COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safety, resilience and sustainability of space activities in the Union
Date: 2025-06-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Defence Industry and Space, European Commission
Subjects: extra-atmospheric space, provision of services, satellite data, single market, space technology, use of outer space

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 25.6.2025  SWD(2025) 336 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safety, resilience and sustainability of space activities in the Union  {COM(2025) 335 final} - {SEC(2025) 335 final} - {SWD(2025) 335 final}  
 
 
A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level? 

The growth of space activities in the EU has been spurred by an increasing demand for space data and 
services  in  support  of  the  economy  and  society  and  by  lower  costs  of  manufacturing  and  launching 
satellites. This has given rise to an expanding network of private companies engaging in cross-border 
activities,  including  the  rapid  emergence  of  commercial  companies  (‘New  Space’  industry)  in  all 
Member States. 

To support the space industry's rapid growth, individual Member States have developed a regulatory 
environment at national level. 

The  patchwork  of  national  regulatory  approaches  is  leading  to  a  fragmentation  of  the  single  market 
and is likely to increase as more Member States have announced the intention to set up their own legal 
framework  for  space  activities.  This  fragmentation  can:  (i)  impede  the  EU  space  industry's 
competitiveness  and  cross-border  value  chains  for  EU  space  activities;  (ii)  hinder  the  protection  of 
space  infrastructure,  jeopardising  the  long-term  sustainability  of  space  assets  and  the  use  of  space 
services  for  EU  users;  and  (iii)  compromise  the  ability  of  the  EU  space  industry  to  tackle  the 
environmental impact of space activities. 

Three main problems have been identified: 

a) 
b) 

c) 

a fragmented single market hindering cross-border space activities; 
risk  for  the  resilience  and  long-term  sustainability  of  space  activities  carried  out  by 
commercial and governmental bodies across the EU; 
environmental challenges amid supply chain pressure for the EU space sector. 

Objectives: What should be achieved? 

The general objective of this initiative is to support the development and functioning of an EU single 
market for the space sector. 

Specifically, the initiative aims to: 

• 

• 

• 

lay down an EU framework guiding the conduct of space operators in a way that provides a stable, 
predictable and competitive business environment that fosters innovation; 

ensure space objects can be tracked and reduce the amount of space debris generated by EU space 
operators and space operators providing their services in the EU; 

create a risk assessment framework tailored to the cybersecurity needs for space infrastructure in 
the EU and Member States; 

• 

create a common method to assess and measure the environmental impact of EU space activities. 

What is the added value of action at EU level (subsidiarity)? 

Member  States  have taken  their  own  approaches  to the  safety,  resilience  and  sustainability  of space 
activities. Action at EU level is essential to bring targeted harmonisation on these three key aspects, 
currently covered in different ways under national licencing requirements. 

1 

 
 
 
Setting out a framework at EU level would increase the level of safety, resilience, and sustainability 
across all space activities, bringing significant added value compared to individual action at  Member 
State level. In particular, it would help: (i) create a level-playing field across the EU by harmonising 
licencing  requirements  for  safety,  resilience  and  sustainability;  (ii)  avoid  overlap,  duplication  and 
conflicts between national legislation, improving the single market; (iii) transfer or recognise licences 
to  provide  EU-wide  services  or  goods;  (iv)  improve  and  harmonise  the  protection  of  space 
infrastructure  in  the  EU,  strengthening  the  capacity  of  these  systems  to  deliver  data  and  services  in 
support of the single market; and (v) ensure consistency when evaluating the environmental impact of 
space  activities.  A  common  approach  at  EU  level  would  also  position  the  EU  as  a  global  leader  in 
setting standards in a sector that is urgently calling for solutions. 

B. Solutions 

What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option? 

To achieve the objectives of this initiative, four policy options have been considered: (i) co-regulation 
(option  1);  (ii)  a  binding  framework  at  EU  level  (option  2);  (iii)  a  binding  framework  at  EU  level, 
combined with non-binding measures (option 2+); (iv) bilateral agreements (option 2++). 

Based on the results of an assessment and comparison of the options, option 2+, ‘a binding framework 
at EU level, paired with non-binding measures’, scored the highest marks and is therefore ranked as 
the  preferred  option.  This  result  is  also  in  line  with  the  preferred  option  of  stakeholders  (including 
SMEs) who responded to the targeted consultation. 

What are different stakeholders’ views? Who supports which option? 

The preferred option is broadly supported by the stakeholders consulted. Overall, 46% of the 
respondents to the targeted consultation ranked policy option 2+ as the option most likely to achieve 
the objective. 

C. Impact of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise the main ones)? 

The preferred option would contribute to: (i) reducing space debris generation and cybersecurity risks 
to the EU space industry; (ii) ensuring business continuity and mitigating the cost of disruptions; (iii) 
improving the space industry's environmental performance and sustainability; (iv) making the industry 
more  competitive,  including  ensuring  a  favourable  environment  for  the  further  growth  of  new 
commercial entrants;  (v) increasing  the  public's  trust  in  and  reliance  on space  systems  and services; 
and  (vi) strengthening  the governance  of the space  sector  by  harmonising  the  key  requirements  that 
national authorities should consider when granting licences. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise the main ones)? 

Compliance  costs  would  depend  on  the  extent  to  which  each  company  has  implemented  current 
measures.  However,  the  binding  measures  included  in  the  preferred  option  would  increase 
manufacturing costs by 3-10% compared to the baseline. 

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness? 

A  common  regulatory  framework  would  boost the  competitiveness  of  the  EU  space industry  by:  (i) 
reducing the administrative burden and costs for companies that would no longer have to comply with 

2 

 
 
many uncoordinated requirements across the EU; and (ii) increasing  a company’s level of reliability 
through better resilience and safety, giving them a global competitive advantage. 

An  improved  integration  of  the  single  market  would  also  open  the  door  to  new  markets  for  SMEs, 
expanding  the  size  of  the  EU  market  and  fostering  innovation.  This  would  also  attract  private 
investment, contributing to the scaling-up and growth of New Space industry in the EU (mostly start-
ups and SMEs in need of larger fundraising). 

The  costs  for  industry,  particularly  SMEs,  would  include  meeting  technical  and  operational 
requirements,  coupled  with  additional  costs  for  administrative  checks  and  enforcement.  These  costs 
could  be  mitigated  by:  (i)  support  measures;  and  (ii)  making  the  rules  proportionate  (taking  into 
account,  for  example,  a  company's  size,  how critical  the mission  is,  or  how  high  the  satellite  would 
orbit the Earth). The initiative would have operational benefits for SMEs, particularly higher revenues 
from extending the life of satellites. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 

The preferred option would have an impact on the relevant national authorities (i.e. those responsible 
for  issuing  licences  to  conduct  space  activities).  For  example,  it  could  affect  setting  up  national 
security  monitoring  centres  and  processing  incident  reporting  and  assessment  data.  The  burden  on 
national administrations would depend on what they have already in place. Member States may choose 
to rely on support from other bodies, including the EU Agency for the Space Programme (EUSPA) to 
check compliance with EU licencing requirements. 

Will there be other significant impacts? 

No other significant negative impacts are expected. The preferred policy option would also contribute 
to achieving several of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and create jobs. 

Proportionality? 

The preferred option would not go beyond what is needed to achieve the objectives of this  initiative 
and would not impose disproportionate costs that could harm the EU space industry's competitiveness. 
EU  action  would:  (i)  create  a  common  baseline  for  the  safety,  resilience,  and  environmental 
sustainability  aspects  of  EU  space  activities;  (ii)  be  proportionate  to  the  specific  risks  of  different 
orbits  and  altitudes  and  the  specific  characteristics  of  non-critical  missions;  (iii)  remain  technology 
neutral; and (iv) respect Member States’ prerogatives on national security. 

D. Follow-up 

When will the policy be reviewed? 

The specific objectives of the initiative would be monitored on an annual basis. The initiative would 
be evaluated three years after it has entered into force to assess the impact on – and reaction of – the 
market, in particular SMEs. 

3