Tomorrow, the U.S. Department of Commerce intends to publish notice that it has initiated an investigation into the national security implications of imports of drones, parts, and components. To inform Commerce’s assessment under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232), it has requested comments from the public, which will be due August 6, 2025. As seen in connection with Commerce’s prior Section 232 aircraft investigation, a focus on drones, parts, and components need not signify narrow coverage of the current investigation. Affected products could become subject to one or more of the following remedies: tariffs, quotas, price floors, subsidies, and/or industrial policy. Parties may wish to comment on the investigation’s scope, the structure of any remedy, and the national security factors identified in Commerce’s notice.
Potentially Broad Scope
Consistent with Commerce’s recent requests for comment in other Section 232 investigations, this notice does not provide extensive detail concerning the scope of product coverage beyond naming the general category of “unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and their parts and components.” Although this formulation omits “derivative” articles, “parts” and “components” have nonetheless yielded broad coverage in other Section 232 actions.
On May 1, 2025, Commerce initiated a Section 232 investigation into commercial aircraft, jet engines, and parts. Because the United States had previously agreed to a specific carve-out for products of the U.K. in connection with the U.S.-UK Economic Prosperity Deal, language was inserted into the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) prophylactically inoculating products of the U.K. from coverage. This language is at least indicative of the products being considered for action in the aircraft investigation. It lists over 550 eight-digit HTSUS Codes, including certain subheadings under the following chapters: 39, 40, 45, 48, 68, 70, 73, 74, 76, 81, 83, 84, 85, 88, 90, 91, 94, 96, and 98. However, at least in the preliminary carve-out, the tariffs are characterized as applicable to, e.g., “articles of civil aircraft {and} their other parts, components, and subassemblies.”
As another example, the existing Section 232 tariffs on automotive parts cover several six-digit HTSUS subheadings and even certain four-digit HTSUS headings. However, the reach of these Section 232 tariffs is similarly tempered by language tying the listed HTSUS provisions to status as “parts of passenger vehicles…and light trucks.”
While a drone may not be as complex as a commercial aircraft, the inclusion of “parts” and “components” may nevertheless encompass a wide variety of imported articles in this investigation. Thus, the omission of “derivative” articles from Commerce’s notice should not necessarily be construed as a narrow focus.
Request for Comments
In regards to the request for comments, Commerce’s notice identifies topics very similar to those found in other recently initiated Section 232 investigations into commercial aircraft, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical products. However, given the potential for direct military application of drones, Commerce also pointedly requests comments on “the potential for foreign nations and companies to weaponize the capabilities or attributes of foreign-built UAS systems and their parts or components.”
The other, more standardized topics highlighted for comment include:
- Current and projected U.S. demand;
- U.S. production capacity and the feasibility of increasing U.S. capacity;
- The role of foreign supply chains, particularly of major exporters, in meeting U.S. demand;
- The concentration of U.S. imports from a small number of suppliers and the associated risks;
- The impact of foreign government subsidies and predatory trade practices on the competitiveness of the U.S. industry for drones, parts, and components;
- The economic impact of suppressed prices due to unfair foreign trade practices and state-sponsored overproduction;
- The potential for export restrictions by foreign nations, including the ability of foreign nations to weaponize their control over supplies of drones, parts, and components; and
- The impact of current trade policies on domestic production, and whether additional measures, including tariffs or quotas, are necessary to protect national security.
As with other recent Section 232 investigations, interested parties are invited to comment upon other relevant factors as well. In particular, commenters might choose to address the scope of the investigation and how a tariff might be structured vis-à-vis parts.
Potential Timeline
Commerce’s notice states that this investigation was initiated on July 1, 2025. The statute therefore provides Commerce until March 28, 2026, to conclude its investigation and transmit a report to the President. Commerce may, however, decide to move faster, and the relatively short public comment period suggests an intention to do so.
Once Commerce’s report has been transmitted, the President has up to 90 days to determine whether imported products subject this investigation threaten to impair U.S. national security and determine a response, as well as a further 15 days to implement any such actions. Again, the President may however decide to move more quickly.
Section 232 actions under the second Trump Administration have thus far resulted in 50% tariffs on steel and steel derivative products, aluminum and aluminum derivative products, and 25% tariffs on automobiles and automobile parts. The President has signaled an intention to impose 50% tariffs on copper and potentially copper derivatives. There is no guarantee that the new investigation will have a comparable outcome, but past actions provide some indication of the level of tariff treatment that the President views as necessary to address imports in the Section 232 context. That said, there is no statutory requirement that the President impose any tariffs or any other remedy in response to a Section 232 report.
Preparing Supply Chains, Opportunities to Engage
Cassidy Levy Kent’s attorneys, economists, compliance experts, and licensed customs brokers help companies develop strategic responses to the latest changes in U.S. tariff policy and plan for potential developments. Cassidy Levy Kent has extensive experience counseling clients to plan compliant supply chains that manage tariff risks, and we routinely assist with preparing and filing comments for consideration in Section 232 investigations. Our team’s deep familiarity with trade law and policy enables our firm’s aerospace supply chain clients to adapt and stay ahead of the curve.