Facepalm: Australia's first-of-its-kind ban on under-16s using social media has run into another unforeseen problem: shockingly, teenagers know how birthdays work. A new study by software testing firm KJR found that major platforms are still allowing users to create accounts without asking for proof of age, even after the law came into force.
Since December 2025, services such as Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, X, and others have been required to take "reasonable steps" to stop Australians under 16 from holding accounts.
The government has backed a system of age checks rather than forcing everyone to upload government ID, partly because of the obvious privacy concerns. Platforms are supposed to look for signs that someone might be underage and escalate to stronger checks.
KJR, which helped run the government's earlier age-assurance trial, created 50 test accounts after the ban began, all declaring the user was 16. None were asked to prove it. All remained active across nine of the 10 platforms covered by the rules.
The finding points to a flaw that has attracted less attention than the accuracy of photo-based age-assurance software. The first stage of the process is supposed to infer a user's likely age range from their broader online activity, then send suspected underage users for stronger checks. KJR says that does not appear to be happening. "You should be asked to demonstrate how old you are, and not once have we been asked to verify our age or use age-assurance measures," Andrew Hammond, the firm's director, told Reuters.
The study found that platforms generally blocked accounts that openly admitted to being under 16, but did little when the user simply claimed to be old enough. Kick, the Australia-based streaming platform, was reportedly the only service that demanded proof of age at sign-up.
The findings echo another study from April. Research from the Molly Rose Foundation found that 61% of Australian 12- to 15-year-olds who had accounts on restricted platforms before the ban still had access to at least one of them.
That report also found that most kids had not needed workarounds, because platforms often failed to identify and remove them.
It also follows a University of Newcastle study of 408 adolescents, published in the BMJ, which found that more than 85% of under-16s were still using restricted social media three months after the ban took effect. Many were still using their own accounts, while others used fake accounts, false ages, selfies, or VPNs.
Australia is trying to respond to these failings by moving to toughen enforcement. It was reported last month that proposed reforms would double maximum penalties from AU$49.5 million to AU$99 million and give the eSafety Commissioner stronger powers to demand documents from platforms and age-assurance providers.
The UK has confirmed its own under-16 social media ban for spring 2027, but Australia's experience suggests passing the law is the easy part. Enforcing it is another matter altogether.