Meta, the technology company behind Facebook and Instagram, is challenging the UK’s media regulator in the High Court over fees and potential financial penalties introduced under the country’s Online Safety Act.
The hearing, scheduled for Tuesday, centres on Ofcom’s interpretation of “qualifying worldwide revenue”, the measure used to calculate how much certain technology companies must contribute towards the regulator’s online safety work.
Meta argues that Ofcom’s method of calculating the fees is disproportionate and unlawful. The regulator, however, has said it will robustly defend its position.
The case highlights growing tensions between major technology companies and regulators over the financial and legal obligations imposed to protect users from harmful online content.
Why Meta Is Challenging Ofcom
The UK’s Online Safety Act introduced new requirements for technology companies and online services to address harmful content and strengthen user protections.
Under the framework, Ofcom’s operating costs for enforcing online safety rules are funded through fees paid by technology firms that meet specified revenue thresholds.
Regulations introduced in September 2025 established a system under which companies earning more than £250 million annually can be required to pay fees calculated using their qualifying worldwide revenue.
Meta argues that the regulator’s approach places an excessive financial burden on a small number of large technology companies, even though the legislation covers a much broader range of online services.
According to court documents cited by the BBC, Monica Carss-Frisk KC, representing Meta, described Ofcom’s approach as “troubling”.
She argued that the calculation method could result in a handful of companies, including Meta, bearing most of the regulator’s costs despite the legislation applying to a wide range of internet services operating in Britain.
Ofcom Promises to Defend Its Position
Ofcom has maintained that it will defend its interpretation of the regulations in court.
The regulator is responsible for implementing the Online Safety Act and overseeing compliance by services covered by the legislation.
Its work includes enforcing requirements intended to reduce exposure to harmful online material and ensuring that regulated companies meet their legal obligations.
The dispute raises questions about how regulatory costs should be distributed among technology companies and whether revenue-based calculations fairly reflect the scope of the services covered by the law.
The High Court challenge will examine Meta’s objections to Ofcom’s approach. The outcome could have implications for the regulator’s fee calculations and the companies required to contribute towards its work.
Meta to Pay Up to $18 Billion in US Settlement Over Children’s Social Media Addiction Claims
Online Safety Act Allows Millions in Fines
The Online Safety Act gives Ofcom powers to impose substantial financial penalties on companies that breach relevant safety requirements.
Firms found to have violated the rules can face fines of up to 10% of their qualifying worldwide revenue or £18 million ($23.7 million), whichever amount is greater.
The penalties are designed to encourage compliance and give the regulator a means of enforcing the law against companies that fail to meet their obligations.
However, the scale of the potential fines has also intensified debate over the balance between protecting users, enforcing regulations and ensuring that companies are treated fairly.
Meta’s challenge focuses on the interpretation of qualifying worldwide revenue used in the regulatory framework, rather than simply the existence of online safety requirements.
Ofcom Faces Growing Legal Pressure
The case comes as Ofcom faces broader legal scrutiny over its implementation of the Online Safety Act.
Earlier this year, Oliver Griffiths, the regulator’s group director for online safety, told a House of Lords committee that Ofcom was operating in a “highly litigious environment”.
He referred to legal actions brought by Meta and other online services, including challenges relating to the regulator’s attempts to collect data.
Griffiths said Ofcom was seeking to drive change through the implementation of the legislation while operating within an increasingly complex legal environment.
The proceedings reflect the wider debate over how governments should regulate digital platforms, distribute the costs of enforcement and hold technology companies accountable for online safety.
The High Court hearing will provide an opportunity for Meta and Ofcom to present their arguments over the revenue calculations underpinning the fee system. The court’s decision could help clarify how the rules should be applied to major technology companies operating in the UK.
