Policy

UK Regulator Identifies Four Age-Check Methods for Planned Under-16 Social Media Ban

Ofcom says photo identification, banking checks, digital IDs and facial age estimation could help enforce the proposed restrictions, but implementation rules are not yet final.

Updated: 2 min read

Britain's communications regulator has identified four age-verification methods that could help social media platforms enforce the government's planned ban on access for children under 16.

In an assessment published on October 29, Ofcom said photo identification matching, digital identity services, banking-based checks and facial age estimation could be sufficiently effective at distinguishing users aged 16 and over. Its report is intended to inform the government's detailed rules and is not itself a final legal mandate for platforms.

Ofcom cautioned that facial estimates have margins of error, especially around age 16, and may need a secondary check. The regulator estimates that around 150,000 16- and 17-year-olds lack a passport or driving licence, raising questions about accessible alternatives. It also expects some adults to have to verify their age even though they are not subject to the proposed ban.

The government has said it intends to set out implementing regulations before the end of 2026, with the restrictions expected to come into effect in 2027. Ofcom plans to consult on industry guidance after the regulations are laid before Parliament.

The regulator acknowledged that some children will bypass checks, and suggested measures such as reporting suspected underage accounts and age inference based on account activity. Civil liberties groups have raised concerns about privacy and the need to submit identity data to use online services. Ofcom maintains that age assurance can be designed to comply with data-protection rules.

The new development is the publication of technical options, not evidence that the ban has already been implemented or that every adult must provide a passport.

AI assistance was used in preparing this report. Fast News remains responsible for its editorial verification and publication.

Spotted an error? Request a correction · Our editorial principles · Contact the newsroom