Australia's Under-16 Social Media Ban: What It Means for Your Family

If your 12-to-15-year-old lost access to Instagram, TikTok or Snapchat in December, you've probably already had the "why can't I have my account back" conversation. Nine months on, the honest answer is more complicated than "the ban fixed it" — because for most kids, it hasn't.

We work with families all over Australia on the technical side of this (Perth Computer Experts is Perth-based, but this guidance applies wherever you're reading from — nothing here requires a technician in your home). What follows is where the law actually stands as of the most recent official reporting, not the December 2025 headlines.

Key TakeawaysThe ban covers 10 named platforms — Roblox is not one of them, despite some early coverage suggesting otherwise.The maximum penalty for platform non-compliance doubled from A$49.5 million to A$99 million on 1 July 2026, and five major platforms are under active eSafety investigation.eSafety's own research shows more than 8 in 10 Australian under-16s are still using social media in some form, nine months in.Two constitutional challenges are before the High Court; neither has a resolution yet.The law penalises platforms, not families — there is no fine or consequence for your child or you if they get around it.

What the Ban Actually Covers

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act took effect on 10 December 2025, requiring covered platforms to take "reasonable steps" to identify and remove account holders under 16 (eSafety Commissioner, retrieved 2026-09-16). Reasonable steps, not perfect enforcement — that distinction matters for everything that follows.

Ten platforms are currently in scope. YouTube's inclusion has a backstory worth knowing: it was originally exempt when the Act passed in November 2024, then added in July 2025 after eSafety identified it as the platform where young Australians most frequently encountered harmful content — 37% of kids who saw harmful content saw it on YouTube specifically (SBS News, 30 July 2025).

Source: eSafety Commissioner platform list, verified 2026-09-16. Roblox is a common misconception — it is gaming/messaging and out of scope.

By mid-December 2025, roughly 4.7 million under-16 accounts had been deactivated or restricted nationally. eSafety itself has flagged that this is an accounts figure, not a count of individual children — kids with accounts on multiple platforms, duplicate accounts, and bot accounts are all counted, so it overstates unique users affected (eSafety Commissioner, 2026 reporting). Meta's own figures illustrate the mechanics: it removed 330,000 Instagram, 173,000 Facebook, and 39,000 Threads accounts (542,000 total) in the single week of 4–11 December 2025 alone (ABC News, 12 January 2026).

What's Changed Since December

The launch wasn't the end of the story — the law itself has gotten sharper since. On 27 June 2026, the federal government introduced the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026, doubling the maximum penalty for a platform's systemic non-compliance from A$49.5 million to A$99 million and giving eSafety expanded power to demand information from platforms, age-assurance vendors, and app stores. The House of Representatives passed the bill on 1 July 2026 (Prime Minister of Australia, 27 June 2026).

Maximum Penalty for Platform Non-ComplianceThe maximum civil penalty for systemic non-compliance with Australia's under-16 social media ban rose from A$49.5 million at launch on 10 December 2025 to A$99 million from 1 July 2026, under the Strengthening Enforcement Bill.Maximum Penalty for Platform Non-ComplianceUnder Australia's under-16 social media ban$49.5MFrom 10 Dec 2025$99MFrom 1 Jul 2026Source: Prime Minister of Australia media release, 27 June 2026Source: Prime Minister of Australia, 27 June 2026.

eSafety's first formal compliance update, published 31 March 2026, confirmed it had issued 23 legally enforceable information-gathering notices to 10 platforms and was actively investigating five — Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube — for potential non-compliance. No fines have been issued against any platform as of the most recent reporting available (eSafety Commissioner compliance update, March 2026).

Two constitutional challenges are also live in the High Court, and neither has reached a hearing yet as of the most recent court reporting (21 August 2026). The Digital Freedom Project, alongside two 15-year-old plaintiffs, filed the first case in November 2025 on "implied freedom of political communication" grounds; Reddit filed a separate case on similar grounds in December 2025 (ABC News, 4 December 2025). Treat the law as in force and unresolved — not as struck down, and not as fully settled either.

Is the Ban Actually Working?

Not as advertised, according to eSafety's own data. Its most recent research, reported in August 2026, found more than 8 in 10 Australian under-16s are still using social media in some form (Al Jazeera, 3 August 2026). Earlier compliance data from March 2026 found 7 in 10 kids who held accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok as of the 10 December 2025 start date had remained on those platforms in some way (9 News Australia; corroborated by NBC News).

Are Kids Still Using Banned Platforms? (2026)eSafety Commissioner research reported in August 2026 found more than 80% of Australian under-16s still use social media in some form. March 2026 compliance data found 70% remained specifically on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat or TikTok. A Molly Rose Foundation teen survey from April 2026 found 60% retained access to at least one restricted platform.Are Kids Still Using Banned Platforms?Share of Australian under-16s, by data source, 2026Still using social media in some form80%+Remained on FB, IG, Snapchat or TikTok70%Retained access, per teen survey (n=1,050)60%+Sources: eSafety Commissioner (Mar–Aug 2026); Molly Rose Foundation (Apr 2026)Sources: eSafety Commissioner compliance data (March–August 2026); Molly Rose Foundation survey (April 2026).

Meta says it has removed more than 750,000 accounts across Facebook and Instagram in Australia to date and ran an education campaign reaching about 1.3 million people (Meta Newsroom, August 2026) — worth noting that figure is self-reported by Meta, not independently audited by eSafety. Government messaging has been consistent that 100% compliance was never the goal. Assistant Minister Andrew Leigh has compared it to minimum-age alcohol laws: imperfect compliance doesn't mean the law has failed, it means enforcement is ongoing (Al Jazeera, 3 August 2026).

The gap between "4.7 million accounts removed" and "8 in 10 kids still using social media" isn't necessarily a contradiction — it's what happens when enforcement targets accounts, not devices or people. A removed account doesn't stop a determined 14-year-old from opening a new one, borrowing a sibling's login, or moving to a platform's messaging surface that isn't covered. That's the practical reason this law works best alongside device- and network-level controls, not instead of them.

How Teens Are Getting Around It

A Molly Rose Foundation survey of 1,050 Australians aged 12–15, published in April 2026, is the most detailed independent look at workaround behaviour so far. Its headline finding: more than 60% of teens who had an account before the ban retained access to at least one restricted platform. Roughly a quarter reported getting past an age check on an account they already had. VPN use specifically — often assumed to be the main workaround — was reported by only about 1 in 20 teens (Molly Rose Foundation research briefing, April 2026).

How Teens Reportedly Kept Access to Banned PlatformsA Molly Rose Foundation survey of 1,050 Australians aged 12 to 15, published April 2026, found around 60% kept access via an existing account, around 25% got past an age check on their own, and around 5% used a VPN specifically. These are independent findings, not mutually exclusive segments of one total.How Teens Reportedly Kept AccessSelf-reported, ages 12–15 (independent findings, not mutually exclusive)Kept access via an existing account~60%Got past an age check on their own~25%Used a VPN specifically~5%Source: Molly Rose Foundation research briefing, April 2026 (n=1,050)Source: Molly Rose Foundation research briefing, April 2026 (n=1,050).

That's a genuinely useful finding for a family working out where to focus. VPN blocking, the thing many parents reach for first, addresses the workaround only about 1 in 20 kids are actually using. The bigger gaps are existing accounts that were never removed and age checks that weren't strict to begin with — both of which point back to your own household's account settings, not to network-level blocking.

What to Do This Week

None of the above means the ban isn't worth taking seriously — a law that removed or restricted millions of accounts and is now facing a doubled penalty for platforms is not toothless. It means the ban is one layer, not the whole system. Here's what to actually check, in order:

1. Check what accounts still exist. Log into your child's phone or tablet and look at what's actually installed and logged in — not what you assume was removed. If TikTok, Instagram, or Snapchat still opens without a login prompt, the account wasn't removed.
2. Turn on the platform's own under-13/under-16 supervision tools where an account is legitimately allowed (e.g., a 16-year-old sibling's device others in the house can reach). Instagram's Family Center and TikTok's Family Pairing are still live and worth configuring even outside the ban's scope.
3. Review age-declaration prompts with your child directly, not just technically. The Molly Rose Foundation data suggests most workarounds are behavioural (a false birthdate, a borrowed login) rather than technical (a VPN) — a conversation closes more gaps than a firewall rule does here.
4. Set expectations about what the law does and doesn't do. It doesn't fine your child, and it doesn't fine you — the eSafety Commissioner's own FAQ is explicit that "there are no penalties for children and young people under 16 if they have access to an age-restricted platform, or for their parents or carers" (eSafety Commissioner FAQs, retrieved 2026-09-16). This is a platform-compliance law, not a household one.
5. If your household's device and router setup has never had a proper review, that's worth doing alongside this, since account-level checks only work as well as the network and devices behind them.

Do NOT:

• Assume a removed account in December means it's still removed today — re-check.
• Rely on VPN blocking alone; the survey data above suggests it addresses the smaller share of workarounds.
• Treat "my kid found a way around it" as a sign you've failed — Government messaging itself doesn't expect full compliance, and the useful response is closing the specific gap, not general alarm.

If your household's parental-control setup has become a patchwork built up over several devices and a few years — which is common by this point — a remote consultation is often faster than trying to audit it yourself device by device.

Get a remote parental-controls check-in. A Perth-based Perth Computer Experts technician reviews your family's actual account and device setup over a call, wherever you are in Australia, and tells you exactly what's still open. Get in touch with Perth Computer Experts

The Bigger Picture

This ban is part of a broader pattern in how governments are approaching platform accountability — shifting the compliance burden onto platforms rather than expecting parents to police every account and device alone, similar in spirit to how age-verification obligations are being tested in the UK and EU. What that means practically is that the law will keep evolving: expect further penalty changes, possibly new platforms added or removed from scope, and a High Court outcome at some point that could reshape enforcement.

Parental controls, in that context, work best as one part of a healthy home network — not a single switch you flip once. A proper comparison of router-level versus whole-home control options, and keeping the rest of your household's security current, both matter alongside the ban itself.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Roblox banned for under-16s in Australia?

No. Roblox is not one of the 10 platforms covered by the ban. The law applies to Facebook, Instagram, Threads, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Reddit, X, Twitch, and Kick (eSafety Commissioner, retrieved 2026-09-16).

Will my child or I get fined if they get around the ban?

No. The eSafety Commissioner's FAQ is explicit that there is no penalty for children or their parents or carers — the compliance obligation and any penalty apply only to the platforms (eSafety Commissioner FAQs, retrieved 2026-09-16).

Has the under-16 social media ban actually worked?

Partially. eSafety's own research found more than 8 in 10 under-16s are still using social media in some form as of August 2026 reporting, though roughly 4.7 million accounts were removed or restricted at launch and platforms now face a doubled maximum penalty for non-compliance. The government has said full compliance was never the expectation.

References and Retrieval Notes

• eSafety Commissioner: Social media age restrictions — Australian Government, retrieved 2026-09-16
• eSafety Commissioner FAQs — Australian Government, retrieved 2026-09-16
• eSafety Commissioner: Compliance Update, March 2026 (PDF) — Australian Government, 31 March 2026
• Prime Minister of Australia: Stronger powers and double penalties — Australian Government, 27 June 2026
• ABC News: Meta removes half a million users — 12 January 2026
• ABC News: Court agrees to hear teens' challenge — 4 December 2025
• SBS News: YouTube included in under-16s ban — 30 July 2025
• Al Jazeera: Australia's under-16 social media ban failing, study shows — 3 August 2026
• Molly Rose Foundation: Australia Social Media Ban research briefing (PDF) — April 2026
• Meta Newsroom: Meta's compliance with Australia's social media ban — August 2026
• YouGov Australia: Cautious optimism as Australians assess impact — January 2026
• NBC News: Australia social media ban age checks fail study — 2026