EU Kids Act draft bans accounts for under‑13s, caps teen use at one hour and forces parental approval
On 17 September 2026 the European Commission unveiled a draft EU Kids Act that would prohibit social‑media accounts for children under 13, limit daily use for 13‑15‑year‑olds to one hour and require parents to approve all contacts.
On 17 September 2026 the European Commission presented a 99‑page draft called the EU Kids Act, outlining three core restrictions for minors on social‑media platforms: a total ban on accounts for children under 13, a one‑hour daily limit for 13‑15‑year‑olds and a requirement that parents approve every contact on teen accounts.1
Draft provisions in detail
The draft explicitly states that “no accounts are allowed for children under 13”.2 For users aged 13 to 15, platforms must embed a hard limit of 60 minutes of use per day and provide a mechanism for parents to manage a “mini‑account” that controls contacts.2 The same text adds that “parents must approve contacts before they are allowed”, making parental consent a prerequisite for any direct messaging or friend request.2
Beyond the three headline rules, the proposal lists additional safety‑by‑design measures: endless scrolling, geolocation, camera and microphone access, as well as AI chatbots, must be disabled by default for all minor accounts. Direct messages from unknown accounts would also be blocked.2
Political context and presentation
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Vice‑President Henna Virkkunen unveiled the draft in Strasbourg, describing the current digital environment as “not built with children’s safety in mind”.3 Their remarks framed the legislation as a response to perceived gaps in existing platform policies, positioning the EU as a global standard‑setter for child‑online protection.
The timing follows a series of national initiatives, such as the Netherlands‑Spain non‑paper calling for a minimum age across digital services, but the EU Kids Act is the first EU‑wide, legally binding proposal that combines age bans, usage caps and parental‑control obligations in a single text.4
Implications for major platforms
Meta, TikTok and Instagram are the platforms most frequently cited when discussing the EU Kids Act. While the draft does not name any company, the requirement to block features such as endless scrolling and AI chatbots will affect how these services design their user‑experience for minors.
Meta’s latest publicly filed figures show a revenue of US$38.924 billion for the 2018 fiscal year and a net income of US$42.621 billion for the six‑month period ending 30 June 2026.5 Total assets stood at US$449.956 billion and shareholders’ equity at US$261.221 billion as of the same 2026 date.5 These balances illustrate the scale of the company that would need to redesign its products to meet the new safety standards.
TikTok, owned by ByteDance and headquartered in China, and Instagram, owned by Meta and based in San Francisco, are also expected to adapt their platforms. The packet provides only their corporate origins and founding dates (TikTok – 20 September 2016; Instagram – 6 October 2010) but no financial data, so the precise cost of compliance remains unknown.67
All three platforms will have to implement parental‑approval workflows for contacts and enforce a hard daily‑time limit for users aged 13‑15. The draft does not specify enforcement mechanisms or penalties, leaving that detail to later legislative texts.
Financial snapshot of Meta
| Metric | Value | Period | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 38,924,000,000 | Fiscal year 2018 (ended 30 Sept 2018) | USD |
| Net income | 42,621,000,000 | Six‑month period 2026 (ended 30 June 2026) | USD |
| Total assets | 449,956,000,000 | 30 June 2026 | USD |
| Shareholders’ equity | 261,221,000,000 | 30 June 2026 | USD |
Source: Meta’s Form 10‑Q filings, SEC EDGAR database.5
Open questions and next steps
The draft does not indicate when the restrictions would become enforceable, nor does it detail the monitoring regime that would verify compliance. It also leaves unanswered how platforms will technically enforce a one‑hour daily cap across devices and whether the parental‑approval process will be standardized across the EU.
Stakeholders have asked for clarification on the definition of “contact” – does it include likes, follows or algorithmic recommendations? The proposal’s language mentions “direct messages from unknown accounts” but does not extend the ban to algorithmic content feeds, which remain a major vector for exposure to harmful material.
Finally, the impact on user behaviour is still speculative. The packet contains no data on current usage patterns of minors, so any projection of how the one‑hour limit will affect overall screen time cannot be substantiated at this stage.
As the EU Parliament prepares to debate the draft, the next tranche of information is likely to come from the Commission’s impact‑assessment report, which should outline enforcement tools, timelines and any transitional arrangements for platforms.
