Foreign nationals have long been able to purchase and hold real estate in the United States. That remains generally true. However, in Florida—particularly when property is located near military bases, ports, energy facilities, or other critical infrastructure—the legal landscape has changed materially. Ownership is no longer just a matter of title and funding; it is increasingly a matter of regulatory positioning and national security compliance.
This post outlines how federal oversight and Florida statutes intersect when foreign buyers acquire property near sensitive locations.
Federal Layer: National Security Review
At the federal level, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) has authority to review certain real estate transactions involving foreign persons. This authority expanded under the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA), which brought standalone real estate transactions—separate from business acquisitions—within CFIUS jurisdiction.
Transactions may attract scrutiny if the property is:
- Within defined proximity to military installations
- Adjacent to ports or airports
- Near missile sites, intelligence facilities, or defense infrastructure
- Situated where physical access or surveillance risk exists
CFIUS may impose mitigation measures, require divestiture, or recommend that the President block a transaction if unresolved national security concerns arise. While CFIUS review is not automatic for every foreign purchase, proximity to sensitive federal installations materially increases exposure.
Separately, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) prohibits transactions with specifically sanctioned individuals and entities. These prohibitions are designation-based, not nationality-based, but transactions involving sanctioned persons are categorically barred.
Florida’s Statutory Restrictions: §§ 692.201–205, Florida Statutes
Florida has enacted one of the most structured state-level regimes addressing foreign ownership of land near critical infrastructure.
Under Florida Statutes §§ 692.201–205, certain “foreign principals” are restricted from owning specific categories of real property. A foreign principal includes governments, political parties, entities controlled by such governments, and certain individuals domiciled in designated “countries of concern.” These countries include China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, and Venezuela (as defined by statute).
The restrictions operate in two principal ways:
1. Agricultural Land Prohibition (§ 692.202).
Foreign principals from designated countries are generally prohibited from directly or indirectly acquiring agricultural land in Florida. This prohibition applies broadly and includes ownership through entities.
2. Proximity Restrictions to Critical Infrastructure (§ 692.203).
Certain foreign principals—particularly those connected to China—are prohibited from acquiring any interest in real property located within ten (10) miles of:
- Military installations
- Seaports and airports
- Power plants and energy infrastructure
- Water treatment facilities
- Communications infrastructure
- Gas and oil pipelines
The statute applies to direct and indirect ownership interests, including acquisitions through LLCs or corporate structures.
Florida provides a limited exception allowing certain individuals to purchase a single residential property (up to two acres) if it is located more than five miles from a military installation and used as a primary residence. Even this exception is subject to affidavit and registration requirements.
Violations may result in forced divestiture, civil penalties up to 25% of the property’s value, and potential criminal exposure.
Transparency Overlay: FinCEN Reporting
Beginning March 1, 2026, FinCEN’s Residential Real Estate Reporting Rule adds another compliance dimension. Certain non-financed residential purchases involving entities or trusts must be reported to the federal government, including disclosure of beneficial ownership.
This rule does not prohibit ownership but increases traceability—particularly in all-cash transactions that historically operated outside traditional lending oversight.
The Practical Reality in Florida
For foreign buyers—or entities with foreign ownership—acquiring property in Florida near military or infrastructure sites, the analysis must now address three separate layers:
- Federal national security exposure (CFIUS).
- Sanctions compliance (OFAC).
- Florida statutory prohibitions and proximity limits (§§ 692.201–205).
A transaction may satisfy federal law yet violate Florida statute. Conversely, a transaction permissible under Florida law may still invite federal review if proximity raises national security concerns.
Title review is no longer sufficient. Geographic mapping, ownership tracing, nationality verification, and sanctions screening are now integral components of transactional diligence.
In Summation
Foreign investment remains a significant component of Florida’s real estate market. However, property located near military installations, ports, energy facilities, and other critical infrastructure is no longer neutral terrain from a regulatory standpoint.
In Florida, proximity has become a compliance variable. Strategic due diligence at the outset—before contract execution—is essential to ensure enforceability, durability of title, and insulation from forced divestiture risk.
Cross-border real estate transactions now require not only capital and opportunity, but structural compliance foresight.
Disclaimer: The information provided on this blog is for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction and can change frequently. Therefore, the information on this blog may not reflect the most current legal developments. No attorney-client relationship is formed by your use of this blog or by any communication with the blog’s authors. You should not act or refrain from acting based on any information contained in this blog without seeking professional legal advice tailored to your specific circumstances. The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of any affiliated organizations or clients. We do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information provided herein. By using this blog, you acknowledge that you have read and understood this disclaimer and agree to its terms.