How long does OnlyFans retain KYC and age verification records and why?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
OnlyFans’ public privacy policy says identity and related records may be retained to satisfy legal and regulatory obligations — in some jurisdictions that can be “up to 7 years” — and the company links retention to legal requests, tax/financial reporting and investigations (OnlyFans privacy policy) [1]. Regulators have recently fined the company over age-verification mis-statements, underscoring why OnlyFans emphasizes long retention for compliance and evidence preservation (Ofcom fine reported in Cointelegraph) [2].
1. What OnlyFans itself says about KYC/age‑verification retention
OnlyFans’ privacy page explicitly ties retention of identity and face‑recognition data to compliance needs: identity record‑keeping and financial/tax reporting requirements “in some cases is up to 7 years,” and data may also be retained if the company receives a valid legal request or must comply with regulatory investigations [1]. The policy also notes users can withdraw consent for retention of Face Recognition Data used for authentication, though doing so may require resubmission of identity documents to third‑party providers [1].
2. Why the company links retention to law, tax and legal process
OnlyFans frames retention as a response to multiple external obligations: local identity‑record requirements, tax and financial reporting windows, preservation orders, search warrants, and regulatory proceedings — all standard reasons businesses keep identity records after onboarding [1]. Industry observers note platforms that handle payments and creators’ earnings adopt KYC/AML practices similar to financial firms, which commonly have multi‑year retention rules to support audits and investigations [3] [4].
3. Enforcement pressure that increases retention incentives
Regulatory scrutiny has produced concrete penalties that make retention and documentary trails tactical necessities. Cointelegraph reported that Ofcom fined OnlyFans’ parent for inaccurate statements about its age‑verification system — a recent enforcement action that reinforces why the company must retain evidence for inquiries and to demonstrate compliance [2]. Such fines create clear incentives for platforms to preserve KYC and verification records longer than convenience alone would require [2].
4. Third‑party vendors and authentication lifecycles
OnlyFans uses third‑party identity and age‑verification providers (advertised partners include names like Ondato in industry materials), and the platform’s policy points out that withdrawing consent for storing face‑recognition data doesn’t stop re‑verification needs because the third party may require you to re‑submit documents during later authentication [1] [5]. That technical choreography — data stored by external vendors plus platform copies — helps explain why data can persist across different systems even when users request deletion [1] [5].
5. Limits, user controls and stated minimization
OnlyFans asserts it practices data minimization — collecting only what’s essential and deleting data once no longer required — and says it will delete personal data sooner where law demands shorter retention [3] [1]. The company also offers a route to withdraw consent for face‑recognition retention and promises deletion in many cases, but it also warns deletion requests may be refused for specific legal reasons, such as account deactivation tied to Terms of Service violations [1].
6. Practical consequences for users and creators
For creators and users, the upshot is predictable: identity documents, KYC profiles and face‑recognition metadata can remain accessible to OnlyFans and its vendors for years — notably “up to 7 years” in some jurisdictions — so account closures or profile cleanup do not guarantee immediate erasure [1]. Users should expect possible re‑verification if they later seek access or if legal/regulatory processes require preservation [1].
7. Alternative viewpoints and gaps in available reporting
Industry commentary frames OnlyFans as having “bank‑grade” KYC/AML ambitions, positioning the platform closer to regulated financial services and explaining multi‑year retention as a compliance necessity [4]. However, available sources do not provide a granular breakdown of retention by data type (e.g., photos vs. metadata), the exact retention schedule in each jurisdiction, nor independent audits proving deletion after retention periods; those specifics are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting) [1] [4].
8. What users can do now
Users who want control should exercise the platform’s stated mechanisms: request deletion, withdraw consent for face‑recognition retention, and keep records of communications; but they should do so knowing OnlyFans may lawfully retain records to meet tax, legal or regulatory obligations and that third‑party vendors may still hold copies [1] [5]. The recent regulatory fine (Ofcom) suggests users and creators should also monitor public enforcement actions for changes to retention practice and verification claims [2].
Limitations: This analysis relies on OnlyFans’ published privacy language and the cited industry/regulatory reporting. Specific retention windows by data type and jurisdictional legal text are not provided in the available sources (not found in current reporting) [1] [2] [5].