FMCSA Tightens Control: USDOT Number Sales and Leasing Deemed Improper

The FMCSA document explicitly states that the agency has identified attempts at improper 'trafficking' of such identifiers and permits, reminding the market of a basic principle: a USDOT Number is not an asset to be freely disposed of like a truck or trailer. According to the regulator, it is an identifier of a 'legal entity' (legal person) responsible for transportation safety and compliance. Therefore, the number is 'non-transferable' and must remain with the same entity—regardless of how attractive an offer to 'buy a ready-made company with history' on a marketplace or in private correspondence may seem.

FMCSA specifically states that upon discovering attempts or facts of selling/buying/leasing such identifiers and permits outside a lawful corporate transaction, the agency will initiate enforcement procedures. Measures explicitly mentioned include placing the USDOT Number in inactive status and revoking related registrations. This concerns both 'safety registration' (referencing 49 U.S.C. § 31134) and 'operating authority registration' (49 U.S.C. §§ 13901–13905). For the industry, this means the risk extends not only to the formal 'entry in the database' but also to the right to perform commercial interstate transportation and the status regarding safety requirements.

A separate emphasis is placed on the fact that the prohibition applies not only to sales or purchases but also to renting/leasing. FMCSA effectively warns against schemes where a number or authority is offered 'temporarily'—for example, to quickly enter the market, bypass delays in processing, or 'restart' operations after compliance issues. The agency does not provide statistics on such cases or disclose how many episodes it has identified, but the warning text is worded to remove ambiguity: such deals are considered improper unless they are part of a legitimate corporate transaction.

At the same time, FMCSA draws an important practical line between 'transferring a number' and 'transferring a business' within the framework of lawful corporate events. The document describes typical situations regularly encountered by small and medium carriers, especially when an owner wants to sell assets or change ownership structure. For sole proprietors (working as 'd/b/a'), FMCSA's position is extremely strict: such a business is legally inseparable from the person. An illustrative example in the warning uses the hypothetical 'John Doe d/b/a Doe Trucking'. If 'Doe Trucking' is sold to another owner, the buyer cannot 'become' the same legal entity, and therefore cannot continue operating under the same USDOT Number. According to FMCSA, the buyer in such a situation needs to obtain their own USDOT Number, and attempting to continue operations on a 'purchased number' may lead to its inactivation and the initiation of safety registration revocation processes.

With operating authority (MC Number), the document describes a more nuanced approach but with the same key restriction: any actions must occur within the framework of properly executed business transactions and under FMCSA rules. The agency notes that in modern practice, the transfer of operating authority is rare compared to earlier times, providing a historical explanation: when the industry was regulated by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), authorities and routes were significantly restricted, making 'authority' valuable as a commodity. After the ICC ceased operations and changes by Congress, many restrictions were lifted, and the 'value' of transferring authority as a separate object significantly decreased: a carrier granted authority can generally operate nationwide within the type of permit issued, rather than on 'fixed routes'.

For corporations and other forms of legal entities, FMCSA describes scenarios where a USDOT Number can remain with the company and scenarios where it is not permissible. The principle in the document is simple: the number stays with the same legal entity if it continues to exist. If, for example, ownership changes through a stock sale but the legal entity remains, the USDOT Number stays the same. However, FMCSA emphasizes the obligation of new owners to 'immediately' update the agency's records—particularly information about the owner and other demographic/profile data of the company.

Another situation involves mergers and acquisitions. FMCSA provides examples where one company acquires another or companies merge, and specifically notes: if the acquired corporation continues operational activities as the same legal entity, its USDOT Number remains with it. But if the legal entity effectively ceases to exist (for instance, the company is dissolved/liquidated), and operations continue under another entity or new structure, the new or 'surviving' entity must use its own USDOT Number. The old number, according to FMCSA, should be decommissioned properly, not 'transferred' to the actual successor.

In the practical part of the warning, FMCSA specifically mentions form MCS-150 as a tool for updating status and data, including deactivation upon cessation of operations. The document explicitly states the option of 'out-of-business' as a reason for cases where a company ceases operations and must properly reflect this in the records. For the market, this is an important detail: many registration discipline violations arise not because a company tries to 'sell a number', but because the old entity is not properly closed in the databases, and the new one continues to operate with 'inherited' credentials without separating legal entities. FMCSA warns that such errors can lead to proceedings for revoking operating authority and other regulatory actions.

Regarding operating authority, FMCSA adds a criterion that often raises questions among M&A participants in transportation: the agency will consider the issue of 'transferring'/accounting for authority only in cases where operations continue with the same safety management, oversight, and control mechanisms. If the safety management and control framework or the responsible entity changes, FMCSA may require new authority or other procedures instead of simply 'rewriting' the permit. The document presents this as a regulatory framework: the issue is not just that a business has a 'number' that can be transferred; FMCSA looks at who is responsible for meeting requirements and how safety management is organized.

The warning itself is addressed not only to carriers. Brokers and freight forwarders are explicitly named, signaling to the entire carrier selection chain: FMCSA reminds that participating in schemes with 'number leasing' or buying others' authorities is not just a matter of commercial caution, but an area where the regulator is ready to apply administrative procedures. The document also emphasizes that it concerns attempts to buy/sell/lease these identifiers 'from an unknown person' and 'outside a legitimate corporate transaction'—a wording clearly aimed at the online ad market and intermediaries offering 'ready-made' USDOT/MC as a product.

The industry context inferred from the FMCSA warning is the agency's intent to more strictly curb schemes where a change of signage and identifiers conceals the responsible entity. However, the FMCSA message itself does not provide a list of investigations, specific cases, or quantitative indicators. The position is stated normatively: the USDOT Number is tied to a specific legal entity and is non-transferable; operating authority may appear in properly executed transactions, but attempts to 'trade' authorities or 'lease them' outside such frameworks risk number inactivation and registration revocation procedures under federal standards listed in the warning.