X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, has sharply criticized Australia’s proposal to strengthen enforcement of its landmark under-16 social media ban, warning the measures would grant the country’s internet regulator sweeping investigative powers, undermine international legal principles and potentially conflict with U.S. law.
In a submission to an Australian Senate committee published on Tuesday, X opposed legislation that would expand the powers of the eSafety Commissioner, including broader authority to compel companies to hand over documents and information during investigations. The proposal would also double the maximum financial penalty for non-compliance to A$99 million ($69 million).
The dispute marks the latest escalation in a long-running clash between Australia’s government and major U.S.-based technology companies over online safety regulation. It also injects a geopolitical dimension into the debate, with Musk noting that Australia’s regulatory approach could have implications beyond its borders.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 20 (June 8 – Sept 5, 2026).
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Australia’s world-first legislation prohibiting children under the age of 16 from holding social media accounts took effect last December. The law requires platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent underage users from accessing their services or face substantial penalties, making Australia one of the most aggressive jurisdictions globally in regulating youth access to social media.
Technology companies have consistently raised concerns about the legislation, arguing that reliable age verification remains technically challenging, while privacy advocates have questioned how platforms can verify users’ ages without collecting additional personal information.
In its submission, X said the proposed enforcement amendments failed to adequately balance regulatory objectives with legal safeguards. The company said the measures did not give “due regard to procedural fairness, privacy, the broader impacts on online services, and Australia’s digital economy.”
A central concern for X is the proposal allowing Australian authorities to compel individuals or entities outside Australia to produce documents if they are affiliated with companies under investigation. According to the company, such powers would extend Australia’s regulatory reach beyond its borders and create conflicts with established principles governing international legal cooperation.
The proposal would “compel any person outside Australia … to provide information and documents merely because they are ‘affiliated’ with a company,” X said, describing the measure as being “in clear conflict” with international legal principles.
The company added that the amendments could have “a severe impact on international comity,” referring to the longstanding principle under which countries respect one another’s legal systems and jurisdictions.
The debate has increasingly attracted attention in the United States. A U.S. congressional committee has asked Australia’s eSafety Commissioner to testify, accusing the regulator of threatening Americans’ free speech rights through its approach to regulating online platforms.
Musk has previously criticized Australia’s under-16 social media law, calling it “a backdoor way to control access to the internet by all Australians” in a post on X.
The regulator, however, argues that stronger investigative powers are essential if the legislation is to be effectively enforced.
According to the eSafety Commissioner, its current authority to compel companies to produce documents is significantly weaker than that of many other Australian regulators, forcing investigators to rely largely on information voluntarily provided by platforms regarding their own compliance.
The regulator also said it lacks authority to require documents from independent age assurance providers hired by social media companies to verify users’ ages, creating what it described as “significant” obstacles to investigating whether platforms are complying with the law.
Those limitations have delayed planned enforcement action. The regulator has previously said it is preparing potential legal proceedings against five social media platforms but has indicated that its existing investigative powers have slowed the process.
The proposed legislation has also drawn criticism from the broader technology industry.
Digital Industry Group Inc. (DIGI), which represents several major online platforms, told the Senate inquiry that the eSafety Commissioner already possesses extensive enforcement powers that have yet to be fully tested. The industry group also called for greater clarity over which entities could legally be compelled to provide documents under the proposed amendments.
Meanwhile, Google’s YouTube and TikTok submitted separate responses stating that there is currently no foolproof method of accurately identifying and blocking every underage user from accessing social media platforms, underscoring one of the central technical challenges facing implementation of the law.
Data released by the eSafety Commissioner, along with independent studies conducted since the ban took effect, indicate that a majority of Australian teenagers under 16 continue to maintain social media accounts, highlighting the practical difficulties of enforcing age-based restrictions at scale.
The Senate has yet to approve the legislation expanding the regulator’s enforcement powers. A parliamentary committee examining the bill is scheduled to deliver its recommendations on August 25, following public hearings involving regulators, technology companies and industry representatives.