The situation of the US router market, that is, those devices essential for internet connection found in every home and office, is becoming increasingly tangled. First, the Pentagon suddenly locked down the United States to those produced abroad, damaging countless companies, citing unspecified national security reasons, then with a pirouette worthy of a dance, the Federal Communications Commission decided to grant a waiver to a single company, the American Netgear, which will be able to continue importing its models from abroad, albeit for a buffer period. However, this decision, besides being even more sudden and unjustified than the previous one, if not followed by others of the same magnitude benefiting competing entities, seems to favor a single brand over all others that are excluded. But let’s go in order.
FOREIGN ROUTERS SCARE AMERICA
It is not the first time that, especially in the hi-tech field, the American administration has suddenly raised high walls at the borders overnight. A precursor in this sense was the ban of the Chinese Big Tech Huawei during Donald Trump’s first term. Even under Joe Biden, import restrictions have been seen, for example in the automotive sector, while now with Trump’s return to the White House, the acceleration has been even more evident, including for example drones. And routers have ended up among the technologies deemed so sensitive by the US that they must obligatorily have a “local” supply chain.
“Malicious actors have exploited security flaws in foreign-made routers to attack American homes, disrupt networks, enable espionage, and facilitate intellectual property theft,” the FCC’s justification. In particular, the federal agency cited three cyberattacks, named Volt, Flax, and Salt Typhoon, directed against US infrastructure between 2024 and 2025 and, according to the respective investigations, carried out by actors linked to the Chinese government.
EVERY RULE HAS ITS EXCEPTION
A likely more political than technical rush that, besides risking being devoid of real reasons beyond yet another North American slight against China (as well as yet another commercial closure in defiance of trade agreements), did not consider one fact: in America, excluding some devices made in Texas by Musk’s Starlink, routers are effectively not produced. Even those with American branding, in short, contain foreign technology.
For this reason, any new router produced outside the United States must now be approved by the FCC before it can be imported and marketed in the 50 states, and to obtain such approval, companies will not only have to share data relating to foreign investors or external influences on the company but above all promise, through the submission of a dedicated plan, that they have already organized the transfer of the entire production to the United States.
CRITICISMS FROM THE TRADE PRESS
This brings us to the sudden waiver announced by that same Federal Communications Commission that seemed intent on making the US market impermeable to foreign technologies. A waiver arrived in the last hours that does not concern everyone: only Netgear, a California brand with its supply chain located in Asia, will benefit.
A piece of news that surprised everyone, starting with journalists covering the market, welcomed thus by The Verge, among the most important and widely read trade publications: “The US ban on importing foreign routers didn’t make much sense and the situation might not change today. The FCC just granted Netgear conditional authorization to import its future routers, cable modems, and gateways for the consumer market into the US until October 1, 2027, despite the company manufacturing these devices in Asia and not announcing any plans to move production to the United States.”
AND THE UNCERTAINTIES OF THIS DECISION
“The FCC approval is strange,” continues the American publication, “also because the agency’s conditional approval process requires router manufacturers to submit a detailed plan with specific deadlines to establish or expand production in the United States, but Netgear has not yet publicly committed to producing on American soil.”
