Florida Senator Rick Scott is pushing FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to weaponize next week’s regulatory vote against Chinese drone manufacturers, demanding the agency retroactively revoke all DJI and Autel Robotics equipment authorizations issued since December 23rd, 2024.

In a letter sent October 20, Scott urged the FCC to use its upcoming October 28 vote to shut down what he calls a deliberate evasion strategy by Chinese drone companies creating shell companies to circumvent U.S. restrictions. The timing puts maximum pressure on the agency just one week before the critical vote.

Scott Targets Shell Company Strategy With Three Specific Demands

Scott’s letter to Chairman Carr outlines three aggressive enforcement actions he wants implemented immediately.

  • First, rescind all existing FCC equipment authorizations for DJI and Autel Robotics devices issued since the FY 2025 NDAA was enacted December 23, 2024, including any approved under proxy entities.
  • Second, deny any new licenses to devices that utilize components, software, or subsystems sourced from DJI, Autel, or their subsidiaries.
  • Third, strengthen corporate disclosure requirements in FCC filings to prevent shell companies from concealing ultimate ownership or control.

The Florida Republican cited evidence first uncovered by security researcher Konrad Iturbe and reported by DroneXL showing DJI logos in Lyno Dynamics FCC documentation.

“Such tactics clearly undermine both the intent and effectiveness of U.S. law,” Scott wrote in the letter.

FCC Vote Could Close Component Parts Loophole

The October 28 FCC vote centers on two regulatory changes that directly target the workaround strategy DJI has been building since March 2024. Chairman Carr announced the agency will vote to prohibit authorization of devices containing Covered List component parts and authorize the FCC to prohibit sale of previously authorized Covered List equipment in specific cases.

Scott championed Section 1709 of the FY 2025 NDAA, which requires a congressional-mandated investigation into Chinese drone manufacturers and creates a statutory framework for more aggressive scrutiny of foreign-controlled equipment.

“We have seen a consistent pattern from DJI and other Chinese-manufactured businesses of evading U.S. laws and regulations by continuously reestablishing under different shell companies or subsidiaries to avoid detection,” Scott stated in the letter.

Security researcher Konrad Iturbe has documented at least nine suspected DJI shell companies submitting FCC applications since March 2024, including Skyany, Skyrover, Cogito, Jovistar, Fikaxo, Lyno Dynamics, and Spatial Hover. These companies sell drones with DJI components, OcuSync frequencies, and in some cases, visible DJI logos in federal filings.

December 23 Deadline Looms as No Agency Confirms Security Review

DJI faces an automatic ban if no federal agency completes a mandatory security review by December 23, 2025—exactly one year after the NDAA was signed into law. Section 1709 mandates that a U.S. national security agency must determine whether DJI poses an unacceptable risk by that deadline.

If no agency completes the review, DJI will automatically join the FCC’s Covered List, effectively banning new drone sales by restricting spectrum access. No federal agency has confirmed they’re conducting the mandated security assessment.

Scott requested a response from Chairman Carr by close of business October 27, 2025—one day before the FCC vote. The senator framed the issue as both a national security imperative and an economic opportunity.

“We can reclaim our leadership in the global drone market, and this new proposed order can be an integral part of that effort,” Scott wrote.

DroneXL Strongly Opposes Senator Scott’s Demands for Immediate Retroactive Bans

This letter represents the most aggressive congressional push yet to accelerate DJI’s removal from the U.S. market before the automatic December ban even triggers. Scott isn’t asking the FCC to investigate shell companies—he’s demanding immediate retroactive revocation of all equipment authorizations issued in the past ten months.

The timing is strategic. By requesting a response one day before the October 28 vote, Scott is essentially forcing Carr to address these demands in real-time during the regulatory process. If the FCC adopts Scott’s recommendations, DJI’s shell company strategy collapses immediately. Companies like Skyany and Skyrover selling “non-DJI” drones with DJI components would lose their FCC authorizations overnight.

DroneXL has documented the shell company network Scott references, from Fikaxo’s DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise clone to DJI logos appearing in Skyhigh Tech FCC filings. The evidence of shell company operations is compelling and deserves scrutiny.

But we strongly oppose Senator Scott’s demands for immediate retroactive bans. This isn’t about defending shell companies—it’s about protecting the thousands of small businesses, first responders, search and rescue teams, farmers, infrastructure inspectors, and public safety agencies that have come to rely heavily on Chinese-made drones from DJI and Autel Robotics. These organizations invested in equipment based on valid FCC authorizations. Retroactively revoking those authorizations doesn’t just hurt DJI—it grounds critical operations across America.

Fire departments using DJI drones for search and rescue. Agricultural businesses using Autel for crop monitoring. Small video production companies that invested their savings in DJI equipment. Scott’s approach punishes American operators for Chinese manufacturers’ evasion tactics. The December 23 deadline already exists as the enforcement mechanism. Accelerating it by two months through retroactive bans creates chaos without improving security.

The FCC should address shell company evasion through the component parts prohibition in the October 28 vote. But retroactively yanking certifications for equipment already in the field? That sets a dangerous regulatory precedent and inflicts immediate economic damage on American businesses that played by the rules.

What do you think? Should the FCC retroactively revoke DJI authorizations, or does protecting American operators who rely on these drones take priority? Share your thoughts in the comments below.