Federal Regulatory Agencies
Here's a look at documents from federal regulatory agencies
Federal Regulatory Agencies
Featured Stories
SEC Director Daly Issues Remarks at the Stanford University Private Capital Roundtable
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Brian Daly, director of Investment Management:
* * *
Remarks at the Stanford University Private Capital Roundtable
Stanford, California Oct. 16, 2026
Thank you, Scott [James], for that kind introduction.
Before I begin, I must - as always - inform you that my remarks today are provided in my official capacity as the Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of the Division of Investment Management, but do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other members ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Brian Daly, director of Investment Management: * * * Remarks at the Stanford University Private Capital Roundtable Stanford, California Oct. 16, 2026 Thank you, Scott [James], for that kind introduction. Before I begin, I must - as always - inform you that my remarks today are provided in my official capacity as the Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of the Division of Investment Management, but do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other membersof the staff.
It's a great privilege to be back at Stanford. On my way over here, I walked through the Huang Engineering Center and stood inside the replica of the garage in which William Hewlett and David Packard founded an electronics company. The lore is that they started with a drill press and $500 of working capital, and they ended up helping change the world.
Now, I never met Bill or Dave -- or Jerry or David, or Sergey or Larry -- but like so many Americans I feel connected to all of them through the companies they started on this campus, companies financed by venture and growth capital providers.
Sadly, I - like so many Americans - was never able to invest in any of those startups before they went public. Nor could I invest in hedge fund strategies, private equity and buyout funds, or other "alternative" assets and exposures. Those options were as a practical matter the exclusive purview of "institutional" investors.
As you may have read in the papers, the Administration, and more specifically the Commission, is trying to change that. And, with your indulgence, I'd like to briefly outline that plan and how it seeks to provide more retail access to alternatives without sacrificing the protections that retail investors have relied upon for over eight decades.
1. What is "Responsible Retailization?"
Under our securities laws, institutional investors and high net worth individuals can:
* obtain exposure to a myriad of alpha and beta opportunities,
* negotiate compensation arrangements designed to align the incentives of an investment adviser with a desired portfolio outcome, and
* invest in, and profit from, the innovative, cutting edge companies that drive the nation's economy.
It might not be overstating the matter to describe the desire to provide retail investors, in a thoughtful and intentional manner, access to these same markets as an historical imperative. President Trump, by Executive Order, has instructed that retirement account participants have more private market options in their 401(k) accounts.[1] Chairman Atkins (also known as "my boss") has directed us in the SEC's Division of Investment Management to propose "responsible retailization" measures that would allow retail investors more freedom to direct their "post-tax, pre-retirement" dollars to alternative assets and strategies.[2]
So-called "alternative" investments -- like all investments -- are not without risk and uncertainty. Some of these risks are familiar to retail investors, like the possibility of poor performance. Others are less familiar or even novel, like suspension gates and binary payouts. This is why the Chairman has insisted, from day one, that any retail access proposal have fiduciary protections and other "guardrails" to address these kinds of risks. This is the basis of our "Responsible Retailization" initiative.
2. The Proposal in Context
The Responsible Retailization initiative relies on three essential components (which we refer to as a "three-legged stool"):
1. Access
2. Transparency; and
3. Incentives.
Access means utilizing, and modernizing, the existing regulated fund regime to provide retail access to alternatives in structures that still provide for fiduciary oversight.
Millions of Americans invest in regulated funds, and this has allowed many ordinary investors to build wealth and provide for their families. While our retail regulatory regime can be paternalistic and limiting, its durability and penetration is undeniable. In other words, by and large, it works pretty well.
But, like any 86-year old, the structure could use some updating. Over the past year and a half, my colleagues in the Division have provided guidance and no-action letters and issued orders pursuant to delegated authority addressing tools and techniques traditionally exclusive to private funds. We have, for example, addressed the ability of:
* Fund sponsors to "seed" newly-formed registered funds;[3]
* Regulated funds to co-invest alongside other advised funds and accounts;[4]
* Registered funds and business development companies to issue multiple share classes with different distribution economics and operational structures;[5]
* Fund sponsors to schedule and to size registered fund redemptions.[6]
And I would like to be clear on one important point: All of these actions were done with a focus on investor protection. While these efforts may have been inspired by common practices in the private fund space, they occur under regulated fund safeguards, including independent board approval and oversight (in addition to the requirement that the investment adviser running the fund adhere to a strict fiduciary duty).
These various staff efforts over the past year-and-a-half have, we believe, laid much of the groundwork for regulated funds as they consider their ability to offer alternative asset exposures. But work continues: the Commission proposed additional modernization measures for interval funds two weeks ago,[7] and we have more things up our sleeve in the exemptive world.
Transparency is the second leg of our stool. We believe that true retailization requires that retail investors and the broader market both see the underlying exposures in these funds and that the market be able to assess their values.
To be clear, solid fair value processes by fund managers are and will continue to be an expectation and an examination focus, as those fair values drive internal fund management and performance fee calculations. But, by facilitating retail funds listing on exchanges (we - most unoriginally - call this "ticker-izaton") we are actively encouraging sponsors of regulated alts funds to provide position-level transparency. We are also hopeful that analysts and other traders will be enabled and incentivized to form independent views on a fund's value. If this happens, it could result in a price discovery feedback loop that could instill confidence in the retail investor, inject liquidity into these new retail funds, and create a "virtuous cycle" of independent pricing data flowing back into the private market. Again, there are no guarantees on how any investment will perform, but letting the market have a say on what an investment is worth seems like a good idea.
Every system requires incentives. It is very, very hard for fund sponsors to make money in the retail space; fees are comparatively low, distribution can be expensive, margins can be razor-thin, and competition is fierce. It is no surprise that very, very few successful alternatives managers have dared to swim in the retail waters.
The Commission has proposed a solution to this situation: make it worth your while. Expanding the ability for advisers to charge performance fees could incentivize advisers currently operating in the private markets to bring diverse strategies to a wider group of clients and investors, including investors in regulated funds, subject to numerous protective conditions.[8] To be clear, we do not expect that these will have exactly the same terms as the private funds currently offered, but today we don't even have apples and oranges. We have nothing and oranges. The Commission's proposals, if adopted, could incent some alts managers to consider offering retail tangerines alongside institutional oranges.
3. Super Intelligence
I simply could not come to Stanford and not mention Super Intelligence.[9] SI offers a unique opportunity for regular folks to gain access to vast expertise, including investment expertise. I say over and over again - because it is true - that I work for the most pro-innovation SEC ever, and we want to encourage investment advisers and fund sponsors to utilize this technology responsibly for the benefit of the American investor.
My colleagues and I have been having many productive discussions with investment advisers and their counsels about operationalizing SI. However, there is still far more trepidation about SI deployment than I think is warranted, so - continuing with the theme of risk and reward - I hope that I can ask this audience to help financial sector participants see that SI adoption, done thoughtfully, is worth the discomfort of leaving the status quo.
SI is a tremendous innovation, but it doesn't render everything we have done in the past obsolete. Our principles-based, fiduciary duty regime adapted to the invention of television, email, the internet, and smartphones; it will adapt to SI.
Fiduciaries have duties of care and loyalty, and progress can be consistent with both of them. I will be the first to admit that innovation - by definition - involves some risk, but so does investing. My recommendation to advisers and sponsors is to enthusiastically innovate in a responsible and thoughtful manner. And don't wait for regulators to hold your hands through this shift, because you may receive guidance that is both too limited and too late.
However, if there are specific laws, regulations, or SEC staff positions that are actually preventing investment advisers from deploying SI tools, we want to hear about them. Call us or visit us and we can assess these roadblocks. We are easy to find: take the train to DC's Union Station, walk towards the McDonalds, make a left, and we are at the end of the hallway.
Risk and reward are interlinked. Everyone - not just the people in this room - should be able to make informed decisions on how much risk to accept. But the regulators must try to ensure those decisions are made within a system of intelligent safeguards.
Great things can happen when people take calculated risks -- just ask Hewlett and Packard.
With that, I would like to once again thank all of you for having me, and open the floor for discussion.
* * *
[1] Executive Order 14330, Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors (Aug. 7, 2025).
[2] See, e.g., Paul S. Atkins, Statement at Open Meeting on Proposals to Expand Responsible Retailization of Private Markets, (Sept. 30, 2026), available at https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-statement-open-meeting-093026.
[3] See Third Point Private Capital Income Fund, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Apr. 16, 2026) (no-action letter relating to BDC seeding transactions).
[4] See J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Apr. 27, 2026) (no-action letter relating to open-end investment companies and co-investments); FS Credit Opportunities, et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35520 (Apr. 3, 2025) (notice) and 35561 (Apr. 29, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to co-investments).
[5] Ark Venture Fund and Ark Investment Management LLC, Investment Company Act Release No. 36308 (Aug. 24, 2026) (notice) and 36333 (Sept. 21, 2026) (order) (exemptive order relating to multiple share classes, including a tokenized share class); Franklin Templeton, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Aug. 12, 2026) (no-action letter relating to tokenized open-end and closed-end investment companies); DFA Investment Dimensions Group Inc., et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35770 (Sept. 29, 2025) (notice) and 35786 (Nov. 17, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to multiple mutual fund share classes, including exchange traded shares); Ares Core Infrastructure Fund, et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35494 (Mar. 12, 2025) (notice) and 35523 (Apr. 8, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to BDC issuing multiple share classes).
[6] Lord Abbett Credit Opportunities Fund, et al. Investment Company Act Release No. 35663 (July 2, 2025) (notice) and 35699 (July 29, 2025) (order).
[7] Proposed Rule, Interval Fund Modernization; Expansion of Multiple Share Class to Registered Closed-End Management Investment Companies and Business Development Companies, Release No. 33-11444; 34-106534; IC-36351 (Sept. 30, 2026) [91 FR 63388 (Oct. 5, 2026)].
[8] See Proposed Rule, Investment Adviser Performance-Based Compensation Modernization, Release Nos. 33-11443; 34-106533; IA-7022; IC-36350 (Sept. 30, 2026) [91 FR 63676, 63678 (Oct. 6, 2026)].
[9] Executive Order 14434, Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence (Sept. 29, 2026) (defining the terms "Super Intelligence" and "SI" as the technologies and systems encompassed by the term "artificial intelligence" as defined in section 9401(3) of title 15, United States Code).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/daly-remarks-stanford-roundtable-101626
* * *
Remarks at the Stanford University Private Capital Roundtable
Stanford, California Oct. 16, 2026
Thank you, Scott [James], for that kind introduction.
Before I begin, I must - as always - inform you that my remarks today are provided in my official capacity as the Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of the Division of Investment Management, but do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other members ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Brian Daly, director of Investment Management: * * * Remarks at the Stanford University Private Capital Roundtable Stanford, California Oct. 16, 2026 Thank you, Scott [James], for that kind introduction. Before I begin, I must - as always - inform you that my remarks today are provided in my official capacity as the Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of the Division of Investment Management, but do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other membersof the staff.
It's a great privilege to be back at Stanford. On my way over here, I walked through the Huang Engineering Center and stood inside the replica of the garage in which William Hewlett and David Packard founded an electronics company. The lore is that they started with a drill press and $500 of working capital, and they ended up helping change the world.
Now, I never met Bill or Dave -- or Jerry or David, or Sergey or Larry -- but like so many Americans I feel connected to all of them through the companies they started on this campus, companies financed by venture and growth capital providers.
Sadly, I - like so many Americans - was never able to invest in any of those startups before they went public. Nor could I invest in hedge fund strategies, private equity and buyout funds, or other "alternative" assets and exposures. Those options were as a practical matter the exclusive purview of "institutional" investors.
As you may have read in the papers, the Administration, and more specifically the Commission, is trying to change that. And, with your indulgence, I'd like to briefly outline that plan and how it seeks to provide more retail access to alternatives without sacrificing the protections that retail investors have relied upon for over eight decades.
1. What is "Responsible Retailization?"
Under our securities laws, institutional investors and high net worth individuals can:
* obtain exposure to a myriad of alpha and beta opportunities,
* negotiate compensation arrangements designed to align the incentives of an investment adviser with a desired portfolio outcome, and
* invest in, and profit from, the innovative, cutting edge companies that drive the nation's economy.
It might not be overstating the matter to describe the desire to provide retail investors, in a thoughtful and intentional manner, access to these same markets as an historical imperative. President Trump, by Executive Order, has instructed that retirement account participants have more private market options in their 401(k) accounts.[1] Chairman Atkins (also known as "my boss") has directed us in the SEC's Division of Investment Management to propose "responsible retailization" measures that would allow retail investors more freedom to direct their "post-tax, pre-retirement" dollars to alternative assets and strategies.[2]
So-called "alternative" investments -- like all investments -- are not without risk and uncertainty. Some of these risks are familiar to retail investors, like the possibility of poor performance. Others are less familiar or even novel, like suspension gates and binary payouts. This is why the Chairman has insisted, from day one, that any retail access proposal have fiduciary protections and other "guardrails" to address these kinds of risks. This is the basis of our "Responsible Retailization" initiative.
2. The Proposal in Context
The Responsible Retailization initiative relies on three essential components (which we refer to as a "three-legged stool"):
1. Access
2. Transparency; and
3. Incentives.
Access means utilizing, and modernizing, the existing regulated fund regime to provide retail access to alternatives in structures that still provide for fiduciary oversight.
Millions of Americans invest in regulated funds, and this has allowed many ordinary investors to build wealth and provide for their families. While our retail regulatory regime can be paternalistic and limiting, its durability and penetration is undeniable. In other words, by and large, it works pretty well.
But, like any 86-year old, the structure could use some updating. Over the past year and a half, my colleagues in the Division have provided guidance and no-action letters and issued orders pursuant to delegated authority addressing tools and techniques traditionally exclusive to private funds. We have, for example, addressed the ability of:
* Fund sponsors to "seed" newly-formed registered funds;[3]
* Regulated funds to co-invest alongside other advised funds and accounts;[4]
* Registered funds and business development companies to issue multiple share classes with different distribution economics and operational structures;[5]
* Fund sponsors to schedule and to size registered fund redemptions.[6]
And I would like to be clear on one important point: All of these actions were done with a focus on investor protection. While these efforts may have been inspired by common practices in the private fund space, they occur under regulated fund safeguards, including independent board approval and oversight (in addition to the requirement that the investment adviser running the fund adhere to a strict fiduciary duty).
These various staff efforts over the past year-and-a-half have, we believe, laid much of the groundwork for regulated funds as they consider their ability to offer alternative asset exposures. But work continues: the Commission proposed additional modernization measures for interval funds two weeks ago,[7] and we have more things up our sleeve in the exemptive world.
Transparency is the second leg of our stool. We believe that true retailization requires that retail investors and the broader market both see the underlying exposures in these funds and that the market be able to assess their values.
To be clear, solid fair value processes by fund managers are and will continue to be an expectation and an examination focus, as those fair values drive internal fund management and performance fee calculations. But, by facilitating retail funds listing on exchanges (we - most unoriginally - call this "ticker-izaton") we are actively encouraging sponsors of regulated alts funds to provide position-level transparency. We are also hopeful that analysts and other traders will be enabled and incentivized to form independent views on a fund's value. If this happens, it could result in a price discovery feedback loop that could instill confidence in the retail investor, inject liquidity into these new retail funds, and create a "virtuous cycle" of independent pricing data flowing back into the private market. Again, there are no guarantees on how any investment will perform, but letting the market have a say on what an investment is worth seems like a good idea.
Every system requires incentives. It is very, very hard for fund sponsors to make money in the retail space; fees are comparatively low, distribution can be expensive, margins can be razor-thin, and competition is fierce. It is no surprise that very, very few successful alternatives managers have dared to swim in the retail waters.
The Commission has proposed a solution to this situation: make it worth your while. Expanding the ability for advisers to charge performance fees could incentivize advisers currently operating in the private markets to bring diverse strategies to a wider group of clients and investors, including investors in regulated funds, subject to numerous protective conditions.[8] To be clear, we do not expect that these will have exactly the same terms as the private funds currently offered, but today we don't even have apples and oranges. We have nothing and oranges. The Commission's proposals, if adopted, could incent some alts managers to consider offering retail tangerines alongside institutional oranges.
3. Super Intelligence
I simply could not come to Stanford and not mention Super Intelligence.[9] SI offers a unique opportunity for regular folks to gain access to vast expertise, including investment expertise. I say over and over again - because it is true - that I work for the most pro-innovation SEC ever, and we want to encourage investment advisers and fund sponsors to utilize this technology responsibly for the benefit of the American investor.
My colleagues and I have been having many productive discussions with investment advisers and their counsels about operationalizing SI. However, there is still far more trepidation about SI deployment than I think is warranted, so - continuing with the theme of risk and reward - I hope that I can ask this audience to help financial sector participants see that SI adoption, done thoughtfully, is worth the discomfort of leaving the status quo.
SI is a tremendous innovation, but it doesn't render everything we have done in the past obsolete. Our principles-based, fiduciary duty regime adapted to the invention of television, email, the internet, and smartphones; it will adapt to SI.
Fiduciaries have duties of care and loyalty, and progress can be consistent with both of them. I will be the first to admit that innovation - by definition - involves some risk, but so does investing. My recommendation to advisers and sponsors is to enthusiastically innovate in a responsible and thoughtful manner. And don't wait for regulators to hold your hands through this shift, because you may receive guidance that is both too limited and too late.
However, if there are specific laws, regulations, or SEC staff positions that are actually preventing investment advisers from deploying SI tools, we want to hear about them. Call us or visit us and we can assess these roadblocks. We are easy to find: take the train to DC's Union Station, walk towards the McDonalds, make a left, and we are at the end of the hallway.
Risk and reward are interlinked. Everyone - not just the people in this room - should be able to make informed decisions on how much risk to accept. But the regulators must try to ensure those decisions are made within a system of intelligent safeguards.
Great things can happen when people take calculated risks -- just ask Hewlett and Packard.
With that, I would like to once again thank all of you for having me, and open the floor for discussion.
* * *
[1] Executive Order 14330, Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors (Aug. 7, 2025).
[2] See, e.g., Paul S. Atkins, Statement at Open Meeting on Proposals to Expand Responsible Retailization of Private Markets, (Sept. 30, 2026), available at https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-statement-open-meeting-093026.
[3] See Third Point Private Capital Income Fund, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Apr. 16, 2026) (no-action letter relating to BDC seeding transactions).
[4] See J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Apr. 27, 2026) (no-action letter relating to open-end investment companies and co-investments); FS Credit Opportunities, et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35520 (Apr. 3, 2025) (notice) and 35561 (Apr. 29, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to co-investments).
[5] Ark Venture Fund and Ark Investment Management LLC, Investment Company Act Release No. 36308 (Aug. 24, 2026) (notice) and 36333 (Sept. 21, 2026) (order) (exemptive order relating to multiple share classes, including a tokenized share class); Franklin Templeton, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Aug. 12, 2026) (no-action letter relating to tokenized open-end and closed-end investment companies); DFA Investment Dimensions Group Inc., et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35770 (Sept. 29, 2025) (notice) and 35786 (Nov. 17, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to multiple mutual fund share classes, including exchange traded shares); Ares Core Infrastructure Fund, et al., Investment Company Act Release No. 35494 (Mar. 12, 2025) (notice) and 35523 (Apr. 8, 2025) (order) (exemptive order relating to BDC issuing multiple share classes).
[6] Lord Abbett Credit Opportunities Fund, et al. Investment Company Act Release No. 35663 (July 2, 2025) (notice) and 35699 (July 29, 2025) (order).
[7] Proposed Rule, Interval Fund Modernization; Expansion of Multiple Share Class to Registered Closed-End Management Investment Companies and Business Development Companies, Release No. 33-11444; 34-106534; IC-36351 (Sept. 30, 2026) [91 FR 63388 (Oct. 5, 2026)].
[8] See Proposed Rule, Investment Adviser Performance-Based Compensation Modernization, Release Nos. 33-11443; 34-106533; IA-7022; IC-36350 (Sept. 30, 2026) [91 FR 63676, 63678 (Oct. 6, 2026)].
[9] Executive Order 14434, Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence (Sept. 29, 2026) (defining the terms "Super Intelligence" and "SI" as the technologies and systems encompassed by the term "artificial intelligence" as defined in section 9401(3) of title 15, United States Code).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/daly-remarks-stanford-roundtable-101626
Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof From Czech Republic and India Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The U.S. International Trade Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
October 16, 2026
The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of freight rail couplers and parts thereof from Czech Republic and India that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of India.
Chairman ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The U.S. International Trade Commission issued the following news release: * * * Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC October 16, 2026 The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of freight rail couplers and parts thereof from Czech Republic and India that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of India. ChairmanBrett W. Doyle and Commissioners Jason E. Kearns, Peter-Anthony Pappas, Bart Thanhauser, and David Foley Jr. voted in the affirmative. Commissioner Samuel T. Negatu did not participate in the vote.
As a result of the USITC's affirmative determinations, Commerce will issue antidumping orders on imports of this product from Czech Republic and India and a countervailing duty order on imports of this product from India.
The USITC's public report, Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-775 and 731-TA-1759-1760 (Final), USITC Publication 5805, November 2026), will contain the views of the USITC and information developed during the investigations.
The report will be available on the USITC website by November 30, 2026.
Status of proceedings, links to relevant documents, and more information about the investigations can be found at the USITC's Investigations Database System (IDS).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2026/er1016_69361.htm
* * *
Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
October 16, 2026
The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of freight rail couplers and parts thereof from Czech Republic and India that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of India.
Chairman ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The U.S. International Trade Commission issued the following news release: * * * Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC October 16, 2026 The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of freight rail couplers and parts thereof from Czech Republic and India that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of India. ChairmanBrett W. Doyle and Commissioners Jason E. Kearns, Peter-Anthony Pappas, Bart Thanhauser, and David Foley Jr. voted in the affirmative. Commissioner Samuel T. Negatu did not participate in the vote.
As a result of the USITC's affirmative determinations, Commerce will issue antidumping orders on imports of this product from Czech Republic and India and a countervailing duty order on imports of this product from India.
The USITC's public report, Freight Rail Couplers and Parts Thereof from Czech Republic and India (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-775 and 731-TA-1759-1760 (Final), USITC Publication 5805, November 2026), will contain the views of the USITC and information developed during the investigations.
The report will be available on the USITC website by November 30, 2026.
Status of proceedings, links to relevant documents, and more information about the investigations can be found at the USITC's Investigations Database System (IDS).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2026/er1016_69361.htm
FEC Issues Digest for Week of Oct. 12-16, 2026
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Extension of Time and Supplemental Material Received
Advisory Opinion Request 2025-08 (Coolidge Reagan Foundation) On October 13, the Commission received an extension of time and on October 14, the Commission made public supplemental material from the requestor.
* * *
Litigation
Bernegger v. FEC (Case No. 25-4072) On October 14, Plaintiff filed the following in the U.S. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest: * * * Commission meetings and hearings No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week. * * * Advisory Opinions Extension of Time and Supplemental Material Received Advisory Opinion Request 2025-08 (Coolidge Reagan Foundation) On October 13, the Commission received an extension of time and on October 14, the Commission made public supplemental material from the requestor. * * * Litigation Bernegger v. FEC (Case No. 25-4072) On October 14, Plaintiff filed the following in the U.S.District Court for the District of Columbia: a Renewed Motion for Default Judgment Against FEC, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment; a Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of His Renewed Motion for Default Judgment, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment; and a Declaration of Peter Bernegger in Support of Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Default Judgment.
* * *
Outreach
On October 15, Commissioner Shana M. Broussard spoke at The Washington Post's Verified Live "Campaigns and Creators" panel in Washington, DC.
* * *
Upcoming educational opportunities
November 18, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host a Winding Down the Campaign & Post-General Reporting Webinar.
For more information on upcoming training opportunities, see the Commission's Trainings page.
* * *
Upcoming reporting due dates
October 20: October Monthly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Monthly Reporting schedule.
October 22: 12-Day Pre-General Election Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Pre- and Post-General Reporting schedule. Staff in the Reports Analysis Division (RAD) and Electronic Filing Office will be available until 8:00 p.m. (EDT) on the 22nd to answer questions regarding the content and filing of reports. To reach RAD, call 800-424-9530 (press 5) or 202-694-1130. For help with technical issues relating to electronic filing, dial the same toll-free number and press 4 or call 202-694-1307.
* * *
Additional research materials
Contribution Limits: In addition to the current limits, the Commission has posted an archive of contribution limits that were in effect going back to the 1975-1976 election cycles.
Federal election results are available. The data was compiled from the official vote totals published by state election offices.
FEC Notify: Want to be notified by email when campaign finance reports are received by the agency? Sign up here.
The Combined Federal State Disclosure and Election Directory is available. This publication identifies the federal and state agencies responsible for the disclosure of campaign finances, lobbying, personal finances, public financing, candidates on the ballot, election results, spending on state initiatives, and other financial filings.
The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Tax Checkoff Chart provides information on balance of the Fund, monthly deposits into the Fund reported by the Department of the Treasury, payments from the Fund as certified by the FEC, and participation rates of taxpayers as reported by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information on the Presidential Public Funding Program, see the Public Funding of Presidential Elections page.
The FEC Record is available as a continuously updated online news source.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fec.gov/updates/week-of-october-12-16-2026/
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Extension of Time and Supplemental Material Received
Advisory Opinion Request 2025-08 (Coolidge Reagan Foundation) On October 13, the Commission received an extension of time and on October 14, the Commission made public supplemental material from the requestor.
* * *
Litigation
Bernegger v. FEC (Case No. 25-4072) On October 14, Plaintiff filed the following in the U.S. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest: * * * Commission meetings and hearings No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week. * * * Advisory Opinions Extension of Time and Supplemental Material Received Advisory Opinion Request 2025-08 (Coolidge Reagan Foundation) On October 13, the Commission received an extension of time and on October 14, the Commission made public supplemental material from the requestor. * * * Litigation Bernegger v. FEC (Case No. 25-4072) On October 14, Plaintiff filed the following in the U.S.District Court for the District of Columbia: a Renewed Motion for Default Judgment Against FEC, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment; a Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of His Renewed Motion for Default Judgment, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment; and a Declaration of Peter Bernegger in Support of Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Default Judgment.
* * *
Outreach
On October 15, Commissioner Shana M. Broussard spoke at The Washington Post's Verified Live "Campaigns and Creators" panel in Washington, DC.
* * *
Upcoming educational opportunities
November 18, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host a Winding Down the Campaign & Post-General Reporting Webinar.
For more information on upcoming training opportunities, see the Commission's Trainings page.
* * *
Upcoming reporting due dates
October 20: October Monthly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Monthly Reporting schedule.
October 22: 12-Day Pre-General Election Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Pre- and Post-General Reporting schedule. Staff in the Reports Analysis Division (RAD) and Electronic Filing Office will be available until 8:00 p.m. (EDT) on the 22nd to answer questions regarding the content and filing of reports. To reach RAD, call 800-424-9530 (press 5) or 202-694-1130. For help with technical issues relating to electronic filing, dial the same toll-free number and press 4 or call 202-694-1307.
* * *
Additional research materials
Contribution Limits: In addition to the current limits, the Commission has posted an archive of contribution limits that were in effect going back to the 1975-1976 election cycles.
Federal election results are available. The data was compiled from the official vote totals published by state election offices.
FEC Notify: Want to be notified by email when campaign finance reports are received by the agency? Sign up here.
The Combined Federal State Disclosure and Election Directory is available. This publication identifies the federal and state agencies responsible for the disclosure of campaign finances, lobbying, personal finances, public financing, candidates on the ballot, election results, spending on state initiatives, and other financial filings.
The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Tax Checkoff Chart provides information on balance of the Fund, monthly deposits into the Fund reported by the Department of the Treasury, payments from the Fund as certified by the FEC, and participation rates of taxpayers as reported by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information on the Presidential Public Funding Program, see the Public Funding of Presidential Elections page.
The FEC Record is available as a continuously updated online news source.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fec.gov/updates/week-of-october-12-16-2026/
FCC Public Safety & Homeland Security Bureau Issues Public Notice: Conditional Approval, Exemption of Certain Advanced Robotic Devices, Power Inverters From FCC Covered List
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 18-89; ET Docket No. 21-232; EA Docket No. 21-233):
* * *
The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) maintains a list of equipment and services (Covered List) that have been determined to "pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons."/1 Pursuant to Section 2 of the Secure and Trusted Communications ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 18-89; ET Docket No. 21-232; EA Docket No. 21-233): * * * The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) maintains a list of equipment and services (Covered List) that have been determined to "pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons."/1 Pursuant to Section 2 of the Secure and Trusted CommunicationsNetworks Act of 2019 (Secure Networks Act)/2 and sections 1.50002(a) and 1.50003 of the Commission's rules,/3 PSHSB announces that the Department of War (DoW) has granted Conditional Approval for certain foreign-produced advanced robotic devices and power inverters. Therefore, such devices are exempt from the Covered List.
Addition of Advanced Robotic Devices and Power Inverters to the Covered List
Advanced Robotic Devices. On July 28, 2026, the Commission added to the Covered List "foreign-produced advanced robotic devices, except advanced robotic devices which have been granted a Conditional Approval by DoW."/4 This addition was based on a National Security Determination from an Executive Branch interagency body, including several appropriate national security agencies, determining (among other things) that advanced robotic devices produced in a foreign country pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of U.S. persons./5
Power Inverters. On July 28, 2026, PSHSB added to the Covered List "[f]oreign-produced power inverters, except power inverters which have been granted a Conditional Approval by DoW or DHS."/6 This action was based on a National Security Determination from an Executive Branch interagency body, including several appropriate national security agencies, determining (among other things) that power inverters produced in a foreign country pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of U.S. persons./7
On August 19, 2026, the Commission received another National Security Determination from DoW that contained additional determinations related to foreign-produced power inverters. First, DoW determined that certain foreign-produced power inverters that are eligible for certain clean energy tax credits do not pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States or to the safety and security of U.S. persons. Second, DoW determined that the definition of "power inverters" should be revised to accurately reflect the specific power inverters that the Executive Branch interagency body and the DoW previously determined to pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States or to the security and safety of U.S. persons./8 On August 20, 2026, PSHSB updated the Covered List to implement these determinations.
Conditional Approvals
The Executive Branch interagency body established a process by which entities producing certain covered equipment in foreign countries can request DoW to evaluate whether such devices do not pose unacceptable risks to national security and receive Conditional Approvals that would exempt such devices from the Covered List. The Commission has previously updated the Covered List to reflect the Conditional Approvals that we have received from DoW exempting certain advanced robotic devices and power inverters from the Covered List./9
On October 15, 2026, the Commission received National Security Determinations from DoW granting Conditional Approvals for the following devices:
- Volley Automation, Inc.'s automated guided vehicles and autonomous mobile robots (AGV/AMR)
- Dynapower Company, LLC's CPS-2500, CPS-1250, and MPS-125 series power inverters
- Power Electronics Espana, S.L.U.'s GEN3 platform utility-scale solar power inverters, including the HEM and the PCSM & Multi PCSM bidirectional battery storage inverters
Consistent with the National Security Determinations, these exemptions from the FCC's Covered List are subject to the companies' continuing "compliance with the onshoring plan[s] outlined in [their] conditional approval application[s]" and "pursuant to updated vetting of [their] products."/10
The Covered List
We find that the Conditional Approval constitutes "a specific determination" by DoW that such devices do not pose risks to U.S. national security./11 Therefore, we conclude that PSHSB is required to update the Covered List to exclude the equipment identified in the Conditional Approval.
PSHSB takes this action under its authority and obligation to publish and maintain the Covered List. Sections 1.50002(a) and 1.50003 of the Commission's rules require PSHSB to publish the Covered List on the Commission's website, to maintain and update the Covered List, and to monitor the status of determinations./12
The Covered List and the list of devices that have received Conditional Approvals are attached as Appendices A and B to this Public Notice and can also be found on the Bureau's website at https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist./13
We note the continued availability of FCC staff guidance pursuant to sections 0.191 and 0.31(i) of the Commission's rules. Commission staff will provide guidance to TCBs, test labs, and equipment authorization applicants on the impact of these updates.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, Pub. L. No. 116-124, 133 Stat. 158 (2020) (codified as amended at 47 U.S.C. Sec.Sec. 1601-1609) (Secure Networks Act); 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002, 1.50003. For the current version of the Covered List, see Federal Communications Commission, List of Equipment and Services Covered By Section 2 of The Secure Networks Act, https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist (last updated Oct. 16, 2026).
2/ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 1601.
3/ 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002(a), 1.50003; see also Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through FCC Programs, WC Docket No. 18-89, Second Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd 14284 (2020) (Supply Chain Second Report and Order).
4/ FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Addition of Foreign-Produced Power Inverters and Advanced Robotic Devices to FCC Covered List, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA 26-786 (July 28, 2026) (Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice).
5/ Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice at 2-3.
6/ Id. at 1-2.
7/ Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice at 1-2.
8/ See Appendix B.
9/ See, e.g., FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Conditional Approval and Exemption of Certain Advanced Robotic Devices from FCC Covered List, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA-26-996 (Sept. 18, 2026); FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Conditional Approval and Exemption of Certain Power Inverters, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA-26-1089 (Oct. 9, 2026). The list of devices that have received Conditional Approvals can be found on the Bureau's website at https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist.
10/ Additionally, for Volley Automation, the National Security Determination states that failure to comply with the onshoring plan or the discovery of a false statement or misrepresentation in the Conditional Approval application could result in termination of the Conditional Approval and return of the equipment to the FCC's Covered List.
11/ July 2026 Power Inverters PN, Appx. B.
12/ 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002(a), 1.50003. See Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd at 14319, 14325, paras. 72, 77, 92.
13/ The FCC website also contains a list of certain affiliates and subsidiaries of entities identified on the Covered List. The list of affiliates and subsidiaries does not constitute a comprehensive list of all entities that the Commission may find, upon further examination, to qualify as relevant subsidiaries or affiliates of entities on the Covered List. Those entities, whether or not they currently provide covered communications equipment or services, are subject to the Commission's prohibitions, such as the prohibition against obtaining authorizations for covered equipment. See Reminder: Communications Equipment and Services on the Covered List Pose an Unacceptable Risk to National Security, National Security Advisory No. 2025-01, DA 25-927, n.3 (PSHSB Oct. 14, 2025).
* * *
Original text plus appendix here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.pdf
* * *
The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) maintains a list of equipment and services (Covered List) that have been determined to "pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons."/1 Pursuant to Section 2 of the Secure and Trusted Communications ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 18-89; ET Docket No. 21-232; EA Docket No. 21-233): * * * The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) maintains a list of equipment and services (Covered List) that have been determined to "pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons."/1 Pursuant to Section 2 of the Secure and Trusted CommunicationsNetworks Act of 2019 (Secure Networks Act)/2 and sections 1.50002(a) and 1.50003 of the Commission's rules,/3 PSHSB announces that the Department of War (DoW) has granted Conditional Approval for certain foreign-produced advanced robotic devices and power inverters. Therefore, such devices are exempt from the Covered List.
Addition of Advanced Robotic Devices and Power Inverters to the Covered List
Advanced Robotic Devices. On July 28, 2026, the Commission added to the Covered List "foreign-produced advanced robotic devices, except advanced robotic devices which have been granted a Conditional Approval by DoW."/4 This addition was based on a National Security Determination from an Executive Branch interagency body, including several appropriate national security agencies, determining (among other things) that advanced robotic devices produced in a foreign country pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of U.S. persons./5
Power Inverters. On July 28, 2026, PSHSB added to the Covered List "[f]oreign-produced power inverters, except power inverters which have been granted a Conditional Approval by DoW or DHS."/6 This action was based on a National Security Determination from an Executive Branch interagency body, including several appropriate national security agencies, determining (among other things) that power inverters produced in a foreign country pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of U.S. persons./7
On August 19, 2026, the Commission received another National Security Determination from DoW that contained additional determinations related to foreign-produced power inverters. First, DoW determined that certain foreign-produced power inverters that are eligible for certain clean energy tax credits do not pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States or to the safety and security of U.S. persons. Second, DoW determined that the definition of "power inverters" should be revised to accurately reflect the specific power inverters that the Executive Branch interagency body and the DoW previously determined to pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States or to the security and safety of U.S. persons./8 On August 20, 2026, PSHSB updated the Covered List to implement these determinations.
Conditional Approvals
The Executive Branch interagency body established a process by which entities producing certain covered equipment in foreign countries can request DoW to evaluate whether such devices do not pose unacceptable risks to national security and receive Conditional Approvals that would exempt such devices from the Covered List. The Commission has previously updated the Covered List to reflect the Conditional Approvals that we have received from DoW exempting certain advanced robotic devices and power inverters from the Covered List./9
On October 15, 2026, the Commission received National Security Determinations from DoW granting Conditional Approvals for the following devices:
- Volley Automation, Inc.'s automated guided vehicles and autonomous mobile robots (AGV/AMR)
- Dynapower Company, LLC's CPS-2500, CPS-1250, and MPS-125 series power inverters
- Power Electronics Espana, S.L.U.'s GEN3 platform utility-scale solar power inverters, including the HEM and the PCSM & Multi PCSM bidirectional battery storage inverters
Consistent with the National Security Determinations, these exemptions from the FCC's Covered List are subject to the companies' continuing "compliance with the onshoring plan[s] outlined in [their] conditional approval application[s]" and "pursuant to updated vetting of [their] products."/10
The Covered List
We find that the Conditional Approval constitutes "a specific determination" by DoW that such devices do not pose risks to U.S. national security./11 Therefore, we conclude that PSHSB is required to update the Covered List to exclude the equipment identified in the Conditional Approval.
PSHSB takes this action under its authority and obligation to publish and maintain the Covered List. Sections 1.50002(a) and 1.50003 of the Commission's rules require PSHSB to publish the Covered List on the Commission's website, to maintain and update the Covered List, and to monitor the status of determinations./12
The Covered List and the list of devices that have received Conditional Approvals are attached as Appendices A and B to this Public Notice and can also be found on the Bureau's website at https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist./13
We note the continued availability of FCC staff guidance pursuant to sections 0.191 and 0.31(i) of the Commission's rules. Commission staff will provide guidance to TCBs, test labs, and equipment authorization applicants on the impact of these updates.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, Pub. L. No. 116-124, 133 Stat. 158 (2020) (codified as amended at 47 U.S.C. Sec.Sec. 1601-1609) (Secure Networks Act); 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002, 1.50003. For the current version of the Covered List, see Federal Communications Commission, List of Equipment and Services Covered By Section 2 of The Secure Networks Act, https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist (last updated Oct. 16, 2026).
2/ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 1601.
3/ 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002(a), 1.50003; see also Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through FCC Programs, WC Docket No. 18-89, Second Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd 14284 (2020) (Supply Chain Second Report and Order).
4/ FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Addition of Foreign-Produced Power Inverters and Advanced Robotic Devices to FCC Covered List, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA 26-786 (July 28, 2026) (Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice).
5/ Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice at 2-3.
6/ Id. at 1-2.
7/ Power Inverters and Robotics Public Notice at 1-2.
8/ See Appendix B.
9/ See, e.g., FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Conditional Approval and Exemption of Certain Advanced Robotic Devices from FCC Covered List, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA-26-996 (Sept. 18, 2026); FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Conditional Approval and Exemption of Certain Power Inverters, WC Docket No. 18-89, Public Notice, DA-26-1089 (Oct. 9, 2026). The list of devices that have received Conditional Approvals can be found on the Bureau's website at https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist.
10/ Additionally, for Volley Automation, the National Security Determination states that failure to comply with the onshoring plan or the discovery of a false statement or misrepresentation in the Conditional Approval application could result in termination of the Conditional Approval and return of the equipment to the FCC's Covered List.
11/ July 2026 Power Inverters PN, Appx. B.
12/ 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 1.50002(a), 1.50003. See Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd at 14319, 14325, paras. 72, 77, 92.
13/ The FCC website also contains a list of certain affiliates and subsidiaries of entities identified on the Covered List. The list of affiliates and subsidiaries does not constitute a comprehensive list of all entities that the Commission may find, upon further examination, to qualify as relevant subsidiaries or affiliates of entities on the Covered List. Those entities, whether or not they currently provide covered communications equipment or services, are subject to the Commission's prohibitions, such as the prohibition against obtaining authorizations for covered equipment. See Reminder: Communications Equipment and Services on the Covered List Pose an Unacceptable Risk to National Security, National Security Advisory No. 2025-01, DA 25-927, n.3 (PSHSB Oct. 14, 2025).
* * *
Original text plus appendix here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.pdf
FCC Issues Daily Digest for Oct. 16
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following Daily Digest (Vol. 45, No. 199) on Oct. 16, 2026:
* * *
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY:
NEWS RELEASES
FCC CUTS OFF MEXICO IP PHONE FOR VIOLATING ROBOCALL RULES. FCC cuts off Mexico IP Phone for violating robocall rules bringing the total number of providers kicked out to more than 1,400.. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR EB. DOC-425933A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.docx) DOC-425933A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf) ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following Daily Digest (Vol. 45, No. 199) on Oct. 16, 2026: * * * THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY: NEWS RELEASES FCC CUTS OFF MEXICO IP PHONE FOR VIOLATING ROBOCALL RULES. FCC cuts off Mexico IP Phone for violating robocall rules bringing the total number of providers kicked out to more than 1,400.. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR EB. DOC-425933A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.docx) DOC-425933A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf)DOC-425933A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.txt)
FCC CONVENES MEETING OF INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR OIA. DOC-425926A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.docx) DOC-425926A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.pdf) DOC-425926A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.txt)
* * *
PUBLIC NOTICES
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-2-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. ACTIONS. MB. DOC-425901A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425901A1.pdf) DOC-425901A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425901A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-1-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. APPLICATIONS. MB. DOC-425900A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425900A1.pdf) DOC-425900A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425900A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02048. Released: 2026-10-16. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACTIONS TAKEN. (DA No. 26-1115). SB. Contact: ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DA-26-1115A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1115A1.pdf) DA-26-1115A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1115A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-16. THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAU ANNOUNCES CONDITIONAL APPROVAL AND EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN ADVANCED ROBOTIC DEVICES AND POWER INVERTERS FROM FCC COVERED LIST. (DA No. 26-1114). (Dkt No 18-89 21-232 21-233). PSHSB. Contact: Emma Sameth (emma.sameth@fcc.gov). Action by: Chief, PSHSB. DA-26-1114A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.docx) DA-26-1114A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.pdf) DA-26-1114A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-3-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. PLEADINGS. MB. DOC-425902A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425902A1.pdf) DOC-425902A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425902A1.txt)
Report No: 3237. Released: 2026-10-16. PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ACTION IN PROCEEDING. OMD. DOC-425896A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.docx) DOC-425896A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.pdf) DOC-425896A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-16. EX PARTE PRESENTATIONS AND POST-REPLY COMMENT PERIOD FILING IN PERMIT-BUT-DISCLOSURE PROCEEDINGS RECEIVED ON 10-15-26. OMD. Contact: Kenneth Hill, 202-418-7521. DOC-425907A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425907A1.pdf) DOC-425907A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425907A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02047. Released: 2026-10-16. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACCEPTED FOR FILING. SB. Contact: ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DOC-425903A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425903A1.pdf) DOC-425903A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425903A1.txt)
* * *
STATEMENT
JOINT STATEMENT FROM MEETING OF INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM. by Statement. OMR OIA. DOC-425928A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.docx) DOC-425928A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.pdf) DOC-425928A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.txt)
* * *
TEXTS
IN THE MATTER OF MEXICO IP PHONE LLC. FCC removes the certification of Mexico IP Phone from the Robocall Mitigation Database for intentionally recertifying its RMD certification without the required information and for transmitting high-volume illegal traffic.. Action by: Chief, Enforcement Bureau. Adopted: 2026-10-16 by ORDER. (DA No. 26-1116). EB. DA-26-1116A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.docx) DA-26-1116A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.pdf) DA-26-1116A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.txt)
* * *
ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED OCTOBER 15, 2026, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 198:
PUBLIC NOTICES
Released: 2026-10-15. THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAU PLACES INTO THE RECORDS OF TWO PROCEEDINGS A LETTER FROM SENATOR SCOTT TO CHAIRMAN CARR . (DA No. 26-1112). (Dkt No 26-22 26-23). PSHSB. Contact: Emma Sameth (emma.sameth@fcc.gov). Action by: Chief, PSHSB. DA-26-1112A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.docx) DA-26-1112A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.pdf) DA-26-1112A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-15. DOMESTIC SECTION 214 APPLICATION GRANTED FOR THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF SIREN TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. TO LAKELAND COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (DA No. 26-1113). (Dkt No 26-198). WCB. Contact: For further information, please contact Megan Danner, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at megan.danner@fcc.gov.. DA-26-1113A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.docx) DA-26-1113A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.pdf) DA-26-1113A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.txt)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fcc.gov/edocs/daily-digest/2026/10/16
* * *
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY:
NEWS RELEASES
FCC CUTS OFF MEXICO IP PHONE FOR VIOLATING ROBOCALL RULES. FCC cuts off Mexico IP Phone for violating robocall rules bringing the total number of providers kicked out to more than 1,400.. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR EB. DOC-425933A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.docx) DOC-425933A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf) ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following Daily Digest (Vol. 45, No. 199) on Oct. 16, 2026: * * * THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY: NEWS RELEASES FCC CUTS OFF MEXICO IP PHONE FOR VIOLATING ROBOCALL RULES. FCC cuts off Mexico IP Phone for violating robocall rules bringing the total number of providers kicked out to more than 1,400.. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR EB. DOC-425933A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.docx) DOC-425933A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf)DOC-425933A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.txt)
FCC CONVENES MEETING OF INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM. by News Release. News Media Contact: MediaRelations@fcc.gov (202) 418-0500. OMR OIA. DOC-425926A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.docx) DOC-425926A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.pdf) DOC-425926A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.txt)
* * *
PUBLIC NOTICES
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-2-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. ACTIONS. MB. DOC-425901A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425901A1.pdf) DOC-425901A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425901A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-1-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. APPLICATIONS. MB. DOC-425900A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425900A1.pdf) DOC-425900A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425900A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02048. Released: 2026-10-16. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACTIONS TAKEN. (DA No. 26-1115). SB. Contact: ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DA-26-1115A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1115A1.pdf) DA-26-1115A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1115A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-16. THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAU ANNOUNCES CONDITIONAL APPROVAL AND EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN ADVANCED ROBOTIC DEVICES AND POWER INVERTERS FROM FCC COVERED LIST. (DA No. 26-1114). (Dkt No 18-89 21-232 21-233). PSHSB. Contact: Emma Sameth (emma.sameth@fcc.gov). Action by: Chief, PSHSB. DA-26-1114A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.docx) DA-26-1114A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.pdf) DA-26-1114A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1114A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-3-261016-01. Released: 2026-10-16. PLEADINGS. MB. DOC-425902A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425902A1.pdf) DOC-425902A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425902A1.txt)
Report No: 3237. Released: 2026-10-16. PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ACTION IN PROCEEDING. OMD. DOC-425896A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.docx) DOC-425896A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.pdf) DOC-425896A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425896A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-16. EX PARTE PRESENTATIONS AND POST-REPLY COMMENT PERIOD FILING IN PERMIT-BUT-DISCLOSURE PROCEEDINGS RECEIVED ON 10-15-26. OMD. Contact: Kenneth Hill, 202-418-7521. DOC-425907A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425907A1.pdf) DOC-425907A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425907A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02047. Released: 2026-10-16. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACCEPTED FOR FILING. SB. Contact: ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DOC-425903A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425903A1.pdf) DOC-425903A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425903A1.txt)
* * *
STATEMENT
JOINT STATEMENT FROM MEETING OF INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS FROM AUSTRALIA, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM. by Statement. OMR OIA. DOC-425928A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.docx) DOC-425928A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.pdf) DOC-425928A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425928A1.txt)
* * *
TEXTS
IN THE MATTER OF MEXICO IP PHONE LLC. FCC removes the certification of Mexico IP Phone from the Robocall Mitigation Database for intentionally recertifying its RMD certification without the required information and for transmitting high-volume illegal traffic.. Action by: Chief, Enforcement Bureau. Adopted: 2026-10-16 by ORDER. (DA No. 26-1116). EB. DA-26-1116A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.docx) DA-26-1116A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.pdf) DA-26-1116A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1116A1.txt)
* * *
ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED OCTOBER 15, 2026, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 198:
PUBLIC NOTICES
Released: 2026-10-15. THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HOMELAND SECURITY BUREAU PLACES INTO THE RECORDS OF TWO PROCEEDINGS A LETTER FROM SENATOR SCOTT TO CHAIRMAN CARR . (DA No. 26-1112). (Dkt No 26-22 26-23). PSHSB. Contact: Emma Sameth (emma.sameth@fcc.gov). Action by: Chief, PSHSB. DA-26-1112A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.docx) DA-26-1112A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.pdf) DA-26-1112A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1112A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-15. DOMESTIC SECTION 214 APPLICATION GRANTED FOR THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF SIREN TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. TO LAKELAND COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (DA No. 26-1113). (Dkt No 26-198). WCB. Contact: For further information, please contact Megan Danner, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at megan.danner@fcc.gov.. DA-26-1113A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.docx) DA-26-1113A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.pdf) DA-26-1113A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1113A1.txt)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fcc.gov/edocs/daily-digest/2026/10/16
FCC Cuts Off Mexico IP Phone for Violating Robocall Rules
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
FCC Cuts Off Mexico IP Phone for Violating Robocall Rules
Bringing Total Number of Providers Kicked Out to More Than 1,400
-
WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--Today, the Federal Communications Commission prohibited a voice service provider from connecting to U.S. networks for failing to comply with FCC robocall rules. Mexico IP Phone and its CEO, Hemant Kumar Bharti, came to the FCC's attention for seeking direct phone numbering access by filing a forged Commission document and failing to disclose ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * FCC Cuts Off Mexico IP Phone for Violating Robocall Rules Bringing Total Number of Providers Kicked Out to More Than 1,400 - WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--Today, the Federal Communications Commission prohibited a voice service provider from connecting to U.S. networks for failing to comply with FCC robocall rules. Mexico IP Phone and its CEO, Hemant Kumar Bharti, came to the FCC's attention for seeking direct phone numbering access by filing a forged Commission document and failing to disclosein its Robocall Mitigation Database (RMD) certification that it was the subject of a State Attorneys General Task Force anti-robocalling investigation. Today's action mandates that U.S. voice service providers and intermediate providers block calls from Mexico IP Phone. The Commission also removed the company from the RMD. All providers operating on U.S. networks have two days to begin blocking all traffic from this company, in compliance with the Commission's RMD and call blocking rules.
The FCC is cracking down on the scourge of illegal robocalls by tackling the problem at every stage of a call's lifecycle. Since January 2025, the Commission has removed more than 1,400 companies from the RMD for failing to comply with Commission rules. The Commission also continues to strengthen its numbering rules in order to provide a critical defense against bad actors seeking to access United States numbering resources, most recently in December 2025 by taking action to extend the anti-robocalling and other compliance requirements to VoIP providers with existing direct access to numbers.
Hunter Deeley, Chief of the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, issued the following statement:
"Numbering resources are a critical front in the fight against illegal robocalls. The FCC continues to work to tighten the rules to keep bad actors from having direct access to U.S. phone numbers. And in this case, we're taking action against a company who went to remarkable and illegal lengths to circumvent the process that allows legitimate providers to access phone numbers. Today's removal effectively cuts off this bad actor from transmitting calls to U.S. consumers."
Additional Background Information:
The FCC's Robocall Mitigation Database was established to promote transparency and effective robocall mitigation. This database is a critical tool through which the agency ensures providers are actively combatting robocalls and implementing STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication. Providers are required to certify that they have implemented STIR/SHAKEN on all IP-based portions of their networks. All providers must also submit robocall mitigation plans. Failure to meet these obligations can result in removal from the database and blocking of the provider's traffic.
The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over those portions of the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) related to the United States. The NANP Administrator (NANPA) is the impartial, non-government entity that administers number resources in accordance with Commission rules and regulations. A provider seeking direct access to numbers from the NANPA must first obtain Commission authorization.
Today's action follows the Enforcement Bureau's June 11, 2026 Show Cause Order directed Mexico IP to explain why the company's certification should not be removed from the RMD for willful violations of the Commission's anti-robocalling rules. The company's RMD filings were found to be deficient and inaccurate. In particular, Mexico IP submitted a falsified Public Notice to the NANPA seeking authority to obtain direct access to numbers. Additionally, it failed to disclose in its RMD certification that it was the subject of a State Attorneys General Task Force anti-robocalling investigation.
Despite Mexico IP's CEO Hemant Kumar Bharti certifying that the company had not run afoul of federal regulators, in truth, the company had been flagged in August 2025 by the Anti-Robocall Multistate Litigation Task Force as having "accepted and transmitted high-volume illegal and/or suspicious call traffic--which has reached U.S. consumers and, presumably, generated revenue for Mexico IP--from providers that have failed to respond to traceback requests in contravention of the FCC's mandates." Not only did the company certify to the contrary after the Task Force letter, but the FCC found in December 2025 that the company was "closely affiliated" with SK Teleco "in transmitting Walmart impersonation robocalls."
Mexico IP's response, submitted by company CEO Hemant Bharti, blamed a freelancer, "Lance Lee," for filing the false numbering application but submitted no evidence of "Lee's" existence. Commission and NANPA records show that Bharti himself personally submitted both the deficient RMD certification and the falsified Public Notice. After a thorough investigation, through today's action, Mexico IP Phone has been removed from the RMD.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf
* * *
FCC Cuts Off Mexico IP Phone for Violating Robocall Rules
Bringing Total Number of Providers Kicked Out to More Than 1,400
-
WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--Today, the Federal Communications Commission prohibited a voice service provider from connecting to U.S. networks for failing to comply with FCC robocall rules. Mexico IP Phone and its CEO, Hemant Kumar Bharti, came to the FCC's attention for seeking direct phone numbering access by filing a forged Commission document and failing to disclose ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * FCC Cuts Off Mexico IP Phone for Violating Robocall Rules Bringing Total Number of Providers Kicked Out to More Than 1,400 - WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--Today, the Federal Communications Commission prohibited a voice service provider from connecting to U.S. networks for failing to comply with FCC robocall rules. Mexico IP Phone and its CEO, Hemant Kumar Bharti, came to the FCC's attention for seeking direct phone numbering access by filing a forged Commission document and failing to disclosein its Robocall Mitigation Database (RMD) certification that it was the subject of a State Attorneys General Task Force anti-robocalling investigation. Today's action mandates that U.S. voice service providers and intermediate providers block calls from Mexico IP Phone. The Commission also removed the company from the RMD. All providers operating on U.S. networks have two days to begin blocking all traffic from this company, in compliance with the Commission's RMD and call blocking rules.
The FCC is cracking down on the scourge of illegal robocalls by tackling the problem at every stage of a call's lifecycle. Since January 2025, the Commission has removed more than 1,400 companies from the RMD for failing to comply with Commission rules. The Commission also continues to strengthen its numbering rules in order to provide a critical defense against bad actors seeking to access United States numbering resources, most recently in December 2025 by taking action to extend the anti-robocalling and other compliance requirements to VoIP providers with existing direct access to numbers.
Hunter Deeley, Chief of the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, issued the following statement:
"Numbering resources are a critical front in the fight against illegal robocalls. The FCC continues to work to tighten the rules to keep bad actors from having direct access to U.S. phone numbers. And in this case, we're taking action against a company who went to remarkable and illegal lengths to circumvent the process that allows legitimate providers to access phone numbers. Today's removal effectively cuts off this bad actor from transmitting calls to U.S. consumers."
Additional Background Information:
The FCC's Robocall Mitigation Database was established to promote transparency and effective robocall mitigation. This database is a critical tool through which the agency ensures providers are actively combatting robocalls and implementing STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication. Providers are required to certify that they have implemented STIR/SHAKEN on all IP-based portions of their networks. All providers must also submit robocall mitigation plans. Failure to meet these obligations can result in removal from the database and blocking of the provider's traffic.
The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over those portions of the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) related to the United States. The NANP Administrator (NANPA) is the impartial, non-government entity that administers number resources in accordance with Commission rules and regulations. A provider seeking direct access to numbers from the NANPA must first obtain Commission authorization.
Today's action follows the Enforcement Bureau's June 11, 2026 Show Cause Order directed Mexico IP to explain why the company's certification should not be removed from the RMD for willful violations of the Commission's anti-robocalling rules. The company's RMD filings were found to be deficient and inaccurate. In particular, Mexico IP submitted a falsified Public Notice to the NANPA seeking authority to obtain direct access to numbers. Additionally, it failed to disclose in its RMD certification that it was the subject of a State Attorneys General Task Force anti-robocalling investigation.
Despite Mexico IP's CEO Hemant Kumar Bharti certifying that the company had not run afoul of federal regulators, in truth, the company had been flagged in August 2025 by the Anti-Robocall Multistate Litigation Task Force as having "accepted and transmitted high-volume illegal and/or suspicious call traffic--which has reached U.S. consumers and, presumably, generated revenue for Mexico IP--from providers that have failed to respond to traceback requests in contravention of the FCC's mandates." Not only did the company certify to the contrary after the Task Force letter, but the FCC found in December 2025 that the company was "closely affiliated" with SK Teleco "in transmitting Walmart impersonation robocalls."
Mexico IP's response, submitted by company CEO Hemant Bharti, blamed a freelancer, "Lance Lee," for filing the false numbering application but submitted no evidence of "Lee's" existence. Commission and NANPA records show that Bharti himself personally submitted both the deficient RMD certification and the falsified Public Notice. After a thorough investigation, through today's action, Mexico IP Phone has been removed from the RMD.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425933A1.pdf
FCC Convenes Meeting of International Partners From Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
FCC Convenes Meeting of International Partners from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom
Third Annual Convening of 'Five Eyes' Group Focuses on Emerging Trends in the Communications Sector Related to National Security and Cybersecurity
-
WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--This week, the Federal Communications Commission convened communications regulator counterparts from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom to address emerging trends in the communications sector ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * FCC Convenes Meeting of International Partners from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom Third Annual Convening of 'Five Eyes' Group Focuses on Emerging Trends in the Communications Sector Related to National Security and Cybersecurity - WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--This week, the Federal Communications Commission convened communications regulator counterparts from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom to address emerging trends in the communications sectorrelated to national security, and cybersecurity. Commissioner Trusty also led the group's session on harmonizing cyber labeling rules. With a collective resolve to deter shared security threats and safeguard the integrity of national communications networks, the participating countries each signed on to formal commitments in a joint statement to:
* Promoting Secured Networks
* Promoting Supply Chain Security
* Deepening Coordination
* Strengthening International Partnerships
* Protecting Critical Communications Infrastructure
* Combating Scams and Fraud
* Addressing Super Intelligence's Role in Communications Security
Chairman Brendan Carr issued the following statement:
"This week's convening of our Five Eyes telecom partners demonstrates the FCC's commitment to working with allies to address shared security threats against our people and our networks. From promoting supply chain security to combatting cyberattacks, this group's work continues to be crucial to both the national security of the United States and the defense of the free world. I appreciate the efforts of all the attendees this week and welcome the commitments outlined for future collaboration."
Commissioner Olivia Trusty issued the following statement:
"Threats to our communications networks and devices do not stop at national borders. FCC collaboration with our Five Eyes partners strengthens international coordination and advances our shared work to safeguard networks and to increase trust and security in the consumer marketplace through programs like the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark. I thank our partners for their continued commitment to building a safer, more resilient digital future."
Additional Background Information:
Cyber actors, including state-sponsored actors like SALT TYPHOON and sophisticated criminal groups, continue to seek opportunities to exploit communications infrastructure, compromise sensitive systems, disrupt essential services, and misuse telecommunications networks. This partnership reflects the continued collective resolve to deter these threats, and exchange and promote best practices to safeguard the integrity of our communications infrastructure. The threats facing the communications sector are vast and constantly changing, which means collaboration is imperative to ensure countries can protect their respective citizens and critical infrastructure. We also added a new session this year, welcoming other partner countries to our international collaboration session to broaden our efforts to lead on telecom security.
The increasing interconnection of our communications ecosystems means that vulnerabilities and incidents in one jurisdiction can have consequences across borders. Among the topics discussed today were promoting secured networks that are resilient, competitive, and trusted to guard against hostile foreign actors; strengthening international partnerships with like-minded countries; combating scams and fraud; the role of super intelligence and communications security, and more.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.pdf
* * *
FCC Convenes Meeting of International Partners from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom
Third Annual Convening of 'Five Eyes' Group Focuses on Emerging Trends in the Communications Sector Related to National Security and Cybersecurity
-
WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--This week, the Federal Communications Commission convened communications regulator counterparts from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom to address emerging trends in the communications sector ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * FCC Convenes Meeting of International Partners from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom Third Annual Convening of 'Five Eyes' Group Focuses on Emerging Trends in the Communications Sector Related to National Security and Cybersecurity - WASHINGTON, October 16, 2026--This week, the Federal Communications Commission convened communications regulator counterparts from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom to address emerging trends in the communications sectorrelated to national security, and cybersecurity. Commissioner Trusty also led the group's session on harmonizing cyber labeling rules. With a collective resolve to deter shared security threats and safeguard the integrity of national communications networks, the participating countries each signed on to formal commitments in a joint statement to:
* Promoting Secured Networks
* Promoting Supply Chain Security
* Deepening Coordination
* Strengthening International Partnerships
* Protecting Critical Communications Infrastructure
* Combating Scams and Fraud
* Addressing Super Intelligence's Role in Communications Security
Chairman Brendan Carr issued the following statement:
"This week's convening of our Five Eyes telecom partners demonstrates the FCC's commitment to working with allies to address shared security threats against our people and our networks. From promoting supply chain security to combatting cyberattacks, this group's work continues to be crucial to both the national security of the United States and the defense of the free world. I appreciate the efforts of all the attendees this week and welcome the commitments outlined for future collaboration."
Commissioner Olivia Trusty issued the following statement:
"Threats to our communications networks and devices do not stop at national borders. FCC collaboration with our Five Eyes partners strengthens international coordination and advances our shared work to safeguard networks and to increase trust and security in the consumer marketplace through programs like the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark. I thank our partners for their continued commitment to building a safer, more resilient digital future."
Additional Background Information:
Cyber actors, including state-sponsored actors like SALT TYPHOON and sophisticated criminal groups, continue to seek opportunities to exploit communications infrastructure, compromise sensitive systems, disrupt essential services, and misuse telecommunications networks. This partnership reflects the continued collective resolve to deter these threats, and exchange and promote best practices to safeguard the integrity of our communications infrastructure. The threats facing the communications sector are vast and constantly changing, which means collaboration is imperative to ensure countries can protect their respective citizens and critical infrastructure. We also added a new session this year, welcoming other partner countries to our international collaboration session to broaden our efforts to lead on telecom security.
The increasing interconnection of our communications ecosystems means that vulnerabilities and incidents in one jurisdiction can have consequences across borders. Among the topics discussed today were promoting secured networks that are resilient, competitive, and trusted to guard against hostile foreign actors; strengthening international partnerships with like-minded countries; combating scams and fraud; the role of super intelligence and communications security, and more.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425926A1.pdf