What Happens If Canada Bans DJI?

In late December 2025, the FCC added DJI and Autel Robotics to its Covered List, effectively banning new drone models from these manufacturers from entering the U.S. market. The move followed a year of uncertainty triggered by Section 1709 of the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, which required a security review that never happened. The result: the world's dominant drone manufacturer can no longer sell new products in the United States.

Canada hasn't followed suit, yet. But the signals are hard to ignore. In December 2025, CBC reported that the RCMP has restricted 973 Chinese-made drones to "non-sensitive operations," acknowledging they present "high security risks, primarily due to their country of origin." These drones represent 80% of the RCMP's fleet. Replacing them would cost over $30 million.

The question for Canadian commercial operators isn't whether this matters. It's what happens next.

The Scale of DJI's Dominance

Before examining what a ban would mean, we need to understand just how thoroughly DJI has captured the commercial drone market. The numbers are staggering: DJI controls approximately 70-80% of the global civilian drone market, with some estimates putting its share in the U.S. consumer segment at over 90%. In the public safety sector specifically, DJI drones hold over 90% market share.

This isn't accidental. DJI built its dominance through a combination of aggressive pricing, rapid innovation, and vertical integration that competitors simply couldn't match. A DJI Matrice 350 RTK, a workhorse enterprise drone for mapping and inspection, runs $10,000 to $15,000 depending on payload configuration. Comparable NDAA-compliant alternatives start at $20,000 and quickly climb to $30,000 or more for equivalent capability.

The RCMP's own assessment confirms this: non-Chinese alternatives cost nearly twice as much. That $30 million replacement cost for 973 drones works out to roughly $35,000 per unit, compared to roughly $15,000-$18,000 for equivalent DJI equipment.

For commercial operators who built their businesses around DJI equipment, a ban doesn't just mean replacing drones. It means doubling or tripling their capital equipment costs overnight.

What a Canadian Ban Might Look Like

Canada has several pathways to restrict Chinese-made drones, ranging from the approach the U.S. took to more targeted measures.

The most likely initial step mirrors what the RCMP has already done voluntarily: restricting use in sensitive government operations while allowing continued commercial use. This is effectively where Canada sits today. Government agencies are quietly limiting their exposure while the private sector continues operating normally.

A more aggressive approach would involve procurement restrictions similar to the U.S. NDAA rules, prohibiting federal agencies and their contractors from using Chinese-made drones. Given Canada's "Buy Canadian" policy push in Budget 2025 and increasing emphasis on supply chain security, this seems increasingly probable. When a major federal contractor can't use DJI drones on government work, the ripple effects extend far beyond direct government contracts.

The nuclear option, an outright import ban similar to what the U.S. implemented, remains possible but less likely in the near term. Canada has historically been more cautious about technology restrictions, preferring risk mitigation over prohibition. But pressure from U.S. partners, particularly regarding border security operations, could accelerate this timeline.

The RCMP's acknowledgment that it cannot use Chinese drones for "investigations with U.S. authorities" is telling. When joint operations are compromised by equipment choices, the calculus shifts.

Who's Ready to Fill the Gap?

If Canada does restrict DJI, the question becomes: who steps in? The honest answer is that no single manufacturer can replicate what DJI offers at comparable price points. But several companies are positioning themselves to capture different segments of the market.

Skydio (United States)

Skydio has emerged as the primary American alternative for enterprise and government applications. Their X10 platform, launched in late 2023, combines AI-powered autonomous flight with modular payloads including thermal, zoom, and visual sensors. It's NDAA-compliant, Blue UAS certified, and manufactured in the United States.

The X10's autonomous capabilities are genuinely impressive, arguably superior to DJI in complex environments. But pricing starts around $20,000, and the platform lacks a mechanical shutter, limiting its photogrammetry performance. Skydio explicitly exited the consumer market in 2023 to focus on government and enterprise, which tells you something about the economics of competing with DJI on price.

Freefly Systems (United States)

Freefly's Astro platform has become a favorite for mapping and inspection work. The Astro Max supports payloads up to 20 pounds, accommodates a 61-megapixel Sony sensor, and integrates RTK positioning. It's designed, assembled, and supported in Washington State, and holds Blue UAS certification.

The catch: the Astro Max Mapping Essentials bundle runs close to $30,000. That's enterprise-grade pricing for enterprise-grade capability, but it puts the platform out of reach for smaller operators who might have been running $3,000 DJI Mavics for similar work.

Parrot (France)

Parrot's Anafi USA offers NDAA compliance in a compact, portable form factor with both thermal and zoom capabilities. It's positioned for security, surveillance, and inspection work where portability matters. The French manufacturer has largely abandoned consumer drones to focus on enterprise applications, another indication of where margins actually exist when competing with DJI.

Inspired Flight (United States)

The IF800 Tomcat is designed as a direct replacement for the DJI Matrice 350 in demanding commercial and government operations. It supports modular payloads, hot-swappable batteries, and offers flight times exceeding 40 minutes. Blue UAS approved and NDAA compliant.

Like other American alternatives, pricing reflects domestic manufacturing costs and lower production volumes. The IF800 runs an open-source ArduPilot flight controller, which offers flexibility but may lack the polished user experience of DJI's software ecosystem.

Autel Robotics

Here's where it gets complicated. Autel has positioned itself as the primary DJI alternative at competitive price points. The EVO series offers genuine capability at consumer-accessible pricing. But Autel is also a Chinese company, and it was included alongside DJI in the U.S. FCC restrictions. If Canada follows the American approach, Autel isn't a solution, it's the same problem.

Canadian Options

Canada has roughly 1,000 companies involved in drone production and sales, with domestic manufacturers like Canadian UAVs, Volatus Aerospace, ARA Robotics, and Avidrone Aerospace operating in various segments. But the honest assessment is that Canadian manufacturing hasn't scaled to offer consumer or prosumer alternatives. Canadian companies are more likely to provide services, integration, or specialized platforms than mass-market hardware.

The Canadian Armed Forces' $2.49 billion investment in MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones signals where government priorities lie, but these are military platforms, not commercial alternatives. The gap between Canada's defense drone investments and its commercial drone manufacturing capability is substantial.

The Software Problem

Hardware is only part of the equation. DJI's dominance extends to software ecosystems that many operators have built their workflows around. DJI Terra for photogrammetry processing, DJI FlightHub for fleet management, Pilot apps for mission planning, these tools are deeply integrated into how commercial operations function.

A ban doesn't just mean buying new drones. It means rebuilding workflows around different software platforms. The Freefly Astro uses the Auterion ecosystem. Skydio has its own mission planning and fleet management tools. None of these directly replace DJI's software stack, and transitioning means retraining pilots, rebuilding mission libraries, and adapting data processing pipelines.

For operators who've invested years building efficiency around DJI's tools, this represents hidden transition costs beyond equipment replacement.

Which Operators Benefit?

A DJI ban wouldn't affect all operators equally. Some are positioned to benefit significantly from the disruption.

Operators already using non-DJI equipment. Those who invested early in NDAA-compliant or Western-manufactured platforms suddenly find themselves ahead of competitors scrambling to transition. Their equipment choices, once seen as expensive alternatives to the DJI standard, become competitive advantages when everyone else is rebuilding their fleets.

Companies with deep capital reserves. Fleet replacement at 2-3x current equipment costs favors well-capitalized operators over smaller competitors operating on thin margins. A ban could accelerate industry consolidation as smaller operators struggle to finance transitions while larger players absorb market share.

Operators focused on government and regulated industries. Government contracts, critical infrastructure work, and security-sensitive applications are where restrictions hit first and hardest. Operators already positioned for this work, with compliant equipment, security clearances, and established client relationships, capture displacement demand as competitors drop out of these sectors.

Training and consulting providers. Transition creates demand for expertise. Operators need help selecting replacement platforms, rebuilding workflows, retraining pilots, and navigating compliance requirements. Companies positioned to provide this guidance benefit from industry-wide disruption.

Service providers over equipment owners. Companies that sell drone services rather than operating drone fleets can pass equipment cost increases to clients more easily than operators competing on price. The value proposition shifts from "cheapest aerial data" to "compliant aerial data", and compliance commands premium pricing.

Which Operators Lose?

The pain wouldn't be distributed evenly either.

Price-sensitive commercial operators. Real estate photographers, event videographers, and small-scale mapping operations that compete primarily on price face the hardest transition. When equipment costs double, margins disappear. Some will absorb the costs, some will pass them to clients, and some will exit the market.

Recent DJI equipment purchasers. Operators who just invested in new DJI fleets face the worst timing. Their equipment may remain legal to operate but becomes increasingly difficult to maintain, repair, and expand. Depreciation schedules planned around 5-7 year equipment lifespans suddenly compress.

Agricultural operators. DJI's agricultural drones, the T50, T100, and similar platforms, have limited direct alternatives. Agricultural spray operations depend on specific payloads, flight characteristics, and integration with farm management software. Transitioning this segment requires purpose-built alternatives that don't fully exist at comparable price points.

Operations dependent on DJI's software ecosystem. Companies that built sophisticated workflows around DJI Terra, FlightHub, or other DJI software face transition costs extending far beyond hardware replacement.

The Practical Reality

Here's what the U.S. experience tells us: existing drones don't get banned overnight. The FCC restrictions affect new imports and new model approvals, not aircraft already in operation with existing certifications. Operators can continue flying current equipment, for now.

But "for now" has limits. Parts become harder to source. Firmware updates stop. Battery replacements get complicated. The fleet that works fine today gradually degrades into an operational liability. You can stretch existing equipment, but you can't stretch it forever.

The smart play isn't panic buying or immediate fleet replacement. It's understanding the timeline, building relationships with alternative suppliers, testing non-DJI platforms in controlled settings, and planning transition strategies before they become urgent.

For operators doing government or government-adjacent work, the transition timeline is shorter. For purely commercial operations with no regulatory exposure, the runway is longer. But the direction of travel seems clear.

What We're Doing

We're not going to pretend we have this figured out. Like most Canadian operators, our equipment inventory includes DJI platforms alongside other manufacturers. We've been watching the U.S. situation closely, not because we expect Canada to follow exactly, but because the underlying pressures are similar.

Our approach has been testing alternatives in operational contexts rather than just evaluating specifications. Understanding how a Skydio X10 actually performs on a pipeline inspection versus how a DJI Matrice 30T performs tells you things that spec sheets don't capture. Building familiarity with different platforms, different software ecosystems, different operational workflows, this takes time that won't be available if restrictions arrive suddenly.

We're also being realistic about cost implications. Premium equipment requires premium pricing. Clients who've grown accustomed to rates based on DJI economics need to understand that equipment cost increases eventually reach them. Having those conversations now, before they're urgent, builds the understanding necessary for smooth transitions later.

The Bigger Picture

The DJI situation reflects something larger than drone policy. Canada is navigating an increasingly complex relationship between economic efficiency and security concerns, between integrated global supply chains and strategic autonomy. Drones are one manifestation of choices that extend across technology sectors.

The RCMP's situation, 80% of their fleet presenting "high security risks" but replacement costing $30 million, illustrates the bind. Security concerns are legitimate. Cost differentials are also real. There's no cost-free path from where we are to where security considerations suggest we should be.

For commercial operators, the practical question isn't whether these concerns are valid. It's how to position for a market that may look very different in two or three years than it does today. Equipment decisions, client relationships, service offerings, pricing strategies, all of these may need adjustment as the regulatory environment evolves.

The operators who navigate this transition successfully won't be the ones who predicted it most accurately. They'll be the ones who prepared for multiple scenarios, maintained flexibility, and built the operational expertise to work effectively with whatever equipment becomes standard.

That's not a satisfying conclusion. It would be easier if we could say "buy this platform" or "expect restrictions by this date." But the honest assessment is that uncertainty is the operating environment for the foreseeable future. The best preparation is building adaptability into how you operate.

---

Aeria Solutions operates across Western Canada with a mixed fleet that includes both DJI and non-DJI platforms. We're actively evaluating transition strategies and happy to compare notes with other operators facing similar questions. The Canadian drone industry is small enough that we all benefit from sharing what we're learning.