Why Thailand will not allow SpaceX full ownership of Starlink operations

Thailand’s refusal to allow SpaceX to wholly own a satellite telecommunications business has returned to the spotlight as the government moves to build the country’s space economy and update its laws to accommodate rapidly changing technology.

The government is seeking to create a framework that would allow foreign satellite operators, including Starlink, to provide services in Thailand. However, it remains firm that SpaceX cannot hold 100% ownership of a Thai telecommunications operation.

The issue extends beyond foreign investment. Satellite communications are closely connected to national sovereignty, security and critical infrastructure, all of which the government maintains must remain subject to effective Thai oversight.

At its first meeting on August 17, the National Space Policy Committee began developing a new framework for Thailand’s space sector, including a draft landing-rights policy governing permission for foreign satellites to provide services in the country.

The central question is therefore how widely Thailand should open its space and satellite markets while retaining regulatory authority over strategically important infrastructure.

SpaceX ownership dispute is not new

The dispute over SpaceX’s proposed ownership structure was first disclosed publicly in November 2025.

The Thai government made clear at the time that any company operating in Thailand would have to comply with Thai laws and regulations.

The renewed attention in 2026 does not represent the collapse of a newly negotiated deal. It is a return to the same unresolved issue: SpaceX wants full control of its local operation, while Thailand cannot accept the proposed 100% foreign-ownership structure.

On November 6, 2025, the Digital Economy and Society Ministry announced that Minister Chaichanok Chidchob had welcomed SpaceX executives for discussions on possible cooperation, support for Thailand’s space policies and the introduction of Starlink satellite-network services.

Chaichanok later told the media that SpaceX wanted to enter Thailand formally by establishing its own company without a Thai partner and retaining complete ownership.

According to the minister, the company indicated that it would not proceed with the investment unless it was permitted to operate under that structure.

The Thai government rejected the condition on both legal and national-security grounds, particularly because the proposed business would involve communications systems and the country’s digital infrastructure.

The rejection was not based on opposition to satellite technology or Starlink itself, nor did it represent an attempt to close Thailand to foreign investment.

The obstacle was the request for 100% foreign ownership in a sector subject to national-security and telecommunications considerations.

Allowing a service is different from allowing full ownership

The government distinguishes between allowing Starlink services to enter Thailand and allowing a foreign company to own an entire telecommunications operation in the country.

Chaichanok previously explained that SpaceX regarded complete foreign ownership as necessary for its investment. Thailand, however, maintained that it could not accept such an arrangement for a business directly connected with satellite telecommunications and digital security.

Telecommunications are not treated as an ordinary commercial activity because they involve infrastructure that the government must be able to supervise.

Thailand’s Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) imposes different conditions depending on the type of business involved. Activities governed by sector-specific legislation must also comply with the relevant specialised laws.

The government is also seeking to prevent the use of nominee ownership structures to circumvent foreign-ownership restrictions.

Since August 1, 2026, the Department of Business Development has increased its scrutiny of companies’ shareholder and director structures after incorporation, with the aim of preventing Thai nationals from being used as nominees concealing effective foreign control.

These concerns are particularly significant in Starlink’s case because it uses satellites in low-Earth orbit, or LEO.

The system can provide internet coverage across wide areas without depending on conventional terrestrial telecommunications networks. Its implications therefore extend beyond ordinary internet access to emergency communications, national security and Thailand’s reliance on infrastructure controlled from overseas.

Sovereignty issue raised in US trade talks

Thailand’s position was reiterated during trade negotiations with the United States.

On August 5, Kirida Bhaopichitr, Vice Minister for Commerce, said Thailand did not want a US company to establish a wholly foreign-owned LEO satellite telecommunications business in the country.

She described the issue as one involving sovereignty and indicated that it would be raised again during the next round of Thai-US trade negotiations, scheduled for late August.

“Only one business sector is one that we genuinely do not want the United States to enter through full investment: low-Earth-orbit satellite telecommunications services, because this is a sovereignty issue,” she said.

“Essentially, there is only one US company seeking this, which is SpaceX.”

Foreign satellites could enter under Thai conditions

Thailand’s position does not mean that the government has closed the door to Starlink or other foreign satellite operators.

On the same day that the government reiterated its ownership limits, the National Space Policy Committee was advancing the landing-rights framework intended to allow foreign satellites to provide services under Thai regulations.

The approach is consistent with proposals previously considered by the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission.

The NBTC board proposed replacing the previous system, which had an exclusive character, with three separate categories of authorisation:

• Landing rights
• Gateway operations
• Satellite services

Separating the permissions would allow the authorities to regulate the different parts of satellite operations more precisely.

The proposed licensing framework is also intended to protect consumers and maintain balanced competition, giving individuals and businesses more options for accessing high-quality communications services without compromising national security or Thailand’s interests.

State seeks free satellite capacity for public services

Another issue considered by the National Space Policy Committee concerns communications capacity allocated to the state by companies licensed to use Thailand’s satellite orbital rights.

The government plans to use this capacity free of charge for state missions and public services under the concept of State Use and Public Services.

The approach reflects the government’s position that orbital positions and space resources should not be treated solely as commercial assets.

Some of the benefits should be returned to the public through government services, public-interest operations and national-security activities.

This is another reason why the rules governing major foreign satellite operators are seen as more important than a simple decision over whether to allow them into the country.

Thailand develops broader space-economy strategy

The National Space Policy Committee’s work extends well beyond satellite internet services.

It has established three principal areas for Thailand’s wider space strategy.

The first is the space economy, focusing on creating a competitive ecosystem capable of attracting investment and supporting business growth.

The second is security, including the development of surveillance systems and space traffic management to address threats in the digital, cyber and space domains.

The third is technology, covering research and development in Earth-observation satellites and a feasibility study for a proposed Thailand Spaceport.

Satellite data would also be used to support agriculture, disaster management and the monitoring of PM2.5 pollution.

The government additionally plans to accelerate the development of skilled personnel needed for the expanding space industry.

These initiatives are being pursued alongside work to revise the draft Space Activities Act and update the National Space Master Plan for 2023–2037 to reflect changes in technology, investment, economic value and national security.

The real question is not whether to accept Starlink

Thailand is not positioning itself against SpaceX or foreign satellite technology.

Instead, it is attempting to create rules that would allow foreign companies to participate while ensuring that the government retains meaningful oversight.

Allowing SpaceX to hold 100% ownership of a LEO satellite telecommunications business could give a single foreign company substantial commercial power over infrastructure with implications for national sovereignty and security.

However, Thailand must also avoid making its regulations so restrictive that it misses opportunities arising from new technology and investment flowing into the global space economy.

The policy choice is therefore not simply between accepting or rejecting Starlink.

The challenge is to determine how Thailand can open its space economy without surrendering full regulatory authority over strategic communications and space infrastructure to any single private operator.

Source: Krungthep Turakij