FCC's January Actions Intensify National Security And Foreign Ownership Oversight

The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) closed January with multiple actions that collectively increase transparency around foreign ownership and toughen national security-oriented compliance expectations—developments that materially affect broadcasters, common carrier wireless licensees, aeronautical licensees, and a broad set of FCC regulated entities with potential foreign ownership exposure. 

On January 29, 2026, the FCC established a new transparency regime that requires many FCC-regulated entities to certify and report if they are owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a “foreign adversary,”¹ and establishes associated disclosures, a consolidated filing system, and enforcement measures. In a companion action, the FCC adopted a Report and Order that clarifies and codifies key aspects of its foreign ownership review under Section 310(b), aiming to streamline filings while preserving robust national security review.

Section 310(b) of the Communications Act restricts foreign ownership of FCC licensees to: up to 20% direct ownership of a broadcast, common carrier, or aeronautical radio licensee, and up to 25% indirect ownership in the controlling US parent absent an affirmative public-interest finding by the FCC through a petition for declaratory ruling. In practice, parties seek specific and advance approvals to exceed these benchmarks, with the FCC evaluating aggregate foreign interests and national security considerations in coordination with the executive branch.

New Foreign Adversary Control Reporting Requirement

The FCC Report and Order establishes a consolidated, risk-based attestation framework that requires holders of, and applicants for, a broad range of FCC licenses and authorizations to disclose whether they are owned or controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of, a foreign adversary. Entities that certify foreign-adversary control must provide detailed ownership information, including all direct or indirect equity or voting interests of 5% or greater, the identity of the foreign-adversary countries, and the nature of control. The Commission will operate a single reporting system (the “Foreign Adversary Control System” or “FACS”) and has set filing deadlines of 60 days (or 120 days for small entities) after the public notice announcing FACS's launch.

The order groups licenses into three categories (Schedules A, B, and C) keyed to government-determined security risk, and requires more granular disclosures where foreign-adversary control is attested. Schedule A entities must make definitive yes/no attestations; Schedule B entities attest only if subject to foreign adversary control; Schedule C entities are exempt from initial attestations.

The rules also impose ongoing attestation obligations upon specified trigger events (e.g. , becoming subject to foreign adversary control; changes to 5%+ interest holders; applications for new or modified Covered Authorizations; or certain schedule redesignations), with extended timelines for small entities in specified circumstances.

Codification and Streamlining of Foreign Ownership Review Under Section 310(B)

In a companion action, the FCC codified longstanding foreign ownership review practices to improve clarity, reduce supplemental filings, and expedite processing of petitions under Section 310(b) for broadcast, common carrier wireless, and aeronautical licensees. The Order defines key concepts and filing content: codifying the “controlling US parent” definition, treatment of deemed voting interests for certain LP/LLC investors, and trust/trustee disclosures; extends the remedial safe-harbor process to privately held entities; requires remedial petitions to include all information required for an initial petition; codifies amendment practices, and clarifies that US residency is not required for approved foreign investors. The Office of International Affairs (and the Media Bureau for Broadcasting) continue to lead reviews and coordinate as needed with the Executive Branch.

Practical Implications

The FCC's Section 310(b) actions should reduce uncertainty and streamline processing by locking in definitions, disclosures, and amendment practices long applied in precedent, while extending remedial safe harbor protections to privately held entities. At the same time, the new foreign adversary control transparency regime introduces affirmative certification and disclosure duties on a tight timeline, with ongoing triggers for new attestations when control status changes, when parties file for new authorizations or modifications, and when 5% or greater interest holders change. Licensees and applicants with any foreign ownership exposure should reassess structures, approvals, and reporting compliance obligations in light of both actions.

Footnote

1. The current “foreign adversaries” list encompasses China (including Hong Kong and Macau), Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuelan politician Nicolás Maduro. This last has not been updated since Maduro's arrest.

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global services provider comprising associated legal practices that are separate entities, including Mayer Brown LLP (Illinois, USA), Mayer Brown International LLP (England & Wales), Mayer Brown (a Hong Kong partnership) and Tauil & Chequer Advogados (a Brazilian law partnership) and non-legal service providers, which provide consultancy services (collectively, the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are established in various jurisdictions and may be a legal person or a partnership. PK Wong & Nair LLC ("PKWN") is the constituent Singapore law practice of our licensed joint law venture in Singapore, Mayer Brown PK Wong & Nair Pte. Ltd. Details of the individual Mayer Brown Practices and PKWN can be found in the Legal Notices section of our website. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of Mayer Brown.

© Copyright 2026. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.