地址：1F, Block B, Jinyuan Business Building, No.302, Xixiang Avenue, Bao 'an District, Shenzhen
The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is about to formulate new regulations: the new rules
发布日期：2026-08-14阅读量：282发布者：suma
On August 7, 2026, local time, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) officially issued its third notice of further proposed rulemaking (ET Docket No. 21-232, FCC 26-50), aiming to comprehensively upgrade the regulatory oversight of communication equipment access on the grounds of "national security". It establishes high thresholds across the entire process, from supply chain tracing, certification procedures, import and export, to online sales. Currently, public comments are still being sought. In the United States, wireless communication equipment must obtain FCC equipment certification before it can be imported and sold. Once listed on the Covered List, no new certification will be issued, effectively denying market access. The proposed rule proposes more than ten measures to comprehensively tighten the scope of identification on the list, reporting obligations for enterprises, and import marketing conditions. The comment period ends on September 8.
1. Expansion of control
Penetrative control across the entire supply chain: The third round of FCC regulations extends from complete machines and modules to upstream chips and components, requiring companies to disclose complete supply chain information (such as OEM, origin list), and prohibiting the use of logic hardware components (such as programmable processors, chipsets) designed or produced by entities on the "controlled list"; the newly proposed rule for mandatory submission of complete Bill of Materials (BOM) requires the listing of all production entities for components, establishing the first mandatory supply chain transparency mechanism in the consumer electronics sector.
Regulation and mandatory labeling of e-commerce platforms: E-commerce platforms are required to clearly label the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) identification number (FCC ID) when selling equipment, facilitating law enforcement inspections; exemption clauses are provided for small and micro sellers and second-hand goods. Refinement of the "controlled list" classification and exemption mechanism; the list is divided into two categories: "based on manufacturer/supplier" and "based on production location". Enterprises from countries such as France and Finland can continue to export new models to the United States through "conditional approval", while no enterprise from Chinese Mainland has been approved yet; allowing installed equipment to undergo necessary software/hardware updates to maintain safety.
"Controlled List" classification refinement and exemption mechanism: The list is divided into two categories: "based on producer/supplier" and "based on production location". Enterprises from countries such as France and Finland can continue to export new models to the United States through "conditional approval", while none of the Chinese Mainland enterprises have been approved. It is allowed to perform necessary software/hardware updates on installed equipment to maintain safety.
2. Internal disputes
Core Controversy: Significant internal divisions in the US, with strong opposition from the industry. 25 tech giants including NVIDIA, Microsoft, and Meta jointly call on the government not to restrict Chinese open-source AI models, emphasizing the necessity of an open ecosystem for US technological sovereignty and cybersecurity. Nearly 200 US startups jointly protest, stating that banning Chinese open-source models will lead to a surge in research and development costs (the price of using Chinese models is only 60%-90% of that of US closed-source models), and may even trigger a wave of industry closures. Although OpenAI and Anthropic did not sign the open letter, they advocate for tiered regulation based on model capabilities rather than a complete ban, expressing concerns about the risk of abuse.
3. Business Impact
The most substantial change in the draft lies in the identification logic. The prohibited list was originally just a list of enterprises, and the evasion routes were relatively clear. After adding the identification of production location, the judgment object becomes the origin and composition of the equipment itself. The bill of materials and producer disclosure are supporting devices to enable this judgment to be executed. The combination of the two means that compliance risks are no longer limited to named enterprises. In principle, all similar equipment produced outside the United States will fall into the list, unless a license is obtained on a case-by-case basis. On the surface, this standard does not target specific countries, but China, as the main production location of drones, routers, and related components, will actually bear the heaviest pressure. As long as the production line or key components of third-country brands are located overseas, they also need to explain the sources layer by layer through the bill of materials.
It is important to distinguish between draft provisions and matters for public consultation. There are already clear provisions regarding the definition of production location, disclosure of bill of materials, certification channels, import conditions, and responsible parties, with a relatively certain direction. However, issues such as the ten-year authorization period, a comprehensive ban at the component level, and a ban on software firmware downloads are still in the inquiry stage, and their ultimate feasibility remains uncertain. Relevant companies should assess the impact of their products during the comment period, focusing on verifying whether the existing bill of materials can meet the disclosure requirements for splitting value proportion by producer and production location.
4. Subsequent Notices
The comment period ends on September 8, 2026, and the rebuttal comment period ends on September 21. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) specifically seeks input on the transition period and implementation schedule for various measures, indicating that the effective arrangements have not yet been determined. Upon expiration of the comment period, the FCC will decide whether and how to formulate the final rules based on the record, and matters without draft provisions may require another round of notice.
