An FAA notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to restrict public access to aircraft owner information based on the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act has inspired both laudatory and concerned reactions across the aviation ecosystem. Airport officials, aircraft transaction attorneys, and some industry associations have warned of potential operational, financial, and legal consequences, while groups such as NBAA and AOPA hail the privacy changes.
The 2025 NPRM addresses the implementation of new privacy protections as directed by Congress. Names, addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses of registered owners would be withheld from public FAA websites. A request for comment closed in early June after an extension in May, drawing more than 300 submissions.
According to title company representatives, complete privacy limitations could lead to problems with aircraft titling and sales. “Making sure that people cannot track flights is not a bad goal. There are security reasons, there are safety, maybe even confidentiality reasons for businesses,” acknowledged AIC Title Service general counsel Bruce Marshall wrote in one of the comments on the NPRM. “But the problem is…the FAA was co-mingling operational information, ADS-B information, and ownership information. The registry originated so that you could follow the legal documents and have some way of determining ownership and interests in aircraft.”
Business and general aviation groups have broadly voiced support for tighter privacy restrictions. “Publicly available, personally identifiable aircraft information has helped enable flight-stalking by anyone, anywhere in the world, with any motive,” NBAA commented in early June. In congressional testimony, NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen said the industry supports protections that mitigate threats without creating unintended consequences.
AOPA president Darren Pleasance similarly called the push a good first step, and wrote to then acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau that misuse of tracking and registry data—such as for lawsuits or landing fee enforcement—was having a chilling effect on general aviation. The association noted that pilots spent more than $600 million equipping for ADS-B under the assumption that it would be used only for air traffic safety.
Concerns about improper use of ADS-B data led to the June introduction of the Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act, a bipartisan bill that would restrict the use of such data for fee collection or enforcement unrelated to safety. “Using ADS-B data for economic reasons clearly undermines the FAA’s 2020 ADS-B safety mandate,” Pleasance said.
However, opposition to the registry rulemaking takes the conversation beyond pilot privacy. Public-use airports, including Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport, pointed out that access to aircraft owner data is essential for collecting legitimate landing fees, conducting safety outreach, and maintaining compliance with FAA grant assurances. “Removal of owner information…has the potential to make collections of legitimate airport fees…very challenging,” Bozeman officials wrote. They also cited risks to situational awareness and regulatory compliance.
The American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) warned the FAA that removing data without preserving access for verified users would hinder national programs, such as the FAA’s own aircraft inventory. AAAE urged the agency to develop a secure-access portal for credentialed airport users, noting that the statutory authority for privacy applies to “individuals,” not corporate entities.
State revenue agencies echoed the concern. The Missouri Department of Revenue said removing public registry data would harm tax compliance and recommended formal information-sharing agreements between FAA and state governments if access is restricted.
Meanwhile, aircraft financiers and attorneys worry the changes would upend due diligence and open the door to fraud. “It would be like buying a house and not checking the title,” said Clay Healey of AIC Title. “We can’t do our jobs for people.” He warned that removing ownership data “crushes the business.”
Scott McCreary of McAfee & Taft, writing on LinkedIn, called the registry changes “inherently more complex” than past FAA digital reforms. He noted that registry access is critical for parties establishing or verifying ownership, liens, and operational structures. McCreary urged the FAA to maintain full document access in its Public Documents Room for vetted users.
The FAA aircraft registry is an owner-based system, meaning it often lists the legal titleholder, not necessarily the aircraft operator. In many cases, the operator is a lessee, trust beneficiary, or related company. As McCreary noted, restrictions on LLC disclosures could also unintentionally expose beneficial owners even when privacy structures are in place.
In light of the widespread criticism, some stakeholders are urging the FAA to adopt a tiered-access approach that protects individual owners while maintaining verified access for those with operational, legal, or regulatory responsibilities. NBAA stressed that the FAA can strike a balance that achieves both goals.
The FAA has not released a response to public comments. Meanwhile, industry advocates continue to call for transparency, dialogue, and regulatory nuance. “There is no way we can exist if they take all that information away,” Healey said. “It’s unbelievable that this is happening.”