Supply chain transparency & auditable components: can the vendor document where critical components come from and if they have adequate supply and contingency plans
On-shore support & spare parts: U.S.-based support and access to U.S.-based spare parts reduce logistical risk
NDAA / procurement familiarity: vendors who already supply government agencies understand security reviews and documentation practices
Local warranty & training options: reduces downtime and operational risk
Modular & open integrations: the ability to swap sensors and change radios future-proofs you if a single OEM becomes constrained
Continued value add: true industrial systems help you move away from consumer models where the system needs to be replaced every couple of years. Instead, create upgrade paths to keep the system running for 5 - 10 yrs. While the upfront cost may be more, the lifetime cost tends to be considerably less.
Vision Aerial’s 13 year history — as an American company with field-focused aircraft and a focus on auditable integrations — makes it a pragmatic alternative for teams that want to reduce supply chain risk and maintain operational continuity. We design systems for durability, provide local support, and build platforms that accept multiple payloads, so customers can choose auditable sensor and comms stacks rather than be locked into a single, potentially vulnerable supplier.
Note: this is not legal advice. Organizations with statutory or grant obligations should consult counsel or their procurement offices about specific compliance requirements.
What a measured transition plan looks like
Continuity Planning, Short term (now → 3 months): Inventory, engage vendor reps, secure spares for mission-critical fleets, and prioritize the most sensitive operations for contingency.
Migration Pilot, Medium term (3 → 6 months): Ideally, pilot American-made alternative platforms in parallel on selected missions. Alternatively, schedule field demo missions with selected vendors to gather data. Validate workflows for photogrammetry, LiDAR, inspection, and public-safety uses. Start training and documentation changes for the new stack.
Fleet Migration, Long term (6+ months): Migrate mission-critical fleets to auditable, supported systems where practical; maintain a small legacy fleet with a decommission plan if necessary. Embed procurement rules for supply chain documentation.
Final thought
Policy shifts around foreign-manufactured drones are driven by real national-security concerns, but they don’t have to mean operational panic. Treat this as a risk-management and procurement exercise: get your inventory in order, identify mission-critical exposures, and test auditable alternatives now rather than react later. For many organizations, that means planning a phased move to systems with on-shore support and clear component provenance — a practical step that reduces headache and keeps teams flying when it matters most.
Sources & further reading
Text and summary, S.4792 — Countering CCP Drones and Supporting Drones for Law Enforcement Act
FY2025 NDAA / conference text: analysis of Section 1709 and implications
Text and summary, Legislative proposals and follow-on bills (e.g., “Drones for America” proposals), S.2168 — Drones for America Act and Additional commentary from Sen. Rick Scott
Text and summary, S.3786 — Drones for First Responders Act
Coverage and explainers: FAQ and explanation of NDAA audit window and implications for DJI