UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM SD

Specialized Disclosure Report

VIASAT, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

6155 El Camino Real

Carlsbad, California 92009

(Address of Principal Executive Offices, Including Zip Code)

Brett A. Church

(760) 476-2200

(Name and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of the Person to Contact in connection with this Report)

Check the appropriate box to indicate the rule pursuant to which this form is being filed, and provide the period to which the information in this form applies:

☒ Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13p-1) for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2023

Section 1 - Conflict Minerals Disclosure

Item 1.01 Conflict Minerals Disclosure and Report

CONFLICT MINERALS DISCLOSURE

Viasat, Inc. is filing a Conflict Minerals Report for the calendar year ended December 31, 2023, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.01 and is publicly available in the Financial Information section of its website at investors.viasat.com under the heading “SEC Filings.”

Item 1.02 Exhibit

Item 2.01 of this Form SD is incorporated by reference into this Item 1.02.

Section 2 – Exhibits

Item 2.01 Exhibits

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the duly authorized undersigned.

Exhibit 1.01

VIASAT, INC. CONFLICT

MINERALS REPORT

Reporting Period:

January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023

This Conflict Minerals Report (this “Report”) of Viasat, Inc. for calendar year 2023 has been prepared pursuant to Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Rule”). The Rule imposes certain reporting obligations on every registrant having conflict minerals that are necessary to the functionality or production of a product manufactured by the registrant or contracted by the registrant to be manufactured. Please refer to the Rule, Special Disclosure Report on Form SD (“Form SD”) and the 1934 Act Release No. 34-67716 (August 22, 2012) for definitions of the terms used in this Report, unless otherwise defined herein. This Report does not address any conflict minerals that were “outside the supply chain” prior to January 31, 2013, as any such conflict minerals are exempted under the Rule and Form SD. References in this Report to “Viasat,” “we,” “us” and “our” mean Viasat, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

A. Overview

We are an innovative, global provider of communications technologies and services, focused on making connectivity accessible, available and secure for current and future customers worldwide. Our end-to-end multi-band platform of satellites, ground infrastructure and user terminals enables us to provide a wide array of cost-effective, high-quality broadband, narrowband and other connectivity solutions to aviation, maritime, enterprise, consumer, military and government users around the globe, whether on the ground, in the air or at sea. In addition, our government business includes a portfolio of communications gateways; situational awareness and command and control products and services; satellite communication products and services across various frequency bands; and cybersecurity and information assurance products and services.

We manufacture or contract to manufacture a variety of advanced satellite-based and wireless products, systems and solutions. We have determined that the Rule applies to our business because necessary conflict minerals are contained in our products.

Therefore, in accordance with the Rule and Form SD, we have conducted, in good faith, a reasonable country of origin inquiry (“RCOI”) with our suppliers that was reasonably designed to determine whether any conflict minerals in our products originated in the Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”) or an adjoining country (collectively, “Covered Countries”) or are from recycled or scrap sources. Based on our RCOI, we had reason to believe that, in calendar year 2023, necessary conflict minerals contained in our products may have originated in the Covered Countries, and had reason to believe that such necessary conflict minerals may not be from recycled or scrap sources. Therefore, given the possibility that necessary conflict minerals in our products may have originated from Covered Countries and may not be from recycled or scrap sources, we have conducted due diligence on the source and chain of custody of those conflict minerals.

In May 2023, we completed the acquisition of Connect Topco Limited, a private company limited by shares and incorporated in Guernsey (together with its subsidiaries, Inmarsat). In accordance with Instruction 3 to Item 1.01 of Form SD, the products and related activities of Inmarsat are excluded from this report.

B. Design of Conflict Minerals Program

We designed our conflict minerals program to conform in all material respects with the internationally recognized due diligence framework developed by The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”). See OECD (2016), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Third Edition, OECD Publishing, available at http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/OECD-Due-Diligence-Guidance-Minerals-Edition3.pdf and the related Supplements for gold, tin, tantalum and tungsten (collectively, the “OECD Guidance”).

Our conflict minerals program has been designed to address each of the five steps in the OECD Guidance due diligence framework as they relate to our position as a “downstream” purchaser in the conflict minerals supply chain, namely:

Because we are a downstream supplier, we are many steps removed from the mining of conflict minerals. The components and

materials contained in our products are supplied by a large number of suppliers, through multiple tiers of distribution. Once minerals are in the supply chain, determining the smelter or the origin of minerals is a challenging process, and we are realistic about the limitations on what we can identify and control.

Consistent with these limitations, the OECD Guidance acknowledges that the requirements for compliance should reflect a company’s position in the supply chain. In particular, the OECD Guidance states that the implementation of due diligence should be tailored to a company’s activities and relationships and that the nature and extent of due diligence may vary based on a company’s size, products, relationships with suppliers and other factors. Due to practical difficulties associated with supply chain complexities, the OECD Guidance advises that downstream companies exercise due diligence primarily by establishing controls over their immediate suppliers. The Responsible Minerals Initiative (“RMI”) guidance on implementing the OECD Guidance further recommends that, in conducting due diligence, downstream companies identify relevant or highest priority “tier-1” (direct) suppliers and focus their due diligence efforts on those priority suppliers first. Suggested factors for prioritizing tier-1 suppliers include annual spend.

Company Management Systems

We have established an internal conflict minerals program to manage risks in our supply chain through policies and procedures that are designed to help us understand whether the minerals in our products contribute to the ongoing conflict in the DRC. As part of our program, we have established and maintain company management systems that involve multiple levels of our organization.

Viasat’s Statement on Conflict Minerals (which is publicly available on our website at www.viasat.com/legal/legal-statements) reflects our commitment to respect human rights through our responsible sourcing practices, as well as our commitment to avoid practices that may contribute to human rights abuses.

Our conflict minerals steering committee oversees the design and execution of our conflict minerals program. Members of our steering committee include senior executives from our finance, legal, operations, engineering and supply chain departments. The steering committee’s responsibilities include reviewing and approving our Statement on Conflict Minerals, the design of our conflict minerals program and the results of our RCOI and due diligence measures. Our steering committee meets as required during each calendar year to review and discuss our conflict minerals program and is briefed as to the status and findings of the supply chain due diligence we conduct each year.

Our conflict minerals program is managed by a cross-functional compliance team, comprised of representatives from our contracts, supply chain, quality, finance and legal groups. This compliance team reports directly to our conflict minerals steering committee.

In addition to the company management systems described above, we have also implemented the following company management controls:

We also support industry forums that share and communicate information and develop policies on conflict minerals. We are a long-standing member of the RMI, an organization committed to the responsible sourcing of conflict minerals, and also provide funding to non-profit and industry initiatives that support the responsible sourcing of conflict minerals through our RMI membership.

Identification and Assessment of Supply Chain Risk

We have developed and implemented a risk management plan to identify and assess risks in our supply chain. To identify and assess these risks, we identify all of our Tier-1 Suppliers and conduct an annual supply chain survey of our Tier-1 Suppliers using the Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (“CMRT”). We have elected to use the CMRT to elicit supply chain information from our suppliers because (1) it provides information critical to our due diligence efforts, and (2) it is a commonly used tool across many industries, thus easing the burden on our suppliers.

In reviewing the diligence data we receive (whether from a completed CMRT, responses to our inquiries or otherwise), we apply evaluation processes to assess the reasonableness of the data and to check for the presence of “red flags.” We consider red flags to be obvious indications or circumstances that indicate the supplier disclosure may be inaccurate or improper and thus, may not be reliable. Factors we take into account in identifying and assessing supplier risk include:

In addition, we use the CMRT to identify conflict minerals processing facilities when reported in our supply chain by our Tier-1 Suppliers. We obtain and validate information (where available) on the country of origin and mine location of conflict minerals processed at the identified facilities by relying on the information made available by the RMI.

Designing and Implementing a Strategy to Respond to Risk

We have developed processes to assess and respond to the risks identified in our supply chain, such as sending corrective action letters to suppliers where appropriate. Our cross-functional compliance team manages the due diligence of our supply chain, and monitors, tracks and evaluates supplier responses to our due diligence efforts. Members of our cross-functional compliance team meet periodically to review the status and results of our due diligence measures and to discuss any actual or potential risks and red flags identified during diligence. Members of our cross-functional compliance team also monitor and track the measures we take to mitigate risks, and reports on risk management to our steering committee. In addition, we support the development of due diligence practices through participation in RMI working groups.

Independent Third-Party Audits of Smelters and Refiners

We do not have direct relationships with any smelters or refiners and accordingly do not directly audit any smelters or refiners in our supply chain. Instead, we rely on RMI’s third-party audit program: the Responsible Minerals Assurance Process (“RMAP”), a widely recognized standard that uses independent, third-party audit assessment of smelter and refiner management systems and sourcing practices to validate compliance with protocols and current global standards to support responsible sourcing of raw materials. We also support independent third-party audits of processing facilities through our RMI membership.

Public Reporting on our Supply Chain Due Diligence

We publish our Form SDs and Conflict Mineral Reports (including this Report) in the Financial Information section of our website at investors.viasat.com under the heading “SEC Filings,” and our Statement on Conflict Minerals is publicly available on our website at www.viasat.com/legal/legal-statements. Information found on or accessed through Viasat’s website is not considered part of this Report and is not incorporated by reference herein. We also publicly file our Form SDs (which include our Conflict Mineral Reports) with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

C. Due Diligence Measures Performed

Set forth below is a description of the measures we performed to exercise due diligence on the source and chain of custody of the necessary conflict minerals contained in our products for calendar year 2023.

To determine whether necessary conflict minerals in our products in calendar year 2023 originated in Covered Countries, we assembled a comprehensive list of suppliers that provide goods and services directly to us. From this list, we identified and excluded suppliers which cumulatively represented less than 1% of procurement expense during the calendar year 2023. From the reduced list we identified 405 Tier-1 Suppliers above the 1% cumulative expense threshold. We contacted each of these Tier-1 Suppliers individually, provided them with a link to our Statement on Conflict Minerals and a copy of the CMRT, and requested the return of the completed CMRT to us. Follow-up requests were sent to all Tier-1 Suppliers who did not respond. We sought to maximize the response rate by sending escalation emails to suppliers that had not submitted their CMRT documentation. We received responses from approximately half of our surveyed Tier-1 Suppliers, representing greater than half of the total purchasing expense for calendar year 2023.

We electronically aggregated and reviewed the data from all of the responses we received from our Tier-1 Suppliers by utilizing software called Compliance Map (“CMAP”) and other various tools and processes. CMAP is an environmental compliance mapping software designed to manage and automate environmental compliance obligations. The reports received from CMAP identify quality issues (e.g. incomplete CMRTs, inconsistent responses, indication of DRC sourcing, no smelters or invalid smelters listed, not all smelters identified, etc.) and aggregate CMRT responses for analysis and reporting. Where red flags were identified, we attempted to further analyze the information provided on the CMRT in order to assess any actual or potential risks to our supply chain and develop a recommended course of action. We then communicated red flags identified in the CMRT responses through corrective action letter requests with our suppliers as appropriate.

We determined if the processing facilities reported to us by our suppliers adhere to responsible sourcing practices by verifying whether they are included on the list of RMAP-Conformant processing facilities.

Members of our cross-functional compliance team met periodically to review the results from our due diligence efforts for calendar year 2023.

D. Product Description

Products Containing Necessary Conflict Minerals

We have determined that substantially all of the products we manufacture or contract to manufacture contain conflict minerals necessary to the functionality or production of such products.

Facilities Used to Process, and Country of Origin of, the Necessary Conflict Minerals in our Products

Based on the information provided by our Tier-1 Suppliers and information made available by RMI and RMAP, we believe that the facilities that have been used to process conflict minerals in our products in calendar year 2023 may include the smelters and refiners listed in Annex I. As discussed above, we are a downstream supplier, many steps removed from the mining of conflict minerals, and accordingly rely on the information provided to us by our Tier-1 Suppliers (who are themselves generally multiple tiers downstream) to determine the country of origin of, or the facilities used to process, the conflict minerals contained in our products.

Of the 431 smelters and refiners identified as potentially being in our supply chain:

Because a smelter or refiner can obtain materials from multiple sources, the categories above are not mutually exclusive.

Not all of these facilities may have processed conflict minerals in our products. Much of the smelter and refiner information provided by our Tier-1 Suppliers was provided at a “company” level (meaning that they reported all of the smelters and refiners that may have processed the conflict minerals contained in all of their products, not just those pertaining to the products sold to us). They may also have reported to us smelters and refiners that were not in our supply chain due to over-inclusiveness in the information received from their own suppliers or for other reasons. Therefore, the list of processing facilities disclosed in Annex I may over-represent the number of processing facilities that process the conflict minerals contained in our products.

Efforts to Determine Mine or Location of Origin

We have determined that our due diligence efforts, including requesting our Tier-1 Suppliers to complete the CMRT and reviewing the RMAP status of identified smelters and refiners, represent our reasonable best efforts to determine the mines or locations of origin of the conflict minerals in our supply chain.

E. Future Steps to Mitigate Risk

Our conflict minerals program is aimed at the continuous improvement of our understanding of our supply chain and risk reduction over time. We intend to continue to take steps to improve our due diligence processes and to minimize the risk that our necessary conflict minerals benefit armed groups. Due diligence is an ongoing, proactive and reactive process, and we are continuing to work with our suppliers to identify and prevent or mitigate risks of adverse impacts associated with conflict minerals.

The primary risks we identified in calendar year 2023 continue to be related to inconsistencies or inadequacies in, or the incompleteness of, suppliers’ responses to the CMRT, the inability of our suppliers to confirm whether or not minerals used in their parts and components were sourced from Covered Countries, and the associated difficulties in identifying the smelters and refiners in our supply chain. With respect to necessary conflict minerals contained in our products with respect to calendar year 2024, we expect to continue to engage with our suppliers regarding our expectations with regard to conflict minerals sourcing and the importance of conflict mineral supply chain diligence. In particular, we continue to encourage our suppliers to work with their own immediate suppliers to improve the transparency, accuracy, validity, reliability and completeness of conflict mineral sourcing information (particularly with regard to information provided regarding smelters and refiners used to process conflict minerals and mine or location of origin and country of origin information), and to minimize the risk that our necessary conflict minerals benefit armed groups. As our Tier-1 Suppliers continue to report smelters and refiners that we believe are not operational or that may have been misidentified as smelters or refiners, we continue to work with our suppliers to re-validate, improve and refine reported information. We strive to use only suppliers that source from “conformant” processing facilities in our supply chain to the extent reasonably practicable.

Certain of the matters discussed in this Report, including in particular, future steps to mitigate risks that the conflict minerals

contained in our products could benefit armed groups in the Covered Countries, include forward-looking statements. Readers of this document are cautioned that our forward-looking statements are not guarantees of our future actions, which may differ materially from the expectations expressed in the forward-looking statements. We disclaim any obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, whether in response to new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.

Annex I

List of Smelters and Refiners Reported in Viasat’s Supply Chain in

2023