Which countries have proposed but not implemented mandatory age verification for adult sites by 2025?
Executive summary
Several countries and subnational jurisdictions had proposed mandatory age‑verification schemes for adult sites by 2025; some moved to binding rules (notably France and parts of the UK’s Online Safety Act framework), while others only proposed or tested systems without full nationwide implementation by that date (for example, EU‑level pilots and proposals, and various national bills and trials). France’s regulator Arcom required adult sites to implement age checks in early 2025 [1] [2]; the UK’s Online Safety Act created mandatory age‑assurance duties to be enforced in 2025 [3] [4]. Available sources do not provide a single, definitive list that isolates every country that proposed but had not implemented mandatory age verification by 2025; they do, however, document proposals, pilots and partial implementation across the EU, the UK, the US states and Australia [5] [4] [6].
1. What was implemented by 2025 — the hard cases
France enacted regulator‑backed rules requiring adult sites to implement age verification in early 2025; Arcom’s standard and SREN law required providers to deploy age checks (deadline events such as January or April 2025 are referenced across outlets) and enforcement actions to block non‑compliant sites were reported [1] [2] [6]. The UK’s Online Safety Act included duties that providers use “highly effective” age‑verification or estimation for priority harmful content; Ofcom’s draft codes and enforcement timetable aimed at July 2025 compliance for high‑risk services [3] [4]. Several U.S. states had enacted their own laws by mid‑2025 (19 states with varying requirements are cited) though litigation and patchwork enforcement complicated uniform national implementation [3] [4].
2. Proposed, piloted or debated — the grey zone
Across the EU and beyond, proposals and pilots were under way rather than uniform, binding implementation. The European Commission funded an EU age‑verification blueprint and commissioned an app being tested by five member states to allow “over‑18” checks without revealing extra persoonsgegevens; this was a pilot approach rather than an EU‑wide, fully implemented mandate in 2025 [5]. Germany and other EU national regulators were active in debates — Germany faced legal disputes over telecom blocking powers and in some cases blocked actions remained contested [6]. Multiple countries were reported as “moving ahead” with privacy‑friendly options or trials rather than full rollouts [7] [8].
3. Countries reported as proposing measures but with unclear implementation by 2025
Sources describe proposals or bills in several jurisdictions where implementation was not clearly nationwide or was pending court challenges: EU‑level harmonization initiatives and national pilots (five‑country app test) indicate proposal status rather than final enforcement [5]; some U.S. states had laws but faced litigation that left enforcement unsettled [3] [4]. Other nations such as Denmark were described as encouraging age verification or using partnerships rather than mandating it [1]. Wikipedia and sector trackers list proposals in places like Canada, the EU, Australia and others but frame many as proposals or trials that would inform later rules [4] [7].
4. Why it’s hard to give a definitive “proposed but not implemented” list
Reporting in the sources shows rapid, uneven change: some countries moved from proposal to partial enforcement within months (France, UK codes), U.S. states enacted patchwork statutes while litigation paused or altered effect, and the EU pursued interoperable pilots rather than a single law in force across all member states in 2025 [1] [3] [5]. Public trackers and industry blogs try to map laws but often mix enacted laws, regulator codes, pilots and proposed bills, creating ambiguity about which are merely proposed versus implemented [9] [3].
5. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas in the coverage
Industry and vendor pieces emphasize feasibility and privacy‑preserving tech such as double‑blind checks or zero‑knowledge proofs and may implicitly promote commercial age‑assurance services [7] [8]. Advocacy groups and some media highlight child‑protection aims and enforcement [6] [2]. Legal coverage stresses that litigation and jurisdictional disputes — for example, telecom providers versus regulators in Germany, or U.S. state laws facing court challenges — shape whether a proposal becomes practical policy [6] [3].
6. What’s missing or uncertain in current reporting
Available sources do not deliver a single authoritative roster titled “countries that proposed but had not implemented mandatory age verification by 2025.” They instead provide scattered evidence of enacted regimes (France, UK codes, many U.S. states), pilots (EU app), proposals and legal uncertainty in other jurisdictions [1] [3] [5] [6]. For a precise, exhaustively verified list you would need a contemporaneous legal survey or official government statements for each country beyond the summaries and trackers cited here [9].
If you want, I can compile a country‑by‑country status table from these sources (enacted, pilot/proposal, contested) to make the differences and legal dates clearer.