Germany's family minister wants a legal social-media minimum age of 13. The European Commission has now proposed a framework that is stricter than that, and it would be a regulation, so it applies directly in every member state. Whatever Berlin presents in October has to be built around the EU text rather than beside it.
What Brussels proposed
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the EU Kids Act in her State of the Union address on 16 September 2026. According to a law-firm analysis from Lexgo, it sets three tiers:
- Under 13: no accounts, apart from guardian-controlled access to child-specific video services.
- 13 to 14: no autonomous accounts. Parents may open limited-feature accounts with parental tools permanently on, a one-hour daily cap and prior approval of new contacts.
- 15 and over: own accounts, subject to safety-by-design duties on addictive algorithms, infinite scroll and autoplay.
The scope goes beyond social networks. It reaches video-sharing platforms, app stores, online games, operating systems and AI companions. Age verification would use solutions certified under a forthcoming EU scheme, with the European Digital Identity Wallet deemed compliant. Per Lexgo, the act would also "specify" Article 28 of the Digital Services Act and create a presumption of compliance for platforms that meet it.
The strongest case for acting
The case for intervention is serious. Voluntary minimum ages of 13 in platform terms of service have been easy to bypass, and the Commission's own July 2025 guidelines on minors under the DSA were expressly non-binding. They recommended private-by-default accounts and switching off autoplay, streaks and push notifications by default. Platforms that ignore a voluntary reference point face no consequence, so a binding rule fixes a real enforcement gap.
German officials appear to share that diagnosis. Family Minister Karin Prien said the "key lies somewhat in Brussels" and conceded that Germany cannot enforce age verification alone, according to dpa reporting. That is correct. A national obligation on a US or Chinese platform with no German establishment is hard to enforce. An EU regulation that applies "irrespective of place of establishment" is the credible vehicle.
Where Berlin's plan diverges
Prien's stated position, published by the family ministry, is "a legal age limit of 13 years" for independent use of social media, combined with effective age verification and graduated protections up to 18. She would exempt demonstrably child-friendly, low-risk services. Her independent expert commission presented 56 recommendations on 11 September 2026, six days before the Commission formally proposed the act.
The two frameworks differ in three ways.
- Age of independence. Germany would let a 13-year-old hold an account under graduated protections. Brussels would allow only a parent-managed, time-capped account until 15. A German rule at 13 would conflict with the EU text once it applies.
- Legal form. The Lexgo analysis says national legislation would need to align with a harmonised EU framework. A national statute that sets different rules on the same platform duties risks being pre-empted or struck down for conflicting with the regulation.
- Timing. Lexgo judges adoption before 2028 unlikely. Germany's wallet is due to launch in early 2027, according to dpa, so a gap of a year or more is possible. A national law passed in that window would be provisional and would need to be rewritten.
What a proportionate German position looks like
The evidence does not yet show that a hard age cutoff is the most effective instrument. It is clear that dark-pattern design is a problem. A rule that works on infinite scroll, autoplay and algorithmic amplification reaches every user and does not depend on identity checks. A rule that gates accounts by birth year makes every adult prove their age to use an ordinary service, which raises privacy and free-expression costs. The EUDI wallet's ability to prove age without disclosing name or birth date reduces that cost, but only if platforms accept it and do not demand extra data. Teenagers aged 13 to 14 who are barred from their own accounts may move to unregulated apps, group chats or VPNs, where no safety-by-design duties apply.
This is where Germany's input has most value. Prien's tiered model is closer to proportionate than a flat cutoff, because it ties protections to development stage and exempts low-risk services such as messengers. Berlin should argue in the Council and Parliament for three changes to the Commission text:
- a low-risk exemption that is written into the regulation rather than left to delegated acts;
- a review clause that tests whether the 15-year account rule reduces harm or only displaces it;
- binding data-minimisation limits on age-verification providers.
On the national side, the October key points should avoid rival age thresholds. They should cover what the EU text leaves to member states: media-literacy funding, school policy, regulator capacity, and support for the roughly 300,000 teenagers the expert commission describes as showing addictive use, as reported by regional press.
Bottom line
The EU Kids Act makes a national age ladder redundant at best and contradictory at worst. Germany's most useful contribution is to shape the EU rulebook toward proportionality and then enforce it, rather than to legislate a parallel limit that Brussels will override.