Two federal actions landed about two weeks apart this August. On Aug. 13, the White House imposed tariffs of up to 100% on imported drones. On July 28, the FCC added foreign-made mobile robots, including humanoids and quadrupeds, to its Covered List. Different agencies. Same direction. If you are planning a warehouse automation investment this year, that pattern matters more than either action alone.
“We have watched drone policy move first, then robotics policy follow the same logic a few weeks later. That is not a coincidence you can ignore when you are picking a vendor,” says Ed Romaine, VP of Marketing and Business Development at ISD.
On this page
What Happened to Drones
On Aug. 13, President Trump signed a proclamation imposing tariffs on imported unmanned aircraft systems and their components. Drones weighing more than 55 lbs. or carrying thermal imaging capability face a 100% tariff. Smaller drones without defense capabilities face 25%. Drones from allied nations, including the European Union, Japan, Liechtenstein, South Korea, Switzerland, and Taiwan, face a 15% rate. UK-made drones face 10%, provided their components trace back to the U.S. or an allied country. The rates take effect Sept. 3.
The proclamation also directs the Commerce Secretary to build an onshoring incentive program for domestic drone and component manufacturing. It follows a 2025 executive order aimed at expediting U.S. drone production. It also follows an earlier restriction on Department of Defense waivers for sourcing critical minerals from foreign entities of concern.
What Happened to Robots
About two weeks earlier, on July 28, the FCC updated its Covered List to include foreign-produced mobile ground robots. The update named humanoids and quadrupeds specifically, along with certain connected power inverters. Products meeting the FCC’s definition can no longer receive equipment authorization. That effectively blocks new imports, marketing, and sales in the U.S. Affected manufacturers can apply for a conditional approval, though the process has no published timeline yet.
Robert Little is a business development advisor and former chief of robotics strategy at Novanta. He sees a dual purpose behind the move. He told Supply Chain Dive the FCC’s action reads as both a cybersecurity measure and a mechanism to drive domestic robotics production. It also gives foreign suppliers an incentive to build U.S. supply chains.
Not every observer agrees the scope was right. Erik Nieves, founder and CEO of Plus One Robotics, told Supply Chain Dive he expected China-specific restrictions. He was surprised the ban covered robotics from every country. That list includes trade partners like Japan, Germany, and South Korea. He called the breadth an overreaction while still supporting the underlying security concern.
“We tell clients the same thing every time regulation touches equipment sourcing. Do not guess at the edges. If a system in your design has a mobile component, get its authorization status in writing before you commit,” says Bob Jones, Senior Consultant at ISD.
The Connecting Thread
Neither action stands alone. Both treat foreign-sourced hardware as a national security variable, not just a line item on a quote. The fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act reinforces the same logic. It bars the Department of Defense from purchasing batteries made with materials from foreign entities of concern, beginning Jan. 1, 2028. The Association for Advancing Automation has separately urged Congress to act. It wants a national robotics strategy built around subsidies and tax incentives for domestic production.
China has responded in kind. It tightened its own export controls on drones bound for the U.S. and sanctioned several American defense and aerospace firms. Whether the current administration extends similar restrictions to other categories of robotics remains an open question. Legislation targeting a broader ban on Chinese-made robots is already moving through the next NDAA.
“Two agencies, two different products, the same underlying question. Where does this hardware actually come from, and what happens if that answer changes? That is exactly the kind of question we build into every automation plan,” says Tony Morgott, President of ISD.
What This Means for ASRS Buyers Specifically
We covered the FCC’s four-prong test, and how it applies to ASRS specifically, in two earlier posts: FCC Advanced Robotic Devices Rule for Warehouse Automation and ASRS and the FCC Advanced Robotic Devices Rule. We will not repeat that here. What matters for this piece is the speed of change. Regulatory attention moved from drones to humanoids and AMRs in about two weeks. That pace, not just the current rule text, is what a warehouse automation plan needs to account for.
Rail-confined and grid-confined ASRS currently sit outside the scope of both actions. So do fixed robotic arms used in applications like palletizing. Floor-roaming, AMR-based systems carry the most direct exposure. If your project leans on that category of hardware, the sourcing question deserves a closer look now. Otherwise it can turn into a re-authorization problem later.
“If you are planning a floor-roaming, AMR-based ASRS this year, ask about conditional approval status the same way you would ask about lead time or warranty terms. It is becoming a standard line item in every automation conversation we have,” says Bob Jones, Senior Consultant at ISD.
Reading the Direction of Travel, Not Just the Rule
Experts do not agree on where this settles, and that disagreement is useful context. Little sees a genuine opening for U.S. suppliers to close the gap with countries like China. China installed roughly ten times as many industrial robots in recent years, according to International Federation of Robotics estimates. If restrictions eventually ease, he believes domestic manufacturers will be in a stronger competitive position.
Nieves takes a more cautious view. He does not want to see U.S. robotics companies relax. That risk grows if they no longer compete directly with Germany, Japan, or South Korea. Both perspectives point to the same practical takeaway. This is a moving policy environment. A sourcing decision made today should hold up under more than one possible outcome.
“Both of those experts are right, in their own way. There is real opportunity for domestic suppliers here, and there is real risk in assuming this settles quickly. We plan for both possibilities when we sit down with a client,” says Ed Romaine, VP of Marketing and Business Development at ISD.
Questions to Ask Before You Buy
You do not need to become a trade policy expert to plan around this. You need a short list of questions for any vendor pitching mobile robotics as part of your solution.
- Where is this hardware actually manufactured, and can the vendor document it?
- Has the vendor sought or received a conditional approval for any foreign-produced component?
- What is the vendor’s contingency if a firmware or hardware refresh triggers re-authorization?
- Does this application need a mobile robot, or would a rail-confined or fixed-arm solution work with less regulatory exposure?
- How does this decision hold up if restrictions expand before your system reaches end of life?
If you want a second set of eyes on these questions, we can help.
Why ISD
ISD is OEM-agnostic. We are not tied to one robotics manufacturer or one country of origin. That means we can steer a design toward already-authorized, domestically produced, or fixed-automation solutions where they fit the application. Our own ASRS lineup, including the UltraStore Mid-Load ASRS, uses fixed-rail crane and grid-confined designs, not free-roaming floor robots. Read more on our Made in America Warehouse Automation page, or use our warehouse automation ROI calculator to model your options against this shifting regulatory landscape.
“Our whole model is built on picking the best-fit technology instead of being locked into one supplier’s roadmap. In a moving regulatory environment, that flexibility is worth more than the lowest bid on the table today,” says Tony Morgott, President of ISD.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the drone tariff news have anything to do with my ASRS or AMR purchase?
Not directly. Drones and mobile robots fall under separate regulatory actions. But both reflect the same underlying push toward domestic sourcing. That is relevant context for any automation sourcing decision.
Is this robotics restriction likely to expand further?
Possibly. Legislation targeting a broader ban on Chinese-made robots is already moving through the next NDAA. The Association for Advancing Automation is also pushing Congress for a national robotics strategy. Nothing is confirmed, but the direction of travel favors more scrutiny, not less.
Should I pause my automation project until the rules settle?
Not necessarily. Fixed automation and rail-confined ASRS sit outside the current restrictions entirely. The rules mainly affect new, foreign-produced mobile robots. A pause is rarely the right call. A sourcing review usually is.
What is the fastest way to check my exposure?
Ask your vendor directly where the hardware is manufactured and whether it holds or has applied for conditional approval. If you want a second set of eyes on it, our team can walk through your design with you.
Not sure how these regulatory shifts affect your automation roadmap?
