New Restrictions Seek to Exclude Chinese Robotics from U.S. Market

The promise of robotics technology was on full display during the World Humanoid Robot Games last month in Beijing, showcasing the progress of Chinese suppliers. While the commercial market remains nascent and real-world applications are still to be determined, the potential is undeniable. However, access to foreign-produced humanoid robots and their advanced hardware technologies in the United States is limited. National security and trade concerns have led to multiple layers of restrictions that are seemingly designed to ensure that the robotics industries in China and the United States develop separately.

Key Takeaways:

• FCC robotics ban: A new national security determination adds certain “foreign-produced advanced robotics devices” to the FCC Covered List, limiting their eligibility for U.S. importation, marketing, or sale. 
• Broad domestic-content impact: The restriction can apply even to U.S.-manufactured robots if they do not meet Buy American Act domestic component thresholds. 
• Tariff pressure on components: Robotics companies sourcing key components from China may face significant aggregated duties justified by different Trump Administration initiatives, including baseline product-specific duties, Section 301 tariffs, and the newly announced forced labor tariffs.
• More restrictions may be ahead: A pending Section 232 investigation into robotics and industrial machinery imports could lead to additional tariffs, quotas, or other import restrictions.

FCC Advanced Robotics Ban

On July 27, 2026, a Trump Administration interagency body issued a national security determination that all “foreign-produced advanced robotics devices” pose an unacceptable risk to U.S. national security and the safety and security of U.S. persons. Under the authority of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) added advanced robotic devices to the FCC Covered List, unless exempted by the Department of War. Equipment on the FCC Covered List is prohibited from receiving the FCC equipment authorization that is a prerequisite to importing, marketing or selling most electronic devices in the United States. 

As a result, new models of “foreign-produced” advanced robotics devices will not be eligible for importation, marketing, or sale in the United States, unless such devices receive an exemption from the Department of War. Existing device models already authorized are not affected by the determination.

The national security determination defines “advanced robotics devices” to mean:

A mechanical mobile device, including autonomous mobile robots, humanoid robots, and quadrupeds, that – 

1. Is capable of locomotion, obstacle avoidance, navigation, or movement on the ground; 
2. Operates at a distance from a human operator or supervisor based on commands or in response to sensor data or any combination thereof; and 
3. The combined weight of the device and, if applicable, ground station or docking station is over 4.4lbs; and 
4. Contains a component falling within each of the below subparagraphs: i. a sensor capable of perceiving its environment; ii. a component that is capable of providing network connectivity (wired or wireless, including Bluetooth/WiFi, cellular, or satellite) with connection speeds of at least 200 kbps in either direction; and iii. software running either locally or remotely, including firmware and AI or machine-learning model weights, that controls the robot’s autonomous navigation or movement perception, data collection, or remote command-and-control.

The “advanced robotics devices” definition specifically excludes connected vehicles, certain surgical instruments and components, and non-mobile robots, including fixed arm robots for industrial or medical use. 

Importantly, the FCC Covered List designation of “advanced robotics devices” covers not just products manufactured outside the United States, but any product manufactured in the United States that does not meet the domestic component requirements of the Buy American Act because of a significant portion of foreign content. A “foreign-produced” advanced robotics device is any device that is not a “domestic end product” as defined in 48 C.F.R. § 25.101(a) - a product manufactured in the United States for which the cost of domestic components exceeds 65% of total costs (rising to 75% starting in 2029). The Buy American Act “component test” analysis measures the cost of the components incorporated into the end item, and not the value added through the production, such that labor costs related to the manufacture of the devices are not included in the total cost calculation. Therefore, a U.S. robotics manufacturer cannot source the components used in robotics, such actuators and mobile drive systems, from foreign suppliers to the extent that such components contribute more than 35% of the total bill of materials for any U.S.-manufactured robot.

The FCC robot ban is dramatic in its scope. The ban does not differentiate on the basis of intended use – whether consumer, industrial, or military. It also covers imports from all countries. However, since most advanced robots and robotics components are produced in China, the assumed target of the FCC Covered List action are Chinese manufacturers, and the Chinese government has threatened to take retaliatory action in response to the ban.

U.S. consumers and manufacturers may obtain relief in the form of exemptions from the ban. To date, two sets of robotics devices have obtained exemptions: (1) Husqvarna AB 305v IQ, 310v IQ, 420v IQ, and 440v IQ robotic platforms, and (2) ANSCER Robotics AR250, AR650, and AR1250 robotic platforms. Consistent with exemptions issued for other equipment on the FCC Covered List (e.g., routers), more exemptions are expected, particularly for robotic devices made in allied countries.

Tariff Impacts

Robotics products and their components that are not subject to the FCC ban may still face commercial hurdles entering the U.S. market, primarily through the added costs imposed by tariffs. Chinese companies currently produce key robotics components at a large scale. Some analysts estimate that Chinese companies produce in excess of 60% of the overall humanoid robotics supply chain, in many cases leveraging common components and technologies from China’s extensive electric vehicle industry. The key components of this supply chain include actuators, sensing and perception systems, compute and control systems, structural components, and battery components. For rotary actuators, which in turn require driver boards, precision bearings, position sensors, and permanent magnets within motors, Chinese companies have an estimated market share of between 30% and 90% (in the case of magnets within motors), with U.S. companies having negligible market share.

U.S. companies needing to source certain components, particularly from China, face multiple tariffs, consisting of baseline Most Favored Nation (MFN) duties, Section 301 tariffs, and the recently announced “forced labor” tariffs. For example, a U.S. robotics manufacturer seeking to utilize a mid-range Chinese made servo motor could pay import duties of 37.5% to 42.5%, consisting of a baseline MFN duty (which ranges from 0% to 5% depending upon the type of motor), Section 301 tariffs of 25% applicable to robotics equipment imported from China, and the “forced labor” tariff of 12.5%.

The tariffs applicable to robotics components work hand-in-hand with the FCC robot ban to effectively block the import of robotics components from China for U.S. manufacturers seeking to use Chinese components. The multiple layers of tariffs also disproportionately increase the relative costs in the overall bill of materials to imported components, making it more difficult to qualify a device as a domestic end product.

As with many imported goods, the tariff rates remain in flux and there may be additional tariffs specifically targeted at Chinese robotics equipment in the near future. In September 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to determine whether imports of “robotics and industrial machinery” and their parts and components threaten to impair U.S. national security. The scope of this investigation includes robots and programmable, computer-controlled mechanical systems, CNC machining centers, turning and milling machines, grinding and deburring equipment, industrial stamping and pressing machines, automatic tool changers, jigs and fixtures, and machine tools for cutting, welding, and handling workpieces. If the investigation determines that imports of these components threaten national security, the President may impose tariffs, quotas, license fees, or other import restrictions to address the threat. 

Implications

Currently, advanced robotics hardware technologies are being developed in China at a large scale. As a result of Trump Administration actions, in many cases with bipartisan support, U.S. companies seeking access to these products and technologies are restricted. Additional trade restrictions are also likely forthcoming. U.S. policy in robotics for the foreseeable future appears to be one of keeping out foreign hardware technology, particularly of Chinese origin. It remains to be seen whether U.S. robotics technology companies will be able to develop alternatives to a foreign supply chain, and the impact that will have on the broader economy and U.S. global competitiveness.

This memorandum is a summary for general information and discussion only and may be considered an advertisement for certain purposes. It is not a full analysis of the matters presented, may not be relied upon as legal advice, and does not purport to represent the views of our clients or the Firm. David Makarechian, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in California; David J. Ribner, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia and New York; Greta L. Nightingale, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia; and Wenting Yu, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in California and New York, contributed to the content of this newsletter. The views expressed in this newsletter are the views of the authors except as otherwise noted.

© 2026 O’Melveny & Myers LLP. All Rights Reserved. Portions of this communication may contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Please direct all inquiries regarding New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct to O’Melveny & Myers LLP, 1301 Avenue of the Americas, Suite 1700, New York, NY, 10019, T: +1 212 326 2000.