DJI US Ban Looms in 42 Days as Government Fails to Begin Required Audit

Industry NewsDrone News

by Nino LeitnerNovember 11^th, 2025

Subscribe to News - Industry

With just 42 days until a December 23, 2025 deadline, DJI faces an automatic ban in the United States unless a federal agency completes a mandated security audit. Section 1709 of the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act requires an “appropriate national security agency” to assess whether DJI drones pose unacceptable security risks. If no determination is made by the deadline, DJI will be automatically added to the FCC’s Covered List, effectively banning new product certifications and blocking future drone imports. Despite nearly a year passing since the NDAA’s enactment, no US agency has initiated the review process, prompting DJI to launch an urgent advocacy campaign through the Drone Advocacy Alliance calling for either immediate action or a deadline extension. Let’s dive into the latest on the looming DJI US ban.

The clock is ticking for the world’s largest drone manufacturer. DJI posted a stark warning on Instagram yesterday, alerting U.S.-based drone operators that “a deadline that could decide DJI’s fate in the US is just 43 days away.” The company emphasized that under the FY25 NDAA, the government was meant to audit Chinese drone manufacturers including DJI before any bans could take effect. However, according to DJI, “no audit has been done.”

The situation represents a critical juncture for filmmakers, cinematographers, and content creators who have built their workflows around DJI’s ecosystem. From the ubiquitous Mini series to professional tools like the Inspire 3 and Ronin 4D, DJI products dominate the commercial drone market with an estimated 76% market share in the United States.

Section 1709 and the audit requirement

When Congress passed the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act in December 2024 (full bill text here if you’re into that), lawmakers deliberately avoided including the more aggressive Countering CCP Drones Act that would have immediately banned DJI products. Instead, Section 1709 mandated a one-year review process. The provision requires a designated national security agency to determine whether communications and video surveillance equipment from Chinese manufacturers, specifically naming DJI and Autel Robotics, pose “an unacceptable risk to national security.”

The deadline: December 23, 2025. Nearly one year has passed since the NDAA’s enactment, and according to multiple reports, no federal agency has formally begun the security assessment. DJI sent letters to five agencies in March 2025 (Department of Homeland Security, Department of Defense, FBI, NSA, and Office of the Director of National Intelligence) requesting initiation of the mandated review. None have confirmed they’re conducting the audit.

Adam Welsh, DJI’s Head of Global Policy, explained the company’s position: “DJI has repeatedly expressed its readiness to take part in a transparent, timely, and fair audit through official channels. More than ten months have now passed with no sign that the process has begun.”

What happens on December 23?

If no agency completes the security determination by the deadline, the consequences are automatic and immediate. DJI will be added to the FCC’s Covered List under the Secure and Trusted Communication Networks Act. This designation would prohibit the FCC from authorizing DJI’s communications equipment, effectively blocking any new product that contains radio transmitters from receiving FCC approval.

For filmmakers and content creators, this means no new DJI drones, gimbals, wireless video systems, or camera equipment could enter the U.S. market. Existing products would remain legal to operate, but support, firmware updates, and replacement parts could become increasingly difficult to obtain. The ban would apply to new model certifications, not retroactively to already-approved equipment currently in use.

The FCC recently voted 3-0 to grant itself additional authority to retroactively revoke previously authorized equipment in specific cases, though this power has not been applied to DJI as the company is not currently on the Covered List.

The 30-day compression controversy

Adding urgency to an already tight timeline, lawmakers in July 2025 pushed for compressing the audit process to just 30 days. Representatives Elise Stefanik, John Moolenaar, and Rick Crawford submitted a formal request urging federal agencies to complete the review within this accelerated timeframe.

DJI responded with concern, arguing that “a credible assessment must allow time for evidence to be reviewed, and it must include meaningful opportunities for engagement, clarification, and responsible dialogue.” The company emphasized that a rushed audit risks undermining the intent of the original legislation, which called for a thorough, evidence-based determination.

The Drone Advocacy Alliance campaign

Facing this existential threat, DJI launched an advocacy push directing U.S. users to the Drone Advocacy Alliance website. The organization, which is sponsored by and maintained by DJI Technology Inc., provides tools for drone operators to contact their congressional representatives urging a deadline extension or immediate audit commencement.

The website allows users to automatically match with their members of Congress through a form submission, generating messages that ask lawmakers to “modify the provision by adding an amendment to this year’s NDAA to delay the deadline date, appoint a single agency in charge of carrying out this analysis and ensure that the results are made public.”

The Drone Advocacy Alliance describes itself as “a non-partisan, drone-agnostic grassroots advocacy coalition,” though its transparent DJI sponsorship has drawn scrutiny. In May 2024, Representatives Moolenaar and Stefanik urged the Department of Justice to investigate the Alliance for potential Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations, characterizing it as part of what they called a “CCP-led disinformation and propaganda campaign.”

DJI maintains that the Alliance represents a broad coalition of drone users whose livelihoods depend on access to Chinese-manufactured equipment, not just company interests. Partners include the Drone Service Providers Alliance, Blue Nose Aerial Imaging, Dronelink, DroneSense, and the Pilot Institute.

Impact on the film and content creation industry

For professional cinematographers and content creators, a DJI ban would force significant workflow changes. The company’s dominance in the commercial drone market means alternatives are limited, particularly at competitive price points. American manufacturers like Skydio focus primarily on enterprise and public safety applications rather than cinema-grade imaging tools.

Professional productions currently relying on DJI systems like the Inspire 3 with Zenmuse X9 cameras, or the Mavic 3 Pro Cine for compact aerial cinematography, would need to source equipment before the potential December cutoff. Existing inventory would remain operational, but accessing new models, replacement parts, or next-generation technology could become impossible.

The situation also affects ground-based equipment. DJI’s Ronin gimbal series, RS stabilizers, and wireless video transmission systems like the DJI Transmission could all face import restrictions as they contain radio transmitters requiring FCC authorization.

Previous CineD coverage

We previously covered this developing situation in depth, examining the broader implications of U.S. drone restrictions for filmmakers and content creators. The ongoing uncertainty has already impacted DJI’s U.S. operations, with many products showing “sold out” status on the company’s official store and inventory tightening at major retailers including Best Buy, Amazon, and B&H Photo.

U.S. Customs has also increased scrutiny of DJI shipments in recent months, with some imports experiencing delays, though these actions are not formally tied to the NDAA provision.

Timeline and next steps

The December 23, 2025 deadline is fixed in legislation. For the ban to be avoided, one of three outcomes must occur: a federal agency completes the security audit and determines DJI does not pose unacceptable risks; Congress amends the NDAA to extend the deadline; or Congress removes the provision entirely.

DJI has publicly stated it welcomes the audit and believes its products can withstand scrutiny. The company points to its technical safeguards, user-controlled data transmission settings, and the fact that drone operators themselves control whether collected data is transmitted or stored locally.

However, political will appears divided. While some lawmakers view Chinese-manufactured drones as genuine security threats, others argue the restrictions would disrupt thousands of American businesses, first responders, and content creators who depend on DJI’s technology for their operations.

What are your thoughts on the pending DJI ban deadline? Have you already started contingency planning or exploring alternatives? How would a DJI ban impact your production workflows and equipment investments? Don’t hesitate to let us know in the comments below!