Under-16s social media ban likely to require photo ID, Ofcom says

Four methods the regulator calls highly effective

Ofcom has recommended four ways to check whether a user is 16 or over: photo ID matching, banking checks, digital ID services and face age estimation technology. Photo ID matching compares a passport or similar document against a live image taken during the check. Banking checks draw on the age information a financial institution already holds on a customer. Digital ID services let people prove who they are or confirm their age online. Credit card checks, mobile network operator checks and email estimation work only for over-18s, and self-declaration is not considered highly effective at any age.

Who is covered and when

The ban will stop children under 16 from accessing ten of the biggest platforms, including TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook. It is due to come into force in March 2027, and ministers aim to put the regulations before parliament this year. Prime minister Andy Burnham intends to proceed with the restriction, which was first unveiled under Sir Keir Starmer's premiership. More than 55 million people in the UK use social media, and many adults are also likely to have to confirm they are not under 16, although how that will be enforced is not yet known. Australia introduced a similar ban last year, and the UK government has vowed a tougher approach to enforcement.

Why photo ID and circumvention are central

The checks would involve processing personal data, but Ofcom said the available methods can be delivered in a way that protects privacy and complies with data protection law. Verifying users under 18 is hard because many 16 and 17-year-olds lack credit cards, full driving licences or passports, and an estimated 150,000 of them have neither a licence nor a passport. Facial age estimation may be wrong by several years, so some users would need a second check, and at younger ages it may need backing from another method. Ofcom said it is "inevitable" that some under-16s will get round the checks, and recommended that platforms make suspected underage accounts easier to report and use technology that estimates age from online behaviour. Dawes has said motivated children will try to bypass the restrictions, comparing it to alcohol laws that cannot fully stop underage drinking.

Enforcement and unpaid fines

Dame Melanie Dawes told LBC that 11 companies have now been fined a total of £7 million, but only two have paid. Nine of the 11 either brought in the protections Ofcom demanded or withdrew their services from the UK, with four leaving the UK market, four putting measures in place and one doing both. Dawes said Ofcom would keep chasing the outstanding fines, but that its priority was securing safety changes rather than revenue for the Treasury. In March she had said Ofcom had issued more than £3 million in fines, with just one paid at that point. She called the largest fine, £1.35 million, a punchy amount for a smaller company given its turnover.

Firms fined11

Firms that have paid2

Brought in protections or withdrew9

Firms fined

11

Firms that have paid

2

Brought in protections or withdrew

9

Data from the article text

Dawes warned that companies may need to combine several methods to build a secure system, and that Ofcom would move quickly against firms that fail to comply. She said the regulator would check compliance from the outset.

“We are going to be absolutely checking compliance right from the beginning.”

Campaigners and the regulator's own framing

Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, welcomed Ofcom's view that highly effective age assurance is achievable. He said he had little confidence the regulator could deliver a social media ban more successfully than it has enforced the Online Safety Act. He warned that a ban widely flouted by tech firms would confuse families and carry safeguarding risks. Dawes said the regulator had drawn on its experience of age checks for porn sites introduced last year, where prescriptive rules from other countries had not worked. She put the stakes this way.

“This ban will shape the future of children's lives online, so it's important to get it right.”