UK to Ban Social Media for Under-16s by Spring 2027

Prime Minister Keir Starmer will ban social media for under-16s in the UK to protect children from its addictive features, harmful content and to “give children their childhoods back”.

The regulation will pass before Christmas and the ban will come in by spring 2027.

The UK “plans to use the same model for a social media ban as Australia”, according to the UK Government’s statement. 

“This would capture user-to-user platforms, whose purpose is to enable social interaction and which allow users to post material, alongside algorithms. The ban will therefore include platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X. 

“We do not intend for messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal to be included in the social media ban.”

The ban is the result of more than 116,000 responses submitted by parents, children and experts across the UK, which included 9 in 10 parents saying they would support it.

It also follows the Prime Minister’s challenge to tech companies last week, saying that Britain will be the first country in the world to make it impossible for children to take, share or view nude images – with a three-month deadline to make meaningful progress.

Ofcom, the nation’s primary media and communications authority, will conduct a study to decide what is effective age assurance for verifying whether someone is over 16.

The Australian blueprint vs. reality

Australia’s social media ban for children under 16 came into effect in December 2025. However, early data suggests that passing a ban is much easier than enforcing it. 

By modelling its legislation on Australia’s ban, the UK is inheriting a framework that tech giants are already proving adept at circumventing. 

The practical breakdown of this model is highlighted by recent polling from the Molly Rose Foundation, which reveals that 61% of Australian 12-to-15-year-olds who held social media accounts before the ban came into force still retain access to one or more of them. 

This systemic failure is consistent across all the major high-risk apps targeted by the UK’s proposed legislation. Data shows that the platforms have retained a clear majority of their child audience with 53% of previous TikTok users, 53% of YouTube users and 52% of Instagram users in Australia still actively accessing their accounts. 

“The proposed ban, as well as other protections to apply to under-18s, will require the social media companies to grapple with the difficult task of age verification,” says Alex Brown, Head of Technology, Media and Telecom at global law firm Simmons & Simmons. 

“The ICO’s recent enforcement activity in that area shows that there are difficult practical challenges to be overcome in relation to verifying a user’s age”. 

For the UK’s upcoming bill to avoid a similar fate when it rolls out, Downing Street will have to rely heavily on its promised plus features, such as strict default settings and heavy Ofcom penalties, to force compliance where Australia’s blueprint has so far fallen short.

Government vows to strip power from tech giants

Starmer says that some tech companies want people to think things are “unchangeable”.

“I want this message to be heard loud and clear,” notes the PM. “I am not prepared to compromise on the safety and happiness of our children, and that is why this ban must happen, and why this ban will happen.”

Liz Kendall, the UK’s Technology Secretary, adds: “Tech companies have had countless opportunities to keep children safe, yet they have failed to act.

“That is why we are a taking power away from the tech giants and putting it back in parents’ hands.

“My driving force has always been to give every child, from every background, the best possible start in life. That is what these regulations will deliver.”

However, the scope of the government’s intervention will extend far beyond traditional social networking apps.

“We’re not just bringing forward a ban” but “going further” with “world-leading action” on gaming services and live streaming platforms, Starmer notes.

Curfews, curbs and unchecked communication

The government will go further than a blanket ban on social media with blocks on harmful functions, such as livestreaming and stranger communication with children for under-16s.

Changes will also tackle platforms, which allow strangers to contact any child “unchecked”, the PM adds.

The government is also considering an overnight curfew and break in infinite scrolling for under-18-year-olds. More details will follow in July.

Friction, flaws and the threat of digital workarounds

Despite the government’s ambitions, industry experts and political figures have quickly pointed out critical gaps in the strategy.

A primary concern is that a ban will simply incentivise children to bypass the system entirely. 

Nigel Farage, Reform UK Leader, says the ban is “well-intentioned” but “unlikely to work” given the popularity of virtual private networks (VPNs), which allow users to have a private, secure internet connection that could bypass age-checks by hiding your location and identity.

Security experts warn that driving this behaviour underground could inadvertently create even greater dangers for minors.

“The newly introduced social media ban may be politically divisive, but the real test is whether it makes children safer online or simply pushes their activity underground – just as it did when restrictions were placed on adult content,” says Alex Laurie, Go-To-Market Chief Technology Officer for security software firm Ping Identity. 

“If young users turn to VPNs, workarounds or less visible platforms, the risks become harder to monitor.

“The answer is not only tougher rules such as this ban, but better enforcement. Platforms need privacy-first age verification that proves a user is old enough without collecting more personal data than necessary. 

“The technology exists; now we have clarity from policymakers, it’s time for urgency from tech companies.”

Other critics argue that by focusing entirely on an outright ban, the government is letting tech companies off the hook for their platform designs while simultaneously cutting off a vital tool for youth democratic engagement.

“Rather than curtailing access to social media platforms to under-16s, the government should be applying far greater regulatory pressure on technology companies to dismantle addictive design features, and to place a statutory duty on them to assist users of their services in distinguishing fact from fiction online,” says Mark Frankel, Head of Public Affairs at Full Fact, a British charity based in London which checks and corrects facts reported in the news.

“We know from numerous surveys that young people routinely use social media for news and information.

“If the government is serious about extending participation in our democratic process to 16 and 17-year-olds, restricting their access to these platforms is unlikely to help them become better informed.

“It’s not the technology itself that is harmful, but the way it’s designed and marketed to all users of these platforms. Far from protecting young people from online harms, this ban fails to address current weaknesses in online safety legislation and gives social media companies a free pass.”