Meta could soon face rules in Europe that mirror a settlement reached earlier this month by a coalition of 29 US states, which forced the company to curb the time minors spend on Facebook and Instagram.

The American states, after demanding roughly $200bn in damages, settled for an $18bn payment and, more importantly, secured a pledge from Meta to limit under‑18s to two hours of combined use per day, block night‑time access and suspend push notifications during restricted periods. California's attorney general, Rob Bonta, hailed the deal as a step towards making social media less hazardous for children.

European officials are now asking whether the EU can extract comparable guarantees from Meta under the Digital Services Act (DSA). The Commission, which opened a formal investigation into the company's design practices in early 2024, already concluded in July that Facebook and Instagram employ addictive features that breach EU law.

What the EU is demanding

Unlike the US case, which zeroed in on minors, the European inquiry adopts a broader consumer‑protection lens. Brussels wants Meta to disable infinite scrolling, halt auto‑play of videos and introduce other friction‑reducing measures that would benefit all users, not just those under 18. The Commission stresses that the aim is to protect citizens from the manipulative architecture of platforms, rather than to compete with US regulators over the size of fines.

Meta now has a statutory deadline to respond to the Commission's preliminary findings. It may defend its current practices, propose additional safeguards, or negotiate a settlement that mirrors the US agreement. The Commission will evaluate any response before deciding whether to levy fines or impose further corrective orders.

Implications for European users and workers

If the EU adopts a two‑hour cap and night‑time block, the impact would be felt across the continent's 450 million internet users. For families, such limits could reduce the pressure on children to stay constantly connected, a concern echoed by teachers' unions in France and Germany who have warned about declining attention spans and mental‑health risks linked to excessive screen time.

Digital‑rights groups, including the European Digital Rights (EDRi) coalition, argue that time‑based limits alone will not address the deeper issue of algorithmic amplification of polarising or extremist content. They call for transparency obligations that would force Meta to disclose how its recommendation engines prioritise posts, a demand already embedded in the DSA's provisions on risk assessment.

From a labour perspective, the debate touches on the growing power of Big Tech over the gig economy and content‑moderation workforce. If Meta is compelled to redesign its user interface, the company may need to hire additional engineers and compliance staff, potentially creating new jobs in Europe. At the same time, stricter controls could reduce advertising revenue, affecting media agencies that rely on Facebook's ad platform for client campaigns.

European trade unions have welcomed the prospect of stronger regulation. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) issued a statement urging Brussels to ensure that any settlement includes robust monitoring mechanisms, warning that without enforcement the commitments could become "paper promises".

Meta's own spokesperson has stressed that the company is already investing in tools to detect multiple accounts created by minors seeking to bypass limits, and that it will continue to refine age‑verification systems. The firm argues that a blanket ban on social‑media use for children would be disproportionate and that targeted safeguards are more effective.

Critics, however, point out that the US agreement still leaves room for circumvention. Parents in the United States have reported that teenagers find ways around the caps by using secondary accounts or switching to other platforms such as TikTok, which remains outside the scope of the settlement. European regulators may therefore consider broader cross‑platform rules, an idea floated by the European Parliament's Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection.

Should the EU succeed in extracting a binding commitment, it would mark the first time a European regulator has secured a time‑limit clause from a major tech firm. The precedent could embolden member states to push for similar measures in other jurisdictions, potentially harmonising digital‑well‑being standards across the continent.

Nevertheless, the path forward is uncertain. The Commission has warned that any final decision will balance consumer protection against the need to preserve a competitive digital market. Companies argue that heavy‑handed restrictions could stifle innovation and limit the free flow of information, a point that resonates with some policymakers wary of over‑regulation.

As the dialogue continues, the European Parliament is expected to debate a resolution on "digital health" later this year, which may codify the time‑limit approach into legislation. Meanwhile, civil‑society organisations are preparing a public consultation to gather feedback from parents, educators and young people on what safeguards they consider most effective.

In the coming weeks, Meta's response to the Commission will shape whether Europe can match the US settlement's ambition or chart a more expansive course that tackles both time‑spending and algorithmic harms. The outcome will have direct consequences for millions of European households, the advertising ecosystem, and the broader debate over how to rein in the power of global tech giants.