Australia’s eSafety Commissioner and federal government have set forth guidelines to implement a law banning under-16s from accessing social media by December 10, 2025, but they are not requiring universal age verification for all users. According to the new rules, platforms must take “reasonable steps” to identify and remove or deactivate accounts held by those under 16, but will be allowed to use existing data or inference (such as from advertising targeting tools) rather than verifying every user’s age. The law does not mandate a specific method of verification, nor a strict quota for how many underage accounts must be purged, so long as platforms can show they are making a good-faith effort.
Key Takeaways
– Platforms will not be required to verify age for every user; rather, they must take “reasonable steps” to exclude under-16s, often using existing data or inference.
– The law is clear that there’s no legally enforceable requirement for platforms to meet a specific target (such as a minimum number of underage accounts removed), just that their efforts are transparent, consistent, and defensible.
– Methods of age screening are not fixed; companies can choose their approach (behavioral data, AI inferences, etc.), and they must build in processes for complaints or review, but they are not obligated to use government ID or similar absolute verification.
In-Depth
Australia is rolling out its new social media minimum age law with a cautious, balanced approach—one that leans toward protecting minors without imposing burdensome verification requirements on all users. Passed in late 2024, the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act bans social media platform accounts for children under 16 starting December 2025. But crucially, it doesn’t demand that every user be age-checked or verified. Instead, the law requires platforms to take reasonable steps to identify and deactivate accounts held by those under the age threshold.
Those reasonable steps can include using existing user data and behavioral inference tools rather than requiring government ID for all users. The authorities explicitly discouraged blanket age verification of every user, calling that route “unreasonable” and invasive. Within this framework, platforms will also need to ensure that their policies are transparent, consistent, and include mechanisms for complaints or reviews when there are disputes. Critics have raised concerns around privacy, data retention, and potential misuse of inference technologies. The Age Assurance Technology Trial, for example, has prompted debate about how much data platforms retain and how it might be used.
On the other hand, supporters argue that requiring every user to undergo full verification would be excessively burdensome and may threaten privacy or drive users to less-regulated services. The government’s guidelines aim to strike a middle ground: enforce the under-16 ban, but without overburdening platforms or users, and while preserving reasonable privacy protections. Will this model set a precedent? Possibly—other nations considering age restrictions on social media are watching. For now, Australia is charting a path where enforcement is required, but total verification is optional, provided platforms are doing enough to meet their legal responsibility.