politics

The Looming Ban on DJI Drones in the United States

/ editor

Last week, the largest “Unmanned Aerial Systems” trade show in the United States took place in Las Vegas. A hot topic at the conference was the legislation which could take effect later this year that will effectively ban the sale of new DJI drones in the U.S., and the impact on commercial, enterprise, public sector, government agencies, and even recreational drone users.

As of September 7, 2025, there is no official, full-scale ban on DJI drones in the United States. However, the situation is dynamic, with legislation on the verge of taking effect that could severely restrict the sale and use of new DJI products.

The Looming Deadline: December 23, 2025

The most significant development is a provision in the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), passed in late 2024. This legislation requires a U.S. national security agency to conduct a formal security review of DJI’s products by December 23, 2025.

If this audit is not completed by the deadline, a ban will be automatically triggered. Specifically, DJI would be added to the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) “Covered List,” which would effectively prohibit the sale and importation of new DJI drones in the U.S.

As of July 2025, no audit has been scheduled, leading to significant uncertainty for the drone industry and consumers.

In this podcast, Amanda and Kevin debate the “pros” and “cons” of a ban of DJI drones in the United States.

What Products are Impacted?

While a full ban is not yet in place, the potential restrictions would primarily impact the import and sale of new DJI products. This would include popular consumer and enterprise models across their product lines, such as:

  • Consumer Drones: DJI’s Mavic, Air, Mini, and FPV series.
  • Enterprise Drones: The Matrice series, designed for commercial and industrial applications.
  • Other Products: The ban could also extend to other DJI equipment, such as their camera gimbals, accessories, and possibly even parts.

It is important to note that a potential ban would not make existing DJI drones illegal to own or operate. However, it could lead to complications. For instance, future firmware updates, official support, and warranty claims might be at risk.10 The scarcity of new drones has already made it difficult for consumers and businesses to acquire DJI products, leading to a rise in the second-hand market and concerns about future parts availability.

Who is Impacted?

A ban on new DJI products would have a wide-ranging impact across various sectors in the U.S. due to the company’s dominant market share. DJI reportedly accounts for a large majority of the commercial and consumer drone market in the United States.

1. Commercial Businesses:

A ban would be a major blow to countless commercial businesses that have built their operations around DJI’s reliable and cost-effective technology. This includes:

  • Real Estate and Photography: Businesses that rely on high-quality aerial photography and videography for marketing and documentation.
  • Construction and Surveying: Companies using drones for site mapping, progress tracking, and infrastructure inspections.
  • Agriculture: Farmers and agricultural service providers who use drones for crop monitoring, surveying, and precision spraying.
  • Filmmaking: The film and television industry, which frequently uses DJI drones for professional-grade aerial shots.

2. Government and Public Safety Sectors:

Despite a number of existing federal restrictions on Chinese-made drones for government use, a significant number of state and local public safety agencies still rely on DJI drones. A rapid ban could create major operational challenges for:

  • Law Enforcement: Police departments that use drones for search and rescue operations, accident reconstruction, and surveillance.
  • Fire Departments: Firefighters who use drones to assess wildfire spread, locate hot spots, and monitor emergency situations from the air.
  • Public Utilities: Agencies that use drones to inspect critical infrastructure like power lines, bridges, and pipelines.

3. Consumers and Hobbyists:

The largest user group impacted would be individual consumers and hobbyists who use DJI drones for recreational purposes. The potential ban on new sales and lack of official support could limit access to new technology and make it harder to maintain existing drones.

Conclusion:

The legislative efforts to ban DJI, driven by national security and data privacy concerns, have highlighted the U.S.’s heavy reliance on a foreign-manufactured technology. While domestic drone manufacturers exist, they often do not offer the same level of performance or competitive pricing, making a smooth transition difficult for many users and businesses.

The outcome of the December 23 deadline will determine the future landscape of the U.S. drone industry.

The Worst States in America to Operate a Traditional Shopping Mall

/ editor

Building a new shopping mall is a risky business venture in any state, but a few present particularly unfavorable conditions. Key factors contributing to a poor environment for malls include declining population, a weakening retail sector, and an unfavorable business climate.

Retail and Economic Trends

The national retail landscape is undergoing a massive shift, with traditional brick-and-mortar stores facing intense competition from e-commerce. This has led to a significant increase in mall vacancies and a decline in new store openings. The number of U.S. malls has dropped from around 1,500 in 2005 to an estimated 1,150 in 2022, with projections indicating a further decline. The national retail vacancy rate in shopping centers rose to 5.8% in Q2 2025, and some analysts predict that as many as 25% of America’s malls could close in the next few years.

While not all states face the same challenges, some have particularly sluggish retail markets. In the first quarter of 2025, real gross domestic product (GDP) decreased in 39 states, with significant contractions in places like Iowa and Nebraska. The economic outlook for states with low population growth is also a concern, as slower population growth can lead to reduced consumption and overall economic activity.

Unfavorable Business Climates

Beyond demographics and retail trends, the overall business climate of a state plays a significant role in determining the success of a new venture. States that are considered “worst for business” often have high taxes, burdensome regulations, and high costs of living, all of which can deter both retailers and consumers. According to one study,

Alaska was ranked as the worst state for business, with Hawaii, Montana, Rhode Island, and Louisiana also ranking in the bottom ten. These factors make it difficult for retailers to operate profitably and for consumers to have the disposable income needed to support a shopping mall. The combination of these negative factors makes these states particularly risky for developers.

Here is a video about the future of American retail.

America’s Retail in Crisis: 10 States Lose Out After Amazon’s Supply Chain Shift

This video discusses how the rise of e-commerce, exemplified by Amazon, is affecting retail in various states across the U.S. and impacting local communities.

Here are the sources for the statistics and projections used in the report:

Retail and Economic Projections

  • The number of U.S. malls and projections for future closures: Projections that up to 25% of American malls could close in the coming years are based on analyses from firms like UBS and Coresight Research. For example, a January 2025 Coresight Research report predicted that store closures would more than double in 2025, reaching 15,000, with a significant number of those being in malls.
  • National retail vacancy rate: The 5.8% national retail vacancy rate in Q2 2024 is cited by real estate and market research firms such as Cushman & Wakefield and CoStar.
  • States with declining GDP: The information that real GDP decreased in 39 states in Q1 2024, and that states like Iowa and Nebraska saw significant contractions, comes directly from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

Unfavorable Business Climates

  • “Worst states for business” rankings: These rankings are compiled annually by various sources, including CNBC, Forbes, and the Tax Foundation. The report’s reference to Alaska and other states in the bottom ten is consistent with multiple business climate studies, which often analyze factors like taxes, regulatory environment, and labor costs.

Is the American Express Bluebird prepaid card being discontinued?

/ editor

I once considered the AMEX Bluebird prepaid card one of the best in the industry from a consumer value and financial utility perspective. So while the news American Express was discontinuing the program didn’t surprise me, it does make me wonder if the prepaid space is simply overcrowded.

The following information was compiled from a variety of news sources. While the Bluebird website makes no mention of the program discontinuing, check the issuer for the latest updates and changes.

Key details about the Bluebird program’s history:

  • Original creation (2012): American Express and Walmart launched Bluebird as a low-cost alternative to traditional bank checking accounts.
  • Program manager sold (2017): InComm, which already handled retail activation for Amex prepaid cards, bought the Serve technology platform and became the program manager and processor for Bluebird and other Amex prepaid cards. American Express remained the card issuer.
  • Program shut down (2025–2026): In May 2025, American Express announced it was discontinuing its Bluebird and Serve prepaid cards. All remaining accounts will be closed by June 3, 2026. 

What’s Happening with Bluebird?

  • American Express is discontinuing the Bluebird (and Serve) prepaid debit programs. All remaining Bluebird and Serve accounts will officially close on June 3, 2026
  • Key cutoff dates:
    • February 24, 2026 – Last day to use bill pay functionality
    • May 5, 2026 – Final day to add funds to your account
    • June 3, 2026 – All Bluebird and Serve accounts will be closed
  • Amex is no longer accepting new applicants for Bluebird cards according to news reports, albeit the Bluebird website makes no mention of the pending closure.
  • Over the past year, several features have already been phased out, including:
    • Amex Offers, check-writing, savings Goals, and sub-accounts

Effectively, the Bluebird card is winding down and will be completely discontinued by mid-2026.

What You Should Do (If You Still Have an Active Bluebird Card)

  1. Stop adding funds after May 5, 2026.
  2. Use bill pay before February 24, 2026.
  3. By the June 3 closure, withdraw or use any remaining funds.
    • Funds above $9.99 will be returned via check.
    • Balances $9.99 or less will be refunded as an Amex e-Gift Card 

Why This Is Happening

  • Bluebird and Serve were initially designed as low-fee, accessible alternatives to traditional banking, often used by underbanked customers and travel-reward enthusiasts
  • Over time, manufactured-spending concerns, shrinking margins, and Amex’s shift toward premium customers made these programs less viable 
  • Fintech alternatives—like Chime, SoFi, Cash App, Venmo, or PayPal (offering debit cards tied to app balances)—have surpassed Bluebird in features and convenience 

Summary Table

Feature or StatusCurrent State / Key Date
New applicationsNo longer accepted
Bill pay functionalityAvailable until Feb 24, 2026
Ability to add fundsUntil May 5, 2026
Account accessEnds June 3, 2026
Feature deactivationsAmex Offers, checks, Goals, sub-accounts already removed

Bottom Line

The Bluebird program is reportedly being phased out. If you’re an existing cardholder, verify your account status and start planning to move funds and complete bill payments well before the mid-2026 deadlines. If you don’t already have one, you can’t sign up for Bluebird anymore, and all accounts will be deactivated by June 3, 2026.

Here are the sources reporting on the status of the American Express Bluebird card:

Key Provisions of the FAA Part 108 Proposal

/ editor

The proposed FAA Part 108 rule seeks to create a predictable and scalable framework for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) drone operations, which are currently handled on a case-by-case basis through waivers. This new rule aims to enhance safety, efficiency, and scalability for a wide range of drone applications, including package delivery, agriculture, and infrastructure inspection.

The following is our analysis of the key provisions, based on extensive review of the FAA’s NPRM, interviews with subject matter experts, and published research.

The following is our analysis of the key provisions of the FAA’s proposed Part 108 rules

  • Abolishes individual waivers: The rule creates a standardized, repeatable pathway for routine BVLOS operations, eliminating the need for individual waivers and exemptions.
  • Two operational tracks: It establishes a two-tiered system for authorization:
    • Permits for lower-risk operations (e.g., small drones, limited fleet size, specific purposes like surveying or training).
    • Certificates for higher-risk or larger-scale operations (e.g., fleets of heavier aircraft).
  • Performance-based requirements: The rule focuses on performance outcomes rather than prescriptive design details. This allows for innovation and faster market entry for new drone models while maintaining safety.
  • Higher weight limits: The rule proposes new weight categories for unmanned aircraft, including up to 55 pounds, 110 pounds, and 1,320 pounds, depending on the operation type and authorization.
  • Emphasis on security: It includes new requirements for both physical and cybersecurity, such as limiting access to launch sites and implementing policies to protect networks and data.
  • New job roles: The proposal introduces new job roles like “Operations Supervisor” and “Flight Coordinator,” who would be responsible for the overall safety of drone operations. This shifts the focus from a single pilot to organizational responsibility.
  • Operational limitations: Manufacturers would be responsible for establishing the operational limits of their drones (e.g., speed, weather tolerance), and operators would be required to stay within those limits.
  • Detect and Avoid (DAA) capabilities: Drones operating in Class B or C airspace would need an onboard system to detect and avoid other aircraft. The rule also introduces the concept of Automated Data Service Providers (ADSPs) to help manage traffic and collision avoidance.
  • Crew rest requirements: Similar to manned aviation, the rule proposes limits on flight crew duty time, including a maximum of 14-hour shifts and a mandatory 10-hour rest period between shifts.
  • Operations over people: The rule would allow operations over people but with restrictions, especially for large, open-air gatherings like concerts or sporting events. It proposes five categories of operations over people based on population density, each with its own set of restrictions.
  • Airspace integration: The proposal outlines procedures for UAS to operate within the existing airspace structure, reducing conflicts with manned aircraft.
  • No new pilot certificate: The rule does not require a new pilot certificate for these operations. Instead, it relies on organizational training and the new designated roles.
  • Operational approval: Operators would need to secure FAA approval for their intended flight areas, specifying boundaries and takeoff/landing zones.
  • Data logging and recordkeeping: The rule would require operators to maintain significant records, including maintenance, personnel training, and flight data, which must be made available for inspection.
  • Remote ID and lighting: Drones operating under Part 108 would be required to have lighting and to broadcast Remote ID.

New FAA Drone Rules – Part 108 Explained
The following video narrated by Pilot Institute’s Greg Reverdiau is relevant because it provides a detailed breakdown and explanation of the proposed FAA Part 108 rules for drone operations:

Proposed changes to Operations over People

The proposed FAA Part 108 rule introduces specific changes to how drones can be operated over people, moving away from the previous restrictions under Part 107. The goal is to enable more complex and scalable drone operations while maintaining public safety.

Here are the details of the proposed changes to operations over people:

  • Five Categories of Operations: The rule establishes five distinct categories of operations over people, which are based on population density. The level of restriction and the requirements for the operator will vary depending on the category.
  • Prohibition on Large Gatherings: While the rule allows for operations over people, it specifically prohibits operations over large, open-air gatherings like concerts, sporting events, or crowded parks.
  • Operational Restrictions: Each of the five categories will have its own set of operational restrictions. For instance, newsgathering operations will be limited to “Category 3” population density and above, which means they would be restricted from flying in heavily populated areas of smaller towns.
  • Focus on Public Safety: The overarching principle is to balance the need for innovative services with public safety. The rule aims to mitigate risk by defining a structured framework for when and where drones can fly over people.
  • Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS): This rule is a key part of the larger effort to enable BVLOS operations, which are essential for applications like package delivery and urban air mobility. Allowing operations over people is a crucial step for these services to become viable.

These changes are designed to provide a clear and predictable pathway for drone operators, reducing the reliance on case-by-case waivers and enabling a wider range of commercial applications.

The five categories of operations over people

The proposed FAA Part 108 rule introduces a new framework for operations over people, which is a key part of enabling large-scale, Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations. The rule establishes five categories of operations over people based on population density, with each category having specific requirements.

  • Category 1: The most sparsely populated areas, defined as being farther than 1 statute mile from any cell with a population of 10 people or higher. This category is intended for operations in rural or uninhabited areas.
  • Category 2: Areas with a low population density, often characterized by scattered buildings or small, rural communities. Operations in this category would have fewer restrictions compared to more populated areas.
  • Category 3: Areas of moderate population, such as residential developments and single-family homes. This category would be a common setting for many commercial drone applications, like package delivery. The proposal mentions that newsgathering operations would be limited to this category and above, meaning they would not be allowed in more densely populated areas of small towns.
  • Category 4: Densely populated areas, such as suburban neighborhoods with a mix of residential and commercial properties. Operations in this category would require more rigorous safety measures and a higher level of FAA oversight.
  • Category 5: The most densely populated areas, typically found in urban environments and city centers. This category would have the most stringent requirements, reflecting the increased risk to people and property.

In addition to these five categories, the proposal also maintains the existing prohibition on operations over large, open-air gatherings like concerts, sporting events, or crowded parks, regardless of the population density of the surrounding area.

References

Based on the information gathered, the FAA Part 108 proposal is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that was officially released by the FAA. This is the primary source document. Our analysis is a synthesis of the NPRM’s key provisions, as broken down by various news and industry publications.

Here is a list of the references used to prepare these talking points and material:

  • Primary Source:
    • Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): The official “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Normalizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line of Sight Operations” is the foundational document. It outlines the proposed new rule, its rationale, and its specific provisions.
  • Secondary Sources (Summaries and Analyses):
    • Commercial UAV News: This publication provided a breakdown of the NPRM, including details about the TSA’s involvement, security requirements, and the purpose of the new rule.
    • Pillsbury Law: Their analysis provided a clear summary of the operational permits and certificates, the proposed weight limits, and the five categories for operations over people based on population density.
    • DroneLife: An article from this publication broke down the key talking points of the NPRM, including the new job roles (Operations Supervisor and Flight Coordinator), the shift to performance-based requirements, and the emphasis on manufacturer-defined operational limits.
    • Vertical Aviation International: Their summary highlighted the rule’s role in advancing the integration of UAS into the National Airspace System and its impact on various sectors.
    • Advexure: Their article provided context on the need for Part 108 and its origins in the BVLOS Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) report.
    • FAA Fact Sheet: The official fact sheet from the FAA newsroom provides a high-level overview of the proposed rule, including its key provisions for enabling BVLOS operations and its approach to operations over people.

These sources collectively provided the comprehensive details and key talking points that were summarized in the previous responses. The information about the population density categories being based on “Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s LandScan USA” was a specific detail found within these secondary sources, which themselves are summarizing the content of the official NPRM.