The U.S. Senate has passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a colossal piece of legislation that, among other things, sets the stage for a potential ban on products from the world’s largest drone manufacturer, DJI. This isn’t an instant ban as many might have expected, but rather, it initiates a one-year clock for DJI to prove its products pose no threat to U.S. national security.

The NDAA, which passed with strong bipartisan support, avoids the immediate enforcement of the “Countering CCP Drones Act.” Instead, it provides DJI and another Chinese drone maker, Autel Robotics, with a year to clear their names. If they fail to do so, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is mandated to add their products to the “covered list” under the Secure and Trusted Communication Networks Act. This listing would prevent DJI’s drones and related equipment from using U.S. communication networks and block FCC authorization for their internal radios, essentially stopping new imports.

This legislation doesn’t just concern drones but extends to any communications and video surveillance equipment from DJI. The text of the bill is explicit, aiming to close loopholes where DJI might attempt to rebrand or license its technology through other entities, as seen with products like the Anzu Robotics Raptor and Cogito Specta.

The implications are vast for DJI, which has dominated the consumer drone market in the U.S., holding a significant market share. For users, this means no new DJI products would be legally importable, although there’s no immediate impact on existing drone owners. However, the broader impact on industries reliant on DJI technology, such as agriculture, public safety, and cinematography, could be profound.

The NDAA’s passage through Congress has been swift, and with it headed to President Biden’s desk, its signing is all but guaranteed due to the critical nature of defense funding it authorizes. A veto would risk a government shutdown, an outcome both parties are keen to avoid.

Looking ahead, the Trump administration, which will assume office in January 2025, will have a significant role in DJI’s fate. Whether Trump chooses to intervene or let the clock run down could define the future of DJI in the U.S. market. Given Trump’s previous administration’s stance on Chinese tech firms, DJI might find itself lobbying hard for a favorable review or even direct negotiations.

DJI has already been navigating choppy waters in the U.S. Prior to this bill, there were import restrictions linked to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, leading DJI to reduce shipments. Additionally, DJI took legal action against the U.S. Department of Defense for branding it as a “Chinese Military Company”, highlighting the company’s growing concerns over its market position in the U.S.

In response to the NDAA, DJI has publicly expressed relief that an outright ban was avoided but raised concerns over the lack of clarity on which government agency will assess the security risks of its products. They argue for a technically focused agency to undertake this evaluation to ensure it’s based on evidence, not speculation, and have asked for an opportunity to respond to findings.

This legislative development reflects broader tensions between U.S. security concerns and the integration of Chinese technology into American infrastructure and daily life. It poses a pivotal moment not just for DJI but for all stakeholders in the drone industry, from manufacturers to the myriad of users who have come to rely on DJI’s technology. As the year ticks down, all eyes will be on how DJI navigates this regulatory gauntlet and whether the U.S. government finds a path to either ban or integrate this technology safely.