California has signed AB 1043, the Digital Age Assurance Act, into law. Beginning January 1, 2027, every new device: smartphones, tablets, laptops, will ask users to provide their age or date of birth during setup.
The law also requires Apple, Google, and other operating system providers to create a method for confirming ages on existing devices by July 1, 2027. Users will then be placed into one of four age brackets. That information will guide what kinds of apps or content are visible on the device.
Violations come with penalties: up to $2,500 per child for negligence and $7,500 per child for intentional breaches. Companies can avoid liability if they show a good-faith effort to comply.
Learning from the UK’s Mistakes
I’m glad that California isn’t forcing users to give out their government ID. They’re trying to learn from the mistakes the UK’s Online Safety Act has made. Instead, it allows parents to simply enter their child’s age during setup.
That age data stays within the operating system. Apple or Google can use it to signal to app stores or developers what’s appropriate for the user’s bracket, without exposing a specific birthdate or personal identity. It’s a privacy-first model, at least in theory.
Are There Any Loopholes?
Still, I have just one question: what’s stopping a child from lying about their age?
If a child is given a smartphone or tablet without any parental controls, what’s stopping them from claiming they’re 35 when they’re actually 13? Or doing a factory reset to adjust the age? In the end, a device can’t tell the difference between a real adult and a child pretending to be one. In order for this law to work, parents have to be the ones to set up their child’s devices.
Teenagers are going to be tricky. They’re the ones who are setting up their devices. They might even be buying their own smart devices with their own money. 16 year olds can buy their own devices if they have a job. They’re the ones deciding what to see, what to hide, and who to trust online. That’s not something a setup screen can regulate. It’s something parents have to teach.
The Real Issue
Laws like AB 1043 mean well. They try to balance child safety with user privacy and innovation. Yet they’re still built on a shaky foundation.
The truth is, age gates don’t solve the core problem. A lot of parents will give their kids a device as a distraction. They come from a generation where their families sent them outside with no clue on what their children were doing. All that mattered was that they were back inside before dinner. Instead of taking the time to monitor what the kids are doing, they expect tech companies to do their job for them. AB 1043 aims to place that responsibility back onto the parents.
I do believe that tech companies should be responsible for moderating content for copyright or misinformation. Their algorithms are having a negative effect on adults by radicalizing them. At the same time, if a child tries to view adult content, their device should have something built-in that will block them.
California’s age verification law is a step forward. On its own, it’s not a permanent solution. Technology can’t replace responsibility from parents to be aware of what their children are doing online. If the goal is digital safety, we have to stop pretending that age gates are a replacement for parental supervision. Otherwise, AB 1043 becomes another well-intentioned policy with little enforcement.
