GLMA Myth #2: “European licence” to provide satellite services

Among the satellite industry, the notion of a “pan-European licence” continues to mislead many operators and investors – particularly those from outside the bloc. Despite ambitions for a Single Market, there is currently no such thing as a “regional permission” for providing satellite services across the EU or wider Europe. Instead, operators must navigate the spectrum and telecoms approvals in each of the national territories.

Fragmentation, Not Federation

The EU’s current framework, the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), provides for a ‘general authorisation’ regime for satellite services, enabling providers to operate under universal conditions with minimal steps. However, as a Directive, the EECC requires national transposition, and even then its reach is limited—particularly on spectrum, which remains under the sovereignty of Member States.

For satellite players, this means closely examining and following national rules and procedures.  For example, in countries like Germany, France, and Spain, satellite operators need dedicated spectrum licenses (“network assignments”) to cover the connecting ground equipment using recognised satellite bands. Fees vary significantly, reflecting national policy priorities and market conditions. Far from being simple, the authorisation process for communications networks and services (ECS/ECN) can also be complex and bureaucratic in several markets. While others enforce conditions like lawful intercept and data security, bringing further complication.

The fragmented system has been debated extensively. In the European Commission’s 2023 initiative on the “Future Of The Electronic Communications Sector And Its Infrastructure”, and most recently on the forthcoming Digital Networks Act (DNA). The DNA seeks to create a new telecoms framework in Europe through a Regulation rather than Directive (meaning direct application in EU Member States): potentially streamlining certain procedures. However, each saw resistance to “EU-wide licence” proposals, in favour of continued harmonisation, while preserving sovereignty.

No One-Size-Fits-All

The Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG), which advises the European Commission (EC) on spectrum strategy, addressed the issue in its Addendum on Satellite Authorisations (to its Opinion on the Future of the Electronic Communication Sector), and its later Opinion on Direct-to-Device (D2D) Connectivity, in 2025. Both observed that:

• There is no centralised EU authorisation model for satellite services or spectrum.

• Authorisations must reflect national legal frameworks, including competition and consumer protection.

• Two models exist: individual authorisations and general authorisations, both managed nationally.

The RSPG also emphasised that D2D satellite services—which aim to connect directly to consumer devices—face significant regulatory hurdles due to spectrum sharing, interference risks, and the lack of harmonised licensing.

Aside from individual authorisations, several European countries also offer “experimental permits” at national level. These are short-term authorisations designed for trial and testing purposes. They allow special access to frequencies for validating technologies and operations, before full deployment is possible. Thereby supporting early-stage development, in areas like D2D and Ground Segment services.

The 2 GHz MSS

The 2 GHz Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) band is often cited as a precedent for pan-EU licensing. In 2009, the EC coordinated among the Member States a comprehensive tender process, with two operators (now Viasat and EchoStar) having exclusive 2 x 15 MHz spectrum across EU Member States until 2027. This was an exceptional event, driven by EU connectivity and policy goals at the time. 

Even then, Member States had control over the licensing, conditions and enforcement aspects in their territories, under domestic rules (individual or general authorisation). The post-2027 scenarios are currently under review via separate RSPG and EC initiatives. The RSPG studies highlight the national licences held by each operator and how regulators are closely involved in future approaches for the bands.

Harmonisation Without Centralisation

While a pan-EU licence does not exist, regulatory cohesion certainly does feature through technical harmonisation and procedural alignment, e.g.:

• The European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) and European Telecommunications Information and Innovation Services Institute (ETSI) collaborate on harmonised standards for satellite equipment and spectrum use. These standards facilitate easier market access, especially where operators comply with technical norms under the Radio Equipment Directive (RED).

• The EECC includes templates and procedures for ECS/ECN, helping streamline procedure across Member States. The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) also administers a database of ECN/ECS providers, improving transparency.

These initiatives reduce friction but do not replace national licensing. Moreover, the Open Skies principle, under the EU’s 2002 “Authorisation Directive”, allows freedom to offer satellite capacity across borders, but does not override national spectrum licensing for ground infrastructure and related coordination matters.

The EECC regime aims for non-discriminatory access to the EU market. Foreign companies are not generally required to have a local entity for acquiring ECS/ECN authorisations and/or spectrum licences from Member State authorities. However, having an EU office is often a practical necessity for providing commercial services in the region: for legal, compliance, tax and operational reasons, among others. The obligation also features under the planned EU Space Act rules.

EU Space Act

The draft EU Space Act (EUSA), currently in its early stages, proposes major new rules for space activities in the EU. It includes terms like “authorisation” and “registration” for regulating space systems in orbital safety, space and environmental sustainability, physical resilience and data security - via harmonised mechanisms like the “Union Register of Space Objects” (URSO) for non-EU operators. It is important, however, not to confuse the EUSA with the telecoms and spectrum authorisations for delivering satellite services in the Member State territories, under separate EU and national frameworks. EUSA would instead add a layer of space segment compliance and procedures for EU players, and non-EU operators looking to provide space services in Europe.

Conclusion

While a source of previous ambitions, continued debate and tension, the notion of a “pan-European licence” for satellite services remains a myth. However, thanks to bodies like the EC, RSPG, CEPT, ETSI, and BEREC, Europe arguably has a more harmonised and transparent regulatory environment than any other region globally. This helps give foreign players a head-start in being able to plan ahead for compliance and approach the constituent markets with more confidence.