EU Space Act is Anti-American

The European Commission in Brussels has rolled out ambitious new space guidelines and a vision to make Europe a leader in the global space economy. 

Europe will launch two low-earth orbit (LEO) precision navigation and timing satellites by the end of 2025 and has plans for a 290-satellite constellation using both LEO and MEO to deliver broadband services. 

But a big part of their approach is to tax and penalize U.S. space providers – especially Starlink and Kuiper with their initiatives for large constellations in low-earth orbit.

At a time when Russia and China are furthering their space alliance with a view to operating on the Moon and dominating cislunar space, the EU’s protectionist stance is dated and dangerous for cooperation. 

Below are comments submitted by Dr. Rebecca L Grant, Senior Fellow, Lexington Institute to the Office of Space Commerce, NOAA. 

The Lexington Institute appreciates this opportunity to submit comments on the Draft European Union Space Act. 

The Draft EU Space Act purports to be a legal framework for harmonizing EU member state space activities to cope with a congested orbital environment.  However, as written, the Draft EU Space Act is another example of singling out leading U.S. technology companies for biased treatment.  The Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act have already disadvantaged U.S. companies and set a trend for anti-American regulations in other countries.  The Draft EU Space Act appears to further a European agenda of protecting and shutting off their markets through onerous rules.  It is particularly disturbing that the policy has been drafted with little regard for the fragility of the space domain and the working relationships built up between the U.S. and Europe for space operations. 

At present, the Draft EU Space Act goes against the spirit of cooperation that has so far characterized U.S. space policy in relation to other friendly nations.  In particular, the U.S. has been a generous partner in military space domain awareness activities as threats to operations on-orbit escalate. 

The United States Space Force prioritizes cooperation with allied and friendly space partners.  On July 8, 2025, the U.S. Space Force released its first International Partnership Strategy, outlining a comprehensive vision for deepening collaboration with allies and partners to ensure a secure, stable, and sustainable space domain.  To this end, the United States Space Force seeks to create conditions for allies and partners to be incorporated in force design and operations.  U.S. initiatives have direct benefits for all EU space operators.  For example, the European Space Agency has a long-standing agreement with the U.S. Space Force Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg Space Force Base, in California.  The JSpOC is the focal point for the operational employment of worldwide joint space forces and the command center where space power is integrated into global military operations.  European satellite operators receive warnings of orbital events such as potential collisions from this source. 

While the Draft EU Space Act technically leaves military and dual-use issues to the purview of Member States, the initiative for “harmonisation” is more like an attempt by the EU to squeeze revenue from space operators outside the EU.  Specific items are listed below. 

The Draft EU Space Act Targets American Companies.  The EU Space Act seeks discriminatory regulation of so-called mega or “giga-constellations” with over 1,000 satellites.  This arbitrary threshold applies to current and future constellations such as Starlink and Kuiper.  However, the operators of these large constellations are the most highly incentivized to ensure safety, reliability, and space situational awareness to avoid collisions and conduct efficient maneuvering and replenishment of constellations. 

The Draft EU Space Act is Overly Burdensome and Punitive.  Operators of large space constellations have direct business motivations for ensuring cybersecurity of both their ground-based and on-orbit components.  Yet the Draft EU Space Act adds burdensome, detailed cybersecurity compliance requirements. Of note, the cost of compliance with unique rule sets is in itself a burden as it drains the engineering talent and resources of American companies from the pursuit of innovation.  The Draft EU Space Act also sets up a wide-ranging system for penalties, again pointed directly at American companies.  While the Draft EU Space Act sets out regulations, the fines for non-compliance are left to the purview of the 13 EU Member states.  Guidelines suggest fines could amount to “2% of the provider’s worldwide annual turnover.”

The Draft EU Space Act Implementation Timeline is Not Realistic.  The proposed 2030 implementation timeline is not realistic.  The regulatory framework may not be complete until 2029.  Satellites being manufactured in that time period would either have to pause production or carry out costly revisions prior to launch.  If such major regulations are to be put in place, the EU has a duty to define requirements to avoid adding to the difficulties created by the Act. 

The Draft EU Space Act Jeopardizes Efforts to Oppose Unfair Practices by China.  China is actively pursuing both space commerce and a domination of the space domain and cislunar space, with potentially catastrophic economic and national security implications.  However, the Draft EU Space Act attempts to partition off certain European space activities, making cooperation between free democracies more difficult.