Meta mounts legal challenge to UK’s Online Safety Act
Meta is taking the UK’s communications regulator to court, filing a judicial review in the High Court to challenge the way Ofcom calculates fees and penalties under the Online Safety Act. The company’s core argument: the formula used to determine what it owes is fundamentally unfair, sticking the biggest firms with most of the bill regardless of the law’s broader ambitions.
A preliminary hearing is scheduled for May 7, 2026, with the substantive hearing set for October 2026. Meta won’t be fighting alone, either. The Computer and Communications Industry Association and Epic Games are expected to intervene on its side, while the 5Rights Foundation will back Ofcom.
The math Meta doesn’t like
At the center of the dispute is something called “qualifying worldwide revenue,” or QWR. Ofcom uses this metric to calculate both the annual fees that regulated platforms owe and the maximum fines they could face for violations.
For companies with QWR exceeding £250 million, the fee obligations kick in. Fines can reach up to 10% of QWR or £18 million, whichever figure is larger. For a company of Meta’s size, that “whichever is greater” clause is doing a lot of heavy lifting in Ofcom’s favor.
Meta reported roughly $201 billion in global revenue in the prior fiscal year. Ten percent of that figure would dwarf the £18 million floor by several orders of magnitude, meaning Meta’s potential penalty exposure under the Act is enormous compared to smaller platforms subject to the same rules.
The company contends that tying fees and penalties to worldwide revenue, rather than UK-specific earnings, creates an outsized burden on global tech firms. In practical terms, Meta argues it would end up covering the lion’s share of Ofcom’s regulatory costs, essentially subsidizing oversight of a much broader ecosystem of platforms.
A broader rebellion brewing
Meta isn’t the only company pushing back against the Online Safety Act’s classification system. WhatsApp and Instagram, both Meta-owned services, are among the platforms appealing their Category 1 designations. Category 1 is the highest tier under the Act, carrying the most extensive compliance obligations around content moderation, transparency reporting, and user safety.
Roblox and Quora are also contesting their Category 1 status. Ofcom’s fees regime was introduced around September 2025, with the first invoices expected to land around September 2026. That timeline means Meta’s legal challenge is arriving well before any bills are actually due.
The Online Safety Act’s rocky rollout
The Online Safety Act received Royal Assent in October 2023, capping years of legislative debate about how to hold tech platforms accountable for harmful content. The Wikimedia Foundation mounted an unsuccessful challenge in 2025 regarding categorization and age-verification obligations under the Act.
The involvement of the 5Rights Foundation on Ofcom’s side adds another dimension. The organization, which focuses on children’s digital rights, represents the constituency that pushed hardest for the Act in the first place.
What’s actually at stake
The outcome of this case could reshape how regulators worldwide think about tying compliance costs to global revenue. If Meta wins, Ofcom may need to redesign its fee structure, potentially shifting to a model based on UK-specific revenue or user numbers. If Ofcom prevails, the QWR model becomes a validated template that other regulators could adopt.
The case also carries implications for how Category 1 designations hold up under legal scrutiny. If the appeals from Meta’s services, Roblox, and Quora succeed in downgrading their classifications, fewer entities would be subject to the most demanding obligations, reducing regulatory revenue for Ofcom.
The preliminary proceeding in May will address procedural questions, but the substantive arguments about proportionality and fairness won’t be tested until October 2026.
