Congress is poised to take down a significant player in the drone industry, but the fallout could ground American hobbyists and hit taxpayers in their wallets. Here’s what you need to know about the potential impact if Congress bans DJI drones.
The proposed Countering CCP Drones Act primarily targets DJI, the world’s leading drone manufacturer. If passed, the act would place DJI on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) blacklist, preventing new DJI drones from using essential communication networks in the U.S.
This move could stifle innovation in the drone market and likely drive up costs for hobby drone pilots and photographers looking to upgrade their equipment. Additionally, it could lead to higher prices for government drone purchases, which means American taxpayers would ultimately foot the bill. All of this hinges on legislation that could ban DJI drones.
What Will Happen if Congress Bans DJI Drones
Inside the Countering CCP Drones Act
The bill in question, H.R. 2864, also known as the “Countering CCP Drones Act,” was introduced by Representatives Elise Stefanik (R-NY) and Mike Gallagher (R-WI) with a clear focus on Shenzhen Da-Jiang Innovations Sciences and Technologies Company Limited, better known as DJI Technologies. DJI, a Chinese-based company, dominates the global drone market, but this proposed legislation aims at the company, citing security concerns and its ties to China.
If passed, the bill would implement a far-reaching ban on DJI drones, explicitly blocking introducing any new DJI models in the U.S. market. Notably, the ban would apply only to new drones manufactured after the law goes into effect, which means existing DJI drone owners wouldn’t have to worry about losing access to their current devices. DJI drone users could continue to fly their own drones without issue. This marks a significant change from earlier proposals that considered revoking the authorization of drones already in use, potentially rendering them inoperable.
However, while existing DJI drones would remain functional, the ban could seriously affect future drone innovation and availability. DJI technologies would be barred from operating on U.S. communications infrastructure, a critical component for drone functionality. Drones depend heavily on Federal Communications Commission (FCC) networks for data transmission, GPS, and connectivity. New DJI drones could not operate legally within the U.S. market without access to FCC-approved networks. The FCC would also be prohibited from approving any new equipment authorizations for DJI products, effectively preventing future models from being sold or used in the U.S.
The implications extend beyond just hobbyists and professional drone photographers. DJI’s products are widely used by government agencies, including fire departments, law enforcement, and infrastructure inspection teams. The ban could force these sectors to seek alternative, often more expensive drone options, driving up costs and potentially affecting the quality of services provided. For taxpayers, this could mean increased government spending on more costly replacements or less efficient drone solutions.
The potential loss of affordable, cutting-edge drones from DJI would likely create a gap in the U.S. market, especially given the company’s reputation for producing reliable, high-performance drones at accessible prices. This could make purchasing new equipment more expensive for enthusiasts and professionals alike, as domestic and non-Chinese alternatives would have less competition, likely driving up prices. For consumers, photographers, and drone operators, this proposed legislation could introduce significant financial and operational challenges in a sector that has seen rapid growth and adoption in recent years.
This bill doesn’t exist in isolation. It comes when lawmakers also debate bans on other Chinese technologies, like TikTok. While the specific issues differ—TikTok is tied to social media influence, while DJI drones raise concerns over potential surveillance—the underlying anxiety remains the same: Chinese tech companies could collect user data or serve as tools for espionage. Both proposed bans prompt similar questions about whether such sweeping actions are genuinely effective in addressing the nuanced challenges of national security.
“Communist China is leveraging their dominance in the drone market and telecom infrastructure to gather data on Americans and monitor our infrastructure,” said Rep. Elise Stefanik (R–N.Y.), the sponsor of the Countering CCP Drones Act.
What a DJI Drone Ban Could Do to the Hobby Drone Industry
A ban on DJI drones could significantly disrupt the hobby drone market and beyond. DJI’s dominance, accounting for over 50% of U.S. drone sales, makes it a key player in providing affordable, user-friendly drones. Without DJI, hobbyists might face a severe lack of options, as few American-made alternatives exist in the under-$500 range.
Skydio, a U.S. competitor, shut down its consumer drone line in 2023, focusing instead on military and enterprise markets. Other non-DJI options, like the Autel Evo Lite+, are also made in China, which might not address the national security concerns the ban aims to tackle.
The absence of DJI could lead to higher prices and reduced quality of available drones. This shift would affect hobbyists and industries relying on affordable drones for agriculture and infrastructure inspections. Ultimately, while the intent is to address security risks, the ban could also limit innovation and accessibility in the drone market.
Other Legislation that Limits DJI Drones
Several legislative measures are currently being proposed or enacted to limit the use of DJI drones, reflecting heightened concerns over national security and data privacy.
American Security Drone Act of 2023: This bipartisan bill prohibits federal agencies from purchasing drones made by companies with links to the Chinese government. Key sponsors include Senators Mitt Romney (R-UT), Mark Warner (D-VA), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Christopher Murphy (D-CT), and Josh Hawley (R-MO). The bill underscores a growing bipartisan consensus on restricting Chinese technology in sensitive areas, particularly federal operations.
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)’s Buy American Act: This regulation governs federal procurement, requiring that products purchased using federal funds be made in America to a certain percentage. This threshold is set at 65% of the product’s American components, with plans to increase it to 70% by 2029. While this act mainly impacts government contracts, it could indirectly affect the availability of drones for federal agencies by making it harder for them to purchase competitively priced, foreign-made options like those from DJI. The Act allows exceptions if no reasonably priced American-made alternatives are available, which might further complicate procurement for agencies accustomed to DJI’s affordability.
These legislative actions focus primarily on federal use, but their implications could extend to the broader market:
Innovation and Industry Impact: The absence of DJI from the market could slow technological advancement. DJI’s presence has spurred innovation across the drone industry. Without its competitive drive, other manufacturers might have less incentive to innovate rapidly, potentially stalling progress in drone technology and applications.
Broader Implications: These legislative measures reflect a more comprehensive strategy to limit reliance on Chinese technology, not just for drones but across various sectors. This approach could lead to increased development of domestic alternatives, though the transition might be slow and fraught with challenges, including higher costs and slower innovation.
The Top Things Amateur Pilots Should Be Anxious about If Congress Bans DJI Drones
If Congress moves forward with a ban on DJI drones, hobby pilots should brace for several significant changes that could affect their hobby in various ways:
Limited Choices: DJI’s dominance in the consumer drone market means finding comparable alternatives will be challenging. With a few non-DJI options available, hobbyists may struggle to find drones that meet their specifications at an affordable price. The limited availability of high-quality, budget-friendly drones could make it harder for enthusiasts to enjoy their hobby.
Reduced Innovation: DJI has been a leading force in drone innovation. From the groundbreaking sense-and-avoid technology of the Phantom 4, the Mavic Pro’s portability, and the FPV flying capabilities of the Avata, DJI has continually pushed the boundaries of drone technology. If DJI is banned, the industry might lose a significant driver of technological advancement, potentially slowing down the development of new and improved drone features.
Second-Hand Woes: While the proposed legislation targets new drone purchases, existing DJI drones won’t be affected directly. However, the second-hand market could see a significant shift. Prices for used DJI drones on platforms like eBay might rise due to increased demand and reduced availability of new models. On the flip side, current owners looking to sell their DJI drones might be able to command higher prices.
Buying Decisions: The potential for a DJI ban raises the question of whether it’s wise to buy a DJI drone now. Given the uncertainty, some hobbyists might hesitate to invest in DJI products if they believe a ban could devalue their purchase or limit future support and parts availability.
Overall, while the security concerns surrounding DJI are essential, a broad ban could unintentionally impact American consumers, limiting their options and potentially driving up costs. Hobbyists should weigh these factors carefully when considering their next drone purchase.
How it Could Increase Costs for All Taxpayers
A ban on DJI drones could lead to higher costs for hobbyists and taxpayers, as government agencies may face increased expenses. Here’s how:
Higher Costs for Government Drones: Government agencies like the National Park Service utilize DJI drones for various non-sensitive tasks like wildlife monitoring and landscape surveys. These drones are cost-effective and essential for operations that support conservation and research efforts. With DJI drones potentially banned, agencies would need to find more expensive alternatives, driving up costs for these taxpayer-funded projects.
Increased Spending on Research and Conservation: At Denali National Park, drones have been crucial for mapping and other research activities. Previously, they used the 3DR Solo, a now-defunct competitor to DJI. With limited alternatives, agencies may have to purchase drones from resellers at inflated prices or turn to pricier, less accessible options, increasing overall spending on research and conservation.
Expensive Alternatives for First Responders: DJI drones are also used by search and rescue teams, law enforcement, and other first responders for tasks like thermal imaging and indoor inspections. Models like the DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise and the Avata 2 provide these capabilities at a fraction of the cost of other enterprise-grade drones. Switching to more expensive alternatives could lead to a significant increase in operational costs for these critical services.
In short, replacing DJI drones with more costly alternatives would waste taxpayer dollars. The increased expense could impact budgets for other essential projects and services, leading to broader financial implications for the public.
Congress could consider more nuanced and targeted approaches to address security concerns surrounding drones without negatively impacting the hobbyist community. Here are some potential alternatives:
Stricter Security Protocols for All Manufacturers: Instead of focusing solely on Chinese companies, implementing rigorous security standards for all drone manufacturers could address potential risks more comprehensively. This would ensure that all drones, regardless of origin, meet high security and data protection standards.
Investing in American Drone Companies: Supporting and funding domestic drone manufacturers could help develop secure and competitive alternatives to foreign products. By fostering innovation and competition within the U.S., Congress could reduce reliance on foreign technology while creating a more secure and vibrant drone market.
Developing a Licensing System: Establishing a drone licensing framework could ensure that only pre-approved, secure models can operate. This system could include thorough vetting processes to certify the security of drones before they are used, balancing safety with the needs of hobbyists and professionals.
Drones for First Responders (DFR) Act: Introduced by Rep. Elise Stefanik in May 2024, the DFR Act proposes a more moderate approach by imposing a 30% tariff on drones made in China, with incremental increases over time. Additionally, it aims to ban the importation of drones with critical components from China by 2030. This approach seeks to address security concerns without an outright ban, allowing for a more gradual transition and allowing alternatives to emerge.
While the DFR Act has its critics, it presents a compromise by targeting economic and security issues without severely disrupting the drone market for hobbyists. This more balanced approach could be more viable and effective in addressing security concerns while minimizing negative impacts on consumers and the industry.
Drones have transformed various fields, including photography, videography, mapping, and environmental monitoring. Their ability to provide unique perspectives and enhance numerous industries is significant. As Congress considers potential drone bans, it is crucial to address security concerns while preserving the vibrant community of American drone enthusiasts and ensuring that government budgets remain intact.
To effectively address security risks, Congress should consider more targeted measures. For instance, implementing rigorous security standards for all drone manufacturers, not just those from specific countries could enhance overall security without disrupting the market. Investing in domestic drone technology can foster innovation and create secure alternatives to foreign products. Developing a certification system for secure drones would ensure that only vetted, safe models are allowed in the market, balancing security with accessibility for hobbyists and professionals.
Congress must balance safeguarding national security and supporting American consumers, businesses, and government agencies. A measured approach that addresses security risks while maintaining a dynamic and innovative drone ecosystem will help ensure that security and technological advancement coexist.
In summary, Congress should explore solutions that address security concerns without stifling innovation or placing undue financial pressure on consumers and government agencies. A balanced and strategic approach will support a secure and thriving drone industry.
Where is the Countering CCP Drones Act at Present?
The Countering CCP Drones Act has garnered significant support from House Republicans and was narrowly approved by the House of Representatives in June 2024. It passed as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA FY25) with a vote of 217 to 199, primarily along party lines.
However, the Act still faces hurdles in the Senate, where it must be voted on as part of the NDAA FY25 legislation. Given the contentious nature of the measure, there is a possibility that it could be modified or stripped from the final version of the bill to increase its chances of passing and to avoid a potential veto. The outcome in the Senate will be crucial in determining whether the Countering CCP Drones Act becomes law.
