AUSTRALIA ENACTS WORLD-FIRST UNDER-16 SOCIAL MEDIA RESTRICTION AS NATIONAL LAW TAKES EFFECT

SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, December 9th

Australia has brought into force a national restriction that prevents children under 16 from holding accounts on major social media platforms, under a framework the government describes as a world-first among democratic nations. The policy is established in the ONLINE SAFETY AMENDMENT SOCIAL MEDIA MINIMUM AGE ACT 2024, which amends the existing Online Safety Act to create a new legal duty for platforms and has received Royal Assent as recorded in the federal legislation register. The statute places responsibility upon companies that operate social media services, requiring them to verify age and address underage accounts, rather than imposing penalties on children or parents.

Under the new framework, enforcement is assigned to the ESAFETY COMMISSIONER, while detailed definitions and exemptions are set out in subordinate rules made by the MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS. Official guidance published by the DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE, TRANSPORT, REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, SPORT AND THE ARTS explains that social media providers captured by the scheme must take “reasonable steps” to ensure that Australian users are at least 16, including steps that apply to existing accounts. The same guidance confirms that penalties fall only on service providers and that families are not subject to fines under these provisions.

Government material and departmental briefings state that civil penalties for serious corporate breaches can reach up to 49,500,000 Australian dollars. These figures appear in explanatory documents associated with the ONLINE SAFETY AMENDMENT SOCIAL MEDIA MINIMUM AGE ACT 2024 and in funding and enforcement briefings linked to the law. Public statements from the PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA and the MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS describe the measure as “world-leading” and identify platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X, and YouTube as examples of “age restricted social media platforms” that are expected to comply, while noting that online games, workplace tools, health services, and educational services are excluded from the definition.

Implementation is staged toward a key date in 2025. According to the explanatory material issued by the DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE, TRANSPORT, REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, SPORT AND THE ARTS, platform obligations under the minimum age provisions are to be fully in effect by December 10th, 2025, at which point companies are expected to have age assurance measures and compliance systems in place. The ESAFETY COMMISSIONER has confirmed that it will oversee compliance and exercise powers under the Online Safety Act, while the OFFICE OF THE AUSTRALIAN INFORMATION COMMISSIONER has reported that it has received dedicated funding to supervise privacy safeguards associated with the new age verification requirements.

The law has also become the subject of constitutional litigation. Two 15 year old Australian citizens, supported by the DIGITAL FREEDOM PROJECT, have brought a special case before the HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA challenging the minimum age scheme. In public statements, the Digital Freedom Project describes the case as a test of whether the restrictions unjustifiably burden the implied freedom of political communication that has been recognized in Australian constitutional law. The HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA has agreed to hear the matter, while leaving the statute in force pending the outcome. As a result, the legal framework now operates nationally, even as the country’s highest court prepares to consider arguments over its compatibility with constitutional principles.

Taken together, the ONLINE SAFETY AMENDMENT SOCIAL MEDIA MINIMUM AGE ACT 2024, its implementing rules, and the associated guidance from Australian regulatory agencies create a national system in which social media companies may face multi million dollar penalties if they fail to keep users under 16 off age restricted platforms. The litigation now before the HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA will determine whether that system remains in place in its current form or must be adjusted in light of constitutional limits, but until the court rules, the law stands and its enforcement arrangements continue to move forward as set out in the primary documents.

The Appalachian Post is an independent West Virginia news outlet dedicated to clean, verified, first-hand reporting. We do not publish rumors. We do not run speculation. Every fact we present must be supported by original documentation, official statements, or direct evidence. When secondary sources are used, we clearly identify them and never treat them as first-hand confirmation. We avoid loaded language, emotional framing, or accusatory wording, and we do not attack individuals, organizations, or other news outlets. Our role is to report only what can be verified through first-hand sources and allow readers to form their own interpretations. If we cannot confirm a claim using original evidence, we state clearly that we reviewed first-hand sources and could not find documentation confirming it. Our commitment is simple: honest reporting, transparent sourcing, and zero speculation.

Sources

Primary First Hand Sources

• ONLINE SAFETY AMENDMENT SOCIAL MEDIA MINIMUM AGE ACT 2024 as published in the Commonwealth legislation register.
• Guidance on the social media minimum age framework issued by the DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE, TRANSPORT, REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, SPORT AND THE ARTS explaining obligations for age restricted social media platforms and the December 10th, 2025 commencement timetable.
• Public statements and media releases from the PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA and the MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS describing the law as world-leading and identifying Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X, and YouTube as examples of covered platforms.
• Briefing material and enforcement summaries associated with the ONLINE SAFETY AMENDMENT SOCIAL MEDIA MINIMUM AGE ACT 2024 outlining maximum civil penalties of up to 49,500,000 Australian dollars for corporate violations.
• Statements from the ESAFETY COMMISSIONER and the OFFICE OF THE AUSTRALIAN INFORMATION COMMISSIONER confirming their roles in enforcement and privacy supervision under the new framework.
• Public case description from the DIGITAL FREEDOM PROJECT and listing by the HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA confirming that a special case brought by two 15 year olds challenging the minimum age provisions has been accepted for hearing.

Secondary Attribution Based Sources

• Reporting by wire services and Australian media summarizing public reaction, political debate, and commentary surrounding the under-16 social media restrictions, which Appalachian Post does not treat as first hand evidence of law or enforcement.