Since Australia's Social Media Minimum Age law took effect on December 10, the nation's eSafety Commissioner has released initial findings on implementation. The picture is sobering: platforms have struggled to meet their obligations, and key metrics on user harm have barely budged.

The regulator identified "significant concerns" with five major platforms—Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube—and has launched formal investigations that could lead to enforcement action by mid-2026. The core problem is stark: "Many children aged under 16 still have their accounts or can create new accounts," the report states. "eSafety has observed poor practices by some platforms in the first three months of the SMMA obligation coming into effect."

Numbers alone mask the reality. Platforms removed, deactivated, or restricted more than 4.7 million accounts belonging to under-16 users by mid-January. Yet account removals do not signal genuine compliance. Underage usage has declined but remains substantial, and the report's detailed analysis exposes significant operational gaps.

Where enforcement is breaking down

Age assurance systems have proven problematic in practice. The report documents instances where users who had already identified themselves as under 16 were asked to complete additional verification steps to "correct" their age—and some regained access through these checks. Facial age estimation tools, despite their documented limitations near the 16-year threshold, were deployed widely. System design choices almost certainly increased the risk of misclassification.

Rollout pace has also hampered effectiveness. Many underage users kept their accounts simply because they had not yet been required to verify their age. The staggered deployment of age checks to existing users limited the ban's reach. Where platforms did introduce stricter measures, these often came only after direct pressure from the regulator, suggesting compliance was largely reactive rather than proactive.

Early data on harm reduction is discouraging. The regulator found no clear decline in complaints from under-16 users about cyberbullying or image-based abuse since the law took effect, though a three-month window is admittedly brief for measuring long-term impact. Account removals have not yet translated into measurable reductions in reported harm.

The blanket ban also appears ineffective at keeping young people off social media entirely. In a survey of parents whose children had accounts before December 10, nearly 70 percent reported their kids still had a Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok account. Close to half said their children retained YouTube access.

What other countries are watching

Australia was the first nation to enact a nationwide minimum age requirement. As other jurisdictions consider similar bans, the ability to measure impact through polling and rigorous research—as Australia's regulator is doing—will prove essential for determining whether such policies actually reduce youth social media use.

The United Kingdom is the most closely watched case. A national consultation running until May 26 will gather views on whether a social media minimum age should exist and, if so, what it should be. The current government has publicly backed a potential nationwide ban. The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill has bounced between parliamentary chambers, with the House of Lords twice voting for an outright under-16 ban while the House of Commons preferred government amendments that would grant regulatory powers without mandating a statutory ban. The consultation explores a broader policy menu than Australia debated, including overnight curfews, algorithmic restrictions, addictive design features, and daily screen time limits.

Indonesia has adopted a framework structurally similar to Australia's and is already facing platform pushback. Its regulation was signed on March 28, placing liability on platforms rather than children or parents. Compliance gaps surfaced immediately: within days of the law taking effect, Jakarta summoned officials from Meta and Google, with the Communications Minister calling them "non-compliant with the law" and threatening sanctions or platform blocks. Indonesia's more aggressive enforcement stance contrasts with Australia's methodical evidence-gathering approach, though whether this assertiveness produces lasting compliance remains uncertain.

Austria is developing proposals for a lower threshold, targeting children under 14. This aligns more closely with existing US frameworks and may sidestep some verification challenges tied to older teenagers. The European Commission is considering consolidating multiple proposed bans across its 27 member states into a single EU-wide approach.

Common patterns across jurisdictions

  • Platform liability is nearly universal; penalties target companies, not children or parents who circumvent rules
  • Facial age estimation and other age assurance technologies are widely deployed despite documented accuracy limitations near age thresholds
  • A gap between legislative enactment and functional enforcement is consistent across all jurisdictions

Age verification and assurance technologies have drawn criticism from privacy advocates worldwide. These tools risk compromising online anonymity and may expose sensitive personal information if not properly overseen.

Other nations face distinct challenges. Malaysia has set a June enforcement target for its under-16 rule but is still determining how platforms will verify ages using government-issued ID. Brazil's new child safety law has taken effect, but implementation has fallen to an under-resourced regulator. India is advancing state-level restrictions and considering national age-verification proposals amid significant civil society concerns about surveillance expansion.

Regulatory design varies considerably. Some countries are imposing access restrictions based on age thresholds, while others are exploring whether targeted obligations on platform features and systems can achieve similar goals. Australia's early compliance data underscores the operational difficulties of enforcing age limits at scale.

https://social-media-age-tracker.onrender.com/?embed

Source: Tech Policy Press