Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is expected to announce the proposed ban at a Downing Street press conference scheduled for 8am.
The move comes in response to overwhelming support during a government consultation, which found that 91% of parents backed raising the minimum age for social media access to 16.
The proposed UK ban would apply to platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, Threads, Facebook, X, YouTube, Snapchat, and Reddit.
Children under 16 to be banned from social media apps
Sir Keir said: “This is a choice about whose side we’re on: families across the country, or a status quo that isn’t working.
“People rightly expect action, and this Government will always stand up for parents and put children first.
“As a dad, I know every parent wants their child to grow up safe and happy.
“That’s why we will call time on a system that’s failing our kids and take bold action to give every child the best possible start in life.”
It is expected that the ban will go further than similar measures in Australia by also banning under-16s from accessing romantic or sexual AI chatbots and limiting their ability to chat with strangers on gaming platforms, according to The Sunday Times.
Other measures under consideration include daily time limits for under-18s to prevent late-night scrolling.
The consultation on the proposals closed on May 26 and drew about 116,000 responses, making it the second-largest in history.
More than 83% of parents who responded said the risks of social media outweigh the benefits for children.
Among younger respondents, 62% said restricting high-risk features would improve their safety online.
However, 72% expressed concerns about feeling left out if such restrictions were introduced.
Sir Keir’s announcement follows his recent ultimatum to Apple and Google, giving them three months to make it technologically impossible for children to take, share or view nude images on their smartphones.
Not everyone agrees with the proposals.
The U.S. embassy in London, responding to the consultation, warned the UK against a blanket ban, favouring more targeted requirements instead.
They raised concerns that strict age verification could place disproportionate compliance burdens on American tech companies.
Domestic critics have also voiced their concerns.
The Molly Rose Foundation, established after the death of 14-year-old Molly Russell, argued that a simple age ban will not address the underlying product safety risks.
Andy Burrows, the foundation’s chief executive, said: “A majority of children will continue to use high-risk sites that will have no incentive to implement robust protections.
“This is not what online safety experts believe will work and is necessary.
“Keir Starmer has chosen to abdicate responsibility for tackling harmful algorithms and his legacy will be setting back children’s safety by years.”
However, Conservative figures who campaigned for tougher online protections for children welcomed the new direction.
Lord Nash, a former education minister, said: “The Government now has an opportunity to draw a line in the sand and end tech companies’ uncontrolled experiment with children’s safety.
“They must deliver in full on their pledge to raise the age limit to 16 for harmful platforms and features, with robust age verification to ensure it is properly enforced.
“Only by doing this can they begin to end the catastrophic harm being done to a generation.
“Let’s give our children their childhood back.”
Labour MP Feryal Clark, co-chairwoman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for digital creators, said: “High-quality, creator-led educational video content is a critical public resource and is not the same thing as social media.
“For example, many young people use it to revise for GCSEs, to learn a language or a musical instrument.
“Any legislative intervention must capably address this distinction.”
Do you agree with a social media ban for under-16s? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login