Proposed — not law yet

The under-16 social media ban, explained.

New Zealand is deciding whether people under 16 should be allowed on social media. Here’s what’s actually proposed, where it’s up to, and what it would mean for your household — in plain English, with sources for everything.

Have your say — take the poll Parents’ guide

The poll

14 questions, anonymous, about two minutes — including the enforcement questions most polls never ask.

Take the poll →

For parents

Set up age controls on every phone, console and the home Wi-Fi tonight — free, step by step.

Open the guide →

Resources

The bill itself, official reports, help lines for families, and the strongest arguments from both sides.

Browse resources →
What’s proposed

The rules, in four cards

Under 16

No social media accounts for anyone under 16 — the same age line Australia uses.

Age checks

Platforms must take “all reasonable steps” to verify how old users are.

NZ$2m

The maximum penalty — for platforms that don’t comply.

$0

For kids and parents. The proposal doesn’t punish families for getting around it.

Where it’s up to

Four things to know

  1. A member’s bill (the Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill) was drawn from Parliament’s ballot in October 2025 — it’s on hold and has never had a first reading.
  2. The Government is drafting a broader bill to replace it, promised before the 2026 election.
  3. ACT and NZ First have said they won’t support it, and the Greens oppose it — so it can only pass with Labour’s votes, and National has confirmed it’s talking to Labour.
  4. The clock: Parliament rises on 24 September and dissolves on 1 October 2026 for the 7 November election. No introduction by then, and it’s a next-term question.

Last checked 10 July 2026 · sources for every claim on the Resources page.

The bit most people miss

Age checks aren’t just for teenagers

A platform can’t tell who’s under 16 without checking ages across the board — so a ban means adults proving their age too, whether by ID, credit card or face scan. That’s not a critics’ talking point; it’s how the regulator itself describes it:

“To ensure under 16-year-olds are not accessing social media, all users over 16 will be required to verify their age.”
— Privacy Commissioner Michael Webster, June 2025

Whether that trade-off is worth it is the real question in this debate — and it’s exactly what our poll asks.

Overseas so far

New Zealand isn’t first

AustraliaBan in force since December 2025. About 4.7 million under-16 accounts were removed or restricted — but surveys since suggest most under-16s who had accounts still get on.
United KingdomAnnounced its own under-16 ban in June 2026, planned to be in force around spring 2027.
CanadaIntroduced a bill in June 2026 combining an under-16 ban with age verification and platform safety duties.
European UnionBuilt an age-verification app and is reviewing whether to set an EU-wide “digital age” for social media.
Both sides, fairly

The strongest arguments each way

Supporters say
  • Social media is linked to real harm for young people — bullying, addiction-style design, harmful content — and parents can’t fight billion-dollar platforms alone.
  • A clear majority of New Zealanders back a ban: 57.8% in the RNZ–Reid Research poll (June 2025).
  • Even where kids slip through, the law puts the legal duty — and multi-million-dollar penalties — on platforms, forcing them to take age seriously for the first time.
Critics say
  • Age checks fall on everyone: adults would have to prove who they are to use everyday platforms, raising privacy and free-expression concerns.
  • Australia’s early results show bans leak — most under-16s who had accounts still get on, mainly because platforms simply didn’t remove them.
  • Parental controls, education and platform-design rules target the harm more directly — and they work today without new checks on adults.