The draft EU Space Act has drawn criticism from the US, citing risks to innovation, costs for non-European operators, and the “giga-constellation” threshold.
Summary
On June 25, 2025, the European Commission unveiled a proposed space regulation, the EU Space Act, aimed at harmonizing the regulation of space activities in the European Union. However, this project has provoked strong anger from the United States and American companies, who believe that certain provisions—notably the definition of a “giga-constellation” (more than 1,000 satellites)—could impose excessive regulatory burdens, exclude American operators, and stifle innovation. Despite these objections, the European legislative process is continuing: more than 120 public comments have been received, and a vote is planned for summer 2026.
The content and ambitions of the EU Space Act
The proposed regulation is based on three pillars: security, resilience, and sustainability of space activities.
- On security, the act introduces authorization and registration requirements for space activities, including non-European operators providing services in the EU internal market.
- On resilience, it imposes cybersecurity and business continuity requirements on critical space infrastructure, in a context of increased threats.
- On sustainability, the text requires operators to assess and reduce the environmental impact of their launches and activities in orbit, including the reduction of space debris.
The scope is broad: the regulation would cover all space operators providing services in the EU, whether European or non-European. An estimate in the Commission’s analysis document provides for implementation from January 1, 2030, with a two-year transition period.
From a market perspective, the EU recognizes that the current fragmentation of national rules (13 separate pieces of legislation according to the Commission) represents a “barrier to the development of a single European space market.” The regulator thus hopes to stimulate private operators, particularly SMEs and start-ups, by reducing administrative formalities. However, it is precisely this aspect that is causing unease across the Atlantic.
American criticism and the “giga-constellation” threshold
One of the most contentious points is the definition of a “giga-constellation”, set at a space network of more than 1,000 satellites. This category aims to regulate constellations with a very large number of satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) and to establish specific security and traceability requirements.
The United States considers that this definition effectively targets its large operators, such as SpaceX with its Starlink constellation, which already has more than 8,000 satellites, or Amazon with its plans for thousands of satellites. The US State Department issued formal comments in early November 2025, pointing out that the current wording “could apply to defense activities or European agencies such as ESA or EUMETSAT.”
The US objections focus on several areas:
- the cost of compliance (burdens on non-European operators);
- the lack of clarity on the mutual recognition of national and European regulations;
- the risk that European rules will be imposed on non-European operators de facto;
- concerns that such a framework would slow down innovation and investment in the international space sector.
For example, the US Chamber of Commerce has denounced “excessive compliance costs” that could “slow down investment and the deployment of services in Europe.”
Figures and trends in the European and global space market
The global space industry is experiencing strong growth. According to analysis by the European Parliamentary Research Service, the number of satellites launched each year has increased fivefold since 2010, with more than 8,000 satellites in active orbit by early 2025. The problem of space debris is a major one: the European Commission reported “more than 128 million fragments” in low orbit.
In Europe, the launch of the IRIS² (Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite) program illustrates the continent’s ambition: 290 multi-orbit satellites for an initial budget of around €10 billion.
This context of rapid intensification makes “real-time” regulatory intervention necessary, according to Brussels. However, for international players, this also means a more burdensome compliance environment. The European market is estimated at more than €12 billion per year for space services and infrastructure, and the Commission estimates that the creation of a single framework could generate a competitiveness gain of around +15% for European industry.
Consequences for US companies and transatlantic partnerships
For US companies in the space sector, the text has three major consequences:
- Regulatory adaptation: a US operator wishing to provide services to European customers may have to comply with EU obligations, which increases costs and changes market access strategy.
- Strategic investment: the prospect of stricter regulation may increase perceived risk, slow down fundraising, or hinder the deployment of satellites in Europe.
- Technological and security cooperation: The US fears that the applicability of the act to European sovereignty or agency activities could affect transatlantic relations, joint programs, and the shared supply chain.
Partnerships between the EU and the US in the space sector—for example, within NATO or via the ESA—could be complicated by regulatory differences. According to the Commission, dialogue was open during the 13th EU-US Space Dialogue in September.
For European companies, the challenge is twofold: on the one hand, to benefit from a regulated, harmonized market and support for innovation; on the other, to prevent regulation from becoming a hindrance in the face of global competitors. This is a balance that European legislators will have to strike.
Challenges for space innovation and European sovereignty
The EU Space Act is not just an economic and industrial framework: it reflects a geopolitical ambition. The EU intends to build open strategic autonomy, i.e., to participate in technological leadership while remaining open to non-European partners.
By harmonizing the rules for space activities, the EU wants to avoid the current complexity where each state imposes its own standards, which slows down innovations such as rapid launch of microsatellites, orbital services, and debris removal.
However, overly burdensome regulation risks being counterproductive. As an American diplomat pointed out, “you can’t regulate your way to technological superiority.” While the goal is laudable, its implementation raises major questions: how can security, rapid innovation, private investment, and global competition be reconciled?
Outlook and upcoming legislative steps
The European legislative process is moving forward. The European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) report indicates that the draft regulation (COM(2025) 335) has been forwarded to Parliament and that the vote could take place in the summer of 2026.
At the same time, in November 2025, the Commission received nearly 120 public contributions. Denmark, which holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, is aiming for a revised version of the text before the end of its term in December 2025.
Three scenarios are possible:
- An amended version responding to transatlantic criticism, particularly on the mutualization of regulations and mutual recognition of standards.
- A tougher text, strengthening obligations for non-European operators, which could lead to the withdrawal of US operators or a slowdown in services to Europe.
- A long transition, with certain rules deferred for major players, but a strong signal sent to the industry.
In any case, the act will serve as a major regulatory reference in the space sector for the next decade.
Frank reflections: a difficult balance to strike
The EU Space Act bill illustrates the tension between security/regulation and innovation/entrepreneurial freedom. On the one hand, the EU may legitimately want to protect its critical infrastructure, prevent orbit from becoming a space Wild West, limit debris, and strengthen its sovereignty. On the other hand, imposing overly strict or premature standards could slow down the entry of new players into the market, inflate costs, and give an advantage to less regulated areas.
For American companies, the feeling is that the EU is seeking to protect its space industry with compliance barriers, which creates an atmosphere of mistrust. For European companies, the time has come to be vigilant: harmonized regulation is essential, but it must not become a hindrance to competitiveness. The real challenge is to succeed in regulating without immobilizing, to supervise without stifling.
In a world where constellations are multiplying, commercial space missions are flourishing, and geopolitics is taking hold in orbit, the arrival of the EU Space Act marks a turning point. It is now up to lawmakers to ensure that this legislation becomes an accelerator—not a brake.
War Wings Daily is an independant magazine.