What Section 889 actually prohibits
Section 889 of the FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act bars federal agencies — and the contractors who sell to them — from procuring or using covered telecommunications and video surveillance equipment from a named set of entities. For physical security, that means Hikvision, Dahua, Huawei, ZTE and Hytera, plus any subsidiary or affiliate, and crucially any product that contains their components or is an OEM rebrand.
That last point is where projects go wrong: a 'no-name' camera or a value brand like Lorex, EZVIZ, Annke or LTS may be a rebrand of banned hardware. The ban follows the components, not just the label on the box.
Section 889 vs. TAA — they are different
- Section 889 (FAR 52.204-25) is about who made it — a prohibited-source ban.
- The Trade Agreements Act (TAA) is about where it was made — for GSA and many federal buys, end products must be manufactured or substantially transformed in the US or a TAA-designated country.
A camera can be Section 889-compliant but not TAA-compliant (made in a non-designated country), or vice versa. Federal projects usually need both, confirmed at the SKU level.
How we keep a project compliant
- Specify compliant lines only — Axis, Hanwha Vision, i-PRO, Bosch, DMP and similar, with documented country of origin.
- Confirm per SKU — origin can vary by line and lot, so we verify each part number and quote a compliant equivalent when a unit isn't designated.
- Document it — a model-line-level compliance statement your contracting officer can put in the file.
- Scan what's already installed — an assessment that finds banned gear and plans a budgeted rip-and-replace.
The bottom line
Section 889 isn't a paperwork formality — a single covered-entity camera in a federal BOM can sink an order. Lead with compliant design, verify per SKU, and document everything. Talk to us about a compliant project.