The FCC has banned foreign-made humanoids, making a fragile, nascent sector part of America’s AI industrial policy.
This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.
Humanoid robots usually elicit more cringe than awe: They stumble, kick children, and despite advances are still worse at using their hands than my toddler. It’s a nascent industry, and such robots are more commonly seen in viral videos than real workplaces or homes.
It was a surprise, then, when last week the Federal Communications Commission issued a sweeping ban on foreign imports of advanced robots, including humanoids, quadrupeds, and wheeled robots. The decision, made by an increasingly partisan and Trump-aligned FCC, cites two reasons. One is that foreign-made humanoids will collect so much data—in homes but also potentially at sensitive facilities—that they’d pose a threat to national security. The second is that US robotics companies need protection from Chinese competition to create a more robust and secure domestic supply chain.
On its face, it’s a strategy to align political and industry interests that is much older than the Trump administration. Whenever China has gotten good at offering cheap versions of strategic technologies like solar panels, electric vehicles, and drones, the US government has tried to stop it from flooding the market by using tariffs or rules on how government agencies purchase the tech. Such moves are always followed by debates about whether the trade-offs—particularly higher prices for consumers—are worth the benefits.
But robotics is now best seen as another piece of the AI industry—in many ways its cutting edge. And the Trump administration is taking an increasingly aggressive approach to protecting the US AI industry, reportedly considering a ban on open-source Chinese models that often rival those from OpenAI and Anthropic while costing far less. Such a move would block businesses from realizing an estimated $25 billion in annual savings.
The ban on humanoids, then, should be understood not as another chapter in the old China trade playbook, but as evidence that the Trump administration is expanding its protection of the AI industry beyond today’s leading labs. It is now willing to step in on behalf of an emerging robotics sector that is still barely finding its footing.
Some US robotics companies unsurprisingly welcome the FCC’s new move. Gavin Kenneally, CEO of a company called Ghost Robotics that makes four-legged robots for inspections, says the cybersecurity risks from foreign-made robots are real (an FCC document released as part of the ruling cited an incident in which a man was able to gain control of 7,000 robot vacuum cleaners). “If today’s announcement encourages stronger cybersecurity and a more level competitive environment, that’s good for customers and good for the robotics industry,” Kenneally said in an email.
But if the new rule aims to boost US robotics companies, there’s a big flaw. Those companies, as well as academic robotics labs, are hugely reliant on cheap robots from China to do research. They’re building fleets of robots that constantly learn new tasks—from flipping waffles to doing laundry—and frequently buy Chinese humanoids instead of US-made ones. The new ruling “creates a challenge for US humanoid researchers,” says Aaron Prather, director of market intelligence for the Association for Advancing Automation, a robotics trade group. “Chinese models offer the best price-to-capability ratio available.” Prather adds that a recent internal review his organization conducted found that 90% of recent robotics research papers from US universities relied on robots from Unitree, China’s top humanoid robotics company.
That price gap can be huge. A four-legged robot from Unitree can cost around $4,600. A comparable one from Boston Dynamics might run to $278,000. If robotics research is stunted because these cheap robots are no longer available, the FCC ruling could slow down the industry, not boost it.
The US and Chinese robotics industries are in starkly different places. Unitree plans to go public this week, targeting a nearly $6 billion evaluation. No robotics companies in the US offer any meaningful comparison, but those that do exist are undeniably moving fewer robots. Figure’s humanoids are not yet selling at scale, and 1X’s robots aren’t yet shipping to homes. That said, work on humanoids is going increasingly mainstream, as a release from Google last week made clear. The company announced a new AI model meant to make humanoids learn new tasks faster; its most impressive ability appears to be tying a trash bag, but given how finicky robot hands are, that’s real progress.
Even though the many carve-outs in the FCC’s order make its practical impact hard to predict, its symbolic impact is easy to see. The administration sees humanoid robotics not as a novelty, but as a strategic frontier of AI worth protecting from foreign competition. For a technology that until recently was mostly known for falling over onstage, that’s a big change.
Correction: A previous version of this article stated the Federal Trade Commission issued the ban on advanced robotics. It was issued by the Federal Communications Commission.
Deep Dive
Artificial intelligence
A startup claims it broke through a bottleneck that’s holding back LLMs
Subquadratic has now shared more details about its new model. But some are still skeptical.
A fundamental flaw leaves LLMs strikingly vulnerable to attack
It makes it easy to trick them into doing things they shouldn’t, such as telling you how to sabotage an aircraft’s navigation system.
Anthropic found a hidden space where Claude puzzles over concepts
A new technique has let the company probe deeper than ever into the weird workings of an LLM.
Claude Science is Anthropic’s newest flagship product
The company is doubling down on AI for science.
Stay connected
Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review
Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.
Facts Only
* The Federal Communications Commission banned foreign imports of advanced robots, including humanoids, quadrupeds, and wheeled robots.
* The ban was based on the concern that foreign-made humanoids could collect sensitive data posing a national security threat.
* The second reason cited was the need to protect US robotics companies from Chinese competition to build a domestic supply chain.
* Some US robotics companies welcomed the new rule, citing cybersecurity risks.
* US robotics companies and academic labs are reliant on cheaper robots from China for research.
* A recent internal review found that 90% of recent robotics research papers from US universities relied on robots from Unitree, China’s humanoid robotics company.
* Chinese models offer the best price-to-capability ratio in the market.
* Unitree plans to go public this week, targeting a $6 billion evaluation.
* A Google release introduced a new AI model aimed at accelerating humanoid learning of new tasks.
Executive Summary
The Federal Communications Commission issued a ban on foreign imports of advanced robots, including humanoids, quadrupeds, and wheeled robots. The rationale cited two reasons: the potential threat to national security from foreign-made humanoids collecting data, and the need to protect US robotics companies from Chinese competition to establish a domestic supply chain. This action is framed as expanding protection for the AI industry beyond leading labs to encompass the emerging robotics sector.
Some US robotics companies welcomed the rule, citing cybersecurity risks associated with foreign robots. However, this move creates a potential challenge for US research and development, as many academic robotics groups rely on cheaper, high-capability robots from China for research, particularly humanoid models. These Chinese models offer a better price-to-capability ratio. There is a tension between the goal of boosting domestic industry competitiveness and the reliance of the research community on existing, cost-effective foreign technology to advance foundational work.
Full Take
The action taken by the regulatory body signals an expansion of protection for the AI ecosystem into emerging hardware sectors like robotics, suggesting a strategic alignment between national security concerns and industrial policy that predates the current administration. The core conflict arises from the tension between protecting domestic innovation and maintaining access to necessary research infrastructure, which is currently dominated by low-cost foreign alternatives. This dynamic creates a potential constraint: if US researchers are forced away from cost-effective Chinese models, it could unintentionally slow the pace of foundational robotics research, despite the stated goal of boosting domestic industry. The narrative pivots on whether the administration views robotics primarily as an industrial competition issue or a critical security frontier for AI data collection. The implication is that defining the boundary of "AI protection" directly impacts who benefits from technological advancement and where future innovation priorities are set.
Bridge Questions: If the cost-to-capability ratio is central to research velocity, what mechanisms can be implemented to ensure domestic supply chains can rapidly scale without sacrificing the access required for cutting-edge academic exploration? How should policymakers weigh immediate security and competitive concerns against the long-term necessity of maintaining an open pipeline for foundational AI/robotics research? What alternative metrics could assess the actual acceleration or deceleration of domestic robotics innovation under this new framework?
Sentinel — Human
The text reads as a nuanced journalistic analysis that successfully connects disparate topics—trade policy, AI strategy, and robotics—using expert commentary to build an argument about protectionism's implications.