Australia is preparing to take Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube to court over alleged failures to enforce a nationwide ban on social media accounts for children under 16, escalating its campaign to hold technology companies accountable for online child safety.
Communications Minister Anika Wells said the country’s online safety regulator is gathering evidence for proceedings.
The proposed legal action follows investigations launched in March by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner into the five platforms. The law, which took effect on December 10, 2025, requires covered social media companies to take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 from creating or retaining accounts.
The regulator’s findings raised concerns that many children continued using existing accounts or opening new ones despite the restrictions. A report released in July highlighted weaknesses in age-verification measures, raising questions about whether platforms were doing enough to identify and restrict underage users.
Wells said that she expected legal action against the five companies, although the decision to bring proceedings rests with the independent regulator. The eSafety Commissioner has expanded its evidence-gathering powers, including the ability to demand documents from companies and require current or former employees to answer questions.
Australia has also increased the maximum penalty for breaches to A$109.2 million, equivalent to approximately US$76 million. The higher potential penalty raises the financial stakes for companies found to have failed to comply with the law.
The legislation is part of Australia’s effort to reduce children’s exposure to harmful online content and address concerns about social media’s effects on young users. Its enforcement has attracted international attention as other governments consider stronger age restrictions and additional responsibilities for digital platforms.
The companies have previously indicated varying positions on compliance. Meta has said it is committed to following the law, while technology companies have raised questions about age-assurance methods and how reliably platforms can determine a user’s age. The allegations have not yet been determined by a court.
For the technology industry, the case could help clarify what regulators consider reasonable measures for enforcing age restrictions. It may also influence how platforms design age checks, manage account access and document compliance in countries considering similar rules.
The next step is for the eSafety Commissioner to assess the evidence and decide how to proceed with the proposed Federal Court action. The outcome could shape future enforcement of child-safety requirements and increase pressure on social media companies to demonstrate that their safeguards are effective.
