Meta has repeatedly failed to prevent illegal advertisements for high-risk financial products from appearing on its platforms in Britain, despite pledging to block them, according to a review by the country’s financial regulator.
Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority found that during one week in November, 1,052 ads for currency trading and certain complex financial instruments were posted on Meta’s platforms by advertisers not authorised by the regulator to promote them.
What’s more, 56% of those ads were from an unspecified number of unauthorised advertisers the FCA had already flagged to Meta.
Britain’s FCA warned last year that people were increasingly being targeted on social media by online trading scams where fraudsters offer currency trades. Its review aimed to assess how successful Meta has been at removing such ads.
Asked about the findings, a Meta spokesperson said the company fights fraud aggressively and takes swift action on the majority of reports within days. However, the regulator said a disproportionate number of suspicious financial ads continue to appear across Meta’s platforms, including Facebook and Instagram.
“Fraud is the most common crime in the UK,” an FCA spokesperson said, adding that it was vital for Meta to do more to protect users.
A follow-up review in December again found that a small number of repeat offenders were responsible for most illegal ads, indicating persistent gaps in enforcement. Despite regular engagement with Meta, the FCA said it had not seen a meaningful change in the company’s approach.
Meta rejected suggestions that it ignores regulatory reports, stating that advertisers are required to comply with local laws and be authorised where necessary.
Legal Black Hole
The issue is complicated by regulatory gaps. Britain’s Online Safety Act, introduced in 2025, allows authorities to fine social media companies for illegal user-generated content. However, provisions covering paid scam advertisements will not come into force until at least 2027, leaving regulators with limited powers in the meantime.
As a result, the FCA cannot take direct action against Meta, and communications regulator Ofcom also lacks authority over paid scam ads for now. Officials say implementation delays are partly due to legal challenges.
To test Meta’s systems, a Reuters reporter created a suspicious investment ad promising unrealistic weekly returns. The ad was approved in Britain without additional checks. In contrast, when the same ad was tested in Australia—where stricter rules apply—it was blocked and required proof of authorisation.
Meta said this difference reflects stronger verification systems in countries with tighter regulations and that it is working to improve safeguards globally.
Consumer advocates argue that tech companies must invest more in tackling scam ads, while banks and regulators continue to push for stricter enforcement and better coordination to combat fraud online.
(With inputs from Reuters)
