‘Shell game’ exposed: US penalises tech companies for evading drone bans

The US telecoms regulator has launched a sweeping digital crackdown, penalising ten technology firms for stonewalling investigations into potential national security threats.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has issued Notices of Apparent Liability, proposing a $25,000 fine for each of the implicated companies, which include Cogito Tech, Fikaxo Technology, Lyno Dynamics, Skyhigh Tech, Spatial Hover, WaveGo Tech, and Xtra Technology. The companies have been cited for wilfully failing to respond to official Letters of Inquiry (LOI) from the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau.

At the heart of the dispute is the FCC’s ‘Covered List’, an inventory of communications and surveillance equipment that has been officially determined to pose an “unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the safety and security of United States persons”. On 22 December 2025, following a national security determination, the regulator expanded this list to outright ban certain foreign-produced uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS)—commonly known as drones—alongside specific video surveillance hardware and action cameras.

The FCC suspects these businesses are operating a corporate ‘shell game’ to smuggle banned technology into the American market, bypassing US tariffs and security regulations.

The regulator’s investigation was catalysed by a series of media exposés in September and October 2025. Publications highlighted the work of security researcher Konrad Iturbe, who built an automated system to scrutinise the hardware of new tech companies. Iturbe’s system flagged that the devices sold by these newly minted companies—from Fikaxo’s and Spatial Hover’s drones to Xtra Technology’s action cameras—incorporated the identical proprietary communication protocols used by the banned equipment.

Seeking to determine whether these companies were covertly marketing disguised covered equipment, the FCC dispatched legal inquiries to the firms’ designated US agents via certified post and email. Despite delivery receipts confirming the legal orders had reached the companies’ inboxes and physical addresses, the firms met the regulator with complete silence.

In response to this stonewalling, the FCC has chosen to escalate its enforcement measures. Whilst the standard base fine for failing to respond to a Commission communication sits at 4,000,the FCC drastically hiked the penalty for each of these companies to∗∗25,000**.

According to the sources, the regulator branded the firms’ conduct as “egregious, intentional, and continuous,” noting that such evasion fundamentally compromises the government’s ability to investigate serious security threats.

“Misconduct of this type exhibits contempt for the Commission’s authority and threatens to compromise the Commission’s ability to adequately investigate violations of its rules,” the FCC stated across its enforcement orders. The companies have been granted 30 days to either pay the fine or file a formal written statement seeking a reduction, whilst remaining legally bound to answer the original letters of inquiry within ten days