Karsten Wenzlaff, Advisor
August 26th, 2025
August 28, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity + Insight | Capital Markets And Market Infrastructure, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Regulation And Policy, Wealthtech Investing And Trading

On August 28, 2026, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission penalized Gabriel Perez for prediction market insider trading after finding that he used confidential presidential speeches to trade event contracts for his own benefit. Perez worked as a White House technical adviser and teleprompter operator, which gave him access to prepared remarks before President Donald Trump delivered them.
Perez generated US$107,539.02 in profits by trading contracts on words and phrases the President would mention. He must return those profits, pay a US$65,000 civil penalty, stop violating the Commodity Exchange Act and stay out of CFTC regulated trading for three years. Perez consented to the settlement without admitting the CFTC's findings or legal conclusions, and the Commission says his cooperation justified a substantial reduction in the civil penalty. The CFTC also thanked KalshiEX for assisting the investigation.
As event contracts attract more volume, products and mainstream distribution, exchanges need to do more than price outcomes and settle trades. They need credible ways to identify when someone may know the answer before everyone else.
A mention market lets traders take a Yes or No position on whether a word, phrase or term will appear during a defined event. Perez opened his Kalshi account on December 8, 2025 and traded markets tied to presidential speeches, including addresses, rallies, policy remarks and the State of the Union.
The CFTC order says Perez generally saw prepared remarks about an hour before the President spoke. He bought Yes contracts when the target word appeared in the speech and No contracts when it did not. On one occasion, he changed his position after watching the President skip part of the prepared text.
Perez traded across 14 presidential mention markets and made money on 39 of 43 contracts. He was not making a better forecast than other traders. He had already seen the prepared remarks and knew whether many of the words being traded were present.
Traditional financial markets already deal with executives, advisers and employees who may hold valuable information before investors receive it. Event contracts can create a much wider group of people with direct knowledge of an outcome. A political speech can involve writers, production staff, government employees and technical crews, while sports, entertainment and corporate events can involve players, coaches, producers, employees, advisers or others close to the result.
That risk was visible before federal enforcement arrived. Kalshi's earlier insider trading cases included a MrBeast editor and a California political candidate, and the exchange said it had opened roughly 200 investigations or probes. Those cases showed that integrity work was already becoming part of running an event market. The Perez action is more consequential because the CFTC is now applying federal commodities law directly to misuse of confidential information in prediction market contracts.
The integrity problem can also extend beyond advance knowledge. Some traders may know an outcome early, others may be able to influence it, and some may hold information through a public duty or private relationship. That makes the source of the information as important as the trade itself.
The CFTC order and what the public record shows is that investigators could connect Perez's account, government role, speech access, trading times and profits. For prediction markets, knowing who is behind an account matters as much as spotting an unusual trade.
Traditional surveillance remains important. Exchanges can look for unusual profits, concentrated positions, repeated success, trading immediately before an event and activity that doesn't fit a customer's normal behaviour. Prediction markets add another requirement because suspicious trading may only make sense once the account is connected to a job, relationship or source of access outside financial markets.
A trader repeatedly winning presidential speech contracts becomes far more interesting if the exchange or regulator also knows that person works on presidential events. The same logic applies to sports personnel trading injury or lineup contracts, employees trading corporate outcomes or production staff trading entertainment events.
Exchanges need to know who is trading, what access they may have to the event and whether their trading pattern fits that access. Reliable customer identity, account history and information about relevant jobs or relationships can help investigators decide whether an unusual trade deserves a closer look. Surveillance teams need tools that can connect trading patterns with occupations, relationships and event access. Case management, alert review and auditable investigation records become more important as the number of contracts and traders grows.
This boosts the commercial case for regulated event contract infrastructure. Market surveillance, identity controls, outcome verification, compliance workflows, investigation tools and regulator reporting are becoming part of what platforms need to operate credible markets, alongside matching, pricing and settlement.
Different contracts also require different surveillance assumptions. An inflation contract settles on a formal public release. A presidential mention contract may depend on a speech seen by staff shortly before delivery. A sports contract can depend on injury or lineup information known to a relatively large group before the public learns it. Exchanges need to understand how each event is produced, who may know the answer early and who can influence the result before they can decide what suspicious trading looks like.
Prediction markets are reaching customers through larger financial platforms, which brings more liquidity but also more accounts and more activity to monitor. Recent CSA and CIRO guidance on prediction markets keeps sports and entertainment event contracts outside Canada's securities dealer channel, while Wealthsimple Investments and Interactive Brokers Canada can offer a narrower set of economic, environmental and financial contracts under CIRO conditions.
The CFTC case also shows that regulators are prepared to use existing commodities rules when confidential information is abused. Exchanges and distributors therefore need to spot suspicious activity early, connect it to useful account information, investigate it and keep records that can support enforcement.
That creates a practical market for surveillance, identity, behavioural analytics and case management tools. Prediction markets have already proved they can attract products, liquidity and mainstream distribution, but can market integrity keep up.
Can prediction markets scale faster than their ability to detect who knows the outcome before everyone else?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
Aug 31, 2026

Uri Poliavich is an entrepreneur and philanthropist who develops philanthropic initiatives with a focus on educational infrastructure and the long-term development of communities. He provides support for projects tied to building and modernizing schools, improving the learning environment, and developing educational teams professionally. This approach helps create the conditions institutions need to keep developing on their own going forward.
Educational institutions play a particularly important role in the development of local communities, bringing together children, families, teachers, and community initiatives around a shared learning environment. Quality schools matter especially for small communities. In that context, they provide not just the knowledge children need, but also a lasting connection between the family and the local community.
In Uri Poliavich's approach, infrastructure is treated as an integral part of a school's long-term development. Beyond current educational programs, this support includes creating the right conditions for institutions to operate and develop over many years.
A distinct direction in Uri Poliavich's work involves support for large-scale educational infrastructure projects. Such initiatives reflect the long-term approach associated with Uri Poliavich, with projects focused on creating and developing educational institutions designed for sustained use.
This format sets Uri Poliavich's work clearly apart from supporting individual educational events or various short-term programs.
Community and cultural spaces create additional opportunities for connection, for hosting various events, and for engagement among teachers, families, and community members. As a result, the educational environment becomes an important part of the broader social infrastructure.
In his work, Uri Poliavich devotes considerable attention to developing community centers and cultural institutions. Even so, he doesn't stray from his core principle: facilities need to be built with long-term use by local communities in mind.
That's why Uri Poliavich's approach helps bring several functions together within a single space – educational and communal alike.
A modern learning environment isn't just a school – it's also the full set of conditions in which children learn every day.
This environment includes:
That's why, as part of his educational support, Uri Poliavich drives the modernization of curricula and modern educational technology, along with the active development of school infrastructure. Thanks to this comprehensive approach, quality of education is judged not just by the content of a given program, but by the conditions in which that program is actually delivered.
Developing educational infrastructure means more than physical facilities – it also covers the content of the entire learning process. That's why, in his work, Uri Poliavich devotes considerable attention to updating curricula alongside introducing modern educational technology. Thanks to this approach, school development is treated as a combination of two components: infrastructure solutions and up-to-date educational content.
Updating resources covers:
But simply acquiring these resources isn't enough – schools also need to learn how to use them correctly to keep improving learning conditions going forward. All of this lets educational institutions quickly adapt their learning process to a changing set of requirements.
The quality of the educational environment also depends on how well-trained teachers are. That's why professional development for teachers is considered an essential complement to the required updates to school infrastructure and learning resources.
Uri Poliavich places particular emphasis on the professional development of teachers, helping them adopt new approaches to working with students and make the most effective use of the educational resources available. All of this matters given how often curricula are updated, when even the smallest changes call for a certain amount of preparation across the entire teaching staff.
Using the capabilities of modern infrastructure, it becomes possible to create the right conditions for teachers and administrators, who can then get a fully functioning learning process up and running far more quickly.
To apply a range of teaching methods and build a more comfortable environment for day-to-day work, the following set of elements has become essential:
For Uri Poliavich, developing infrastructure is closely tied to the ability to attract qualified specialists, as well as to creating the right conditions for their long-term work going forward.
The key difference between long-term support for an educational institution and one-time assistance lies in creating the conditions institutions need to keep working independently afterward. Uri Poliavich's approach is closely tied to building sustainable educational capabilities that hold their value even after individual projects wrap up.
A central role in Uri Poliavich's approach goes to combining the following elements:
When all of these components are developed at the same time, an institution gains enough capacity to sustain a quality educational process on its own and to plan its future work.
As a result, institutions gradually become less dependent on short-term outside solutions. Support, in this way, becomes a tool for building an institution's own educational foundation.
In Uri Poliavich's approach, a strong educational institution is an integral part of every community's life. He sets out to support schools that deliver quality general education while helping preserve Jewish identity. At the same time, in his work, Uri Poliavich pays attention not only to individual curricula, but also to questions of stability and the future development of every institution.
Thanks to this, an ongoing process of engagement takes shape between schools and community members. Regular training and development for teachers and school leadership plays an equally important role.
For Uri Poliavich, a long-term outcome depends on how well an educational institution is able to continue its work and create opportunities for the generations that follow.
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
August 28, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Regulation And Policy, Capital Markets And Market Infrastructure, Wealthtech Investing And Trading, Risk Compliance And Regtech

On August 27, 2026, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) and Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) issued new guidance on sports and entertainment event contracts. The CSA says those contracts belong outside securities and derivatives regulation, and CIRO will not approve dealer members to trade them.
The decision closes the securities-dealer route without banning every sports prediction market category under every Canadian law. Gaming and other applicable rules can still determine what is permitted elsewhere, but Canadian investment dealers now know sports and entertainment will not join the event contracts they can distribute through CIRO.
CIRO currently allows two investment dealers, Wealthsimple Investments Inc. and Interactive Brokers Canada Inc., to facilitate a limited set of contracts tied to economic forecasts, environmental outcomes and financial indicators. Permitted contracts generally need at least 30 days to maturity, clients cannot use leverage, and elections, referendums, political nominations and other political events remain prohibited.
In the U.S., sports category helped prediction markets reach a much larger audience. Prediction Markets Tighten As Wealthsimple Enters noted in March that a March Madness winner contract had already exceeded US$100 million in volume and 2026 Super Bowl contracts topped US$1 billion. Canada is now explicitly removing that demand interest from the securities-dealer channel.
That leaves economic, environmental and financial contracts to prove they can generate repeat participation and enough liquidity to remain useful. Rates, inflation, housing and climate outcomes can carry real forecasting value, but they don't naturally produce the same frequency, fan interest or habitual trading as professional sports.
Platforms are also experimenting with how prediction markets are presented. CRSHMARKET's livestream prediction-market model combines live video, creators and event contracts to make participation more immediate. That doesn't change Canada's regulatory limits, but it highlights why product format is important to growth if permitted contracts have to compete for attention without sports.
A contract within CIRO's permitted categories can potentially reach Canadian clients through an authorized investment dealer, while sports and entertainment contracts cannot use that route. Product teams therefore need to understand the event being priced, the applicable regulator and the distribution rules before estimating the addressable market.
As a result, the need for regulated event contract infrastructure is more valuable. Platforms need compliance controls, market surveillance, outcome verification, settlement and dealer integration, but they also need to know which contracts can be offered through which channel.
Infrastructure providers that help firms classify products, apply the right controls, integrate regulated distribution and settle outcomes can serve multiple markets even when the permitted contract set differs by jurisdiction.
CSA and CIRO say they are still assessing other types of event contracts. They haven't said which additional categories may eventually fit inside securities and derivatives regulation or which will remain outside it.
Those decisions will help determine the size of Canada's regulated prediction-market business. If CIRO dealers remain concentrated on economic, environmental and financial indicators, the sector may develop mainly as a forecasting and investment product. Additional permitted categories could create more reasons to trade and more opportunities for liquidity to build.
Regulators still need to consider market manipulation, insider information, outcome integrity and whether a particular event belongs inside financial regulation at all.
Can Canadian prediction markets build enough liquidity around economic, environmental and financial events without the sports contracts that helped drive U.S. adoption?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
August 28, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Open Banking Open Finance And Data Sharing, Digital Identity And Trust, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Cybersecurity And Fraud

On August 26, 2026, Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) called for five changes to Canada’s proposed Consumer-Driven Banking Regulations including what financial data can be shared, what firms must prove before accreditation, when public data can be reused without consent, how security keeps pace with new threats, and how the Bank of Canada and Privacy Commissioner coordinate oversight.
The submission arrived on the last day of the government's 60-day consultation, which closed August 26. Finance Canada now has to decide which recommendations make it into the final regulations before Canada's open banking system starts moving from rulemaking into accreditation and implementation.
The Commissioner supports consumer-directed data sharing, multi-factor authentication and mandatory breach reporting to the Bank of Canada. The five requested changes go further and could affect compliance costs, product design, consumer trust and which fintechs can afford to participate.
The proposed regulations cover identity information, account identifiers, fees and terms, balances, transactions and information about financial products. The OPC says those categories aren't detailed enough for consumers to know exactly what information they are agreeing to share and points to Australia’s Consumer Data Right as a more precise model.
It's important when someone is looking at a consent screen. "Identity data" doesn't tell a customer whether a provider will receive a name, address, email, phone number or other information.
The issue becomes more important as firms combine bank data with other sources and use it for credit, fraud, pricing or financial recommendations. Open banking decision intelligence becomes more valuable as firms infer more from permissioned financial data, which makes precision about what was actually shared even more important.
If Canada wants meaningful consent, people need to know what is leaving their bank before they approve it.
The proposed rules offer four accreditation routes under Bank of Canada oversight, including streamlined treatment for payment service providers already registered under the Retail Payment Activities Act. The OPC wants stronger proof from some applicants, including evidence that security controls are working, technical standards are being met and authentication and complaint processes are ready.
It also wants certain financial institutions to show that people responsible for consumer-driven banking have been assessed for good character and integrity, and that insurance or other guarantees are available to manage data-related risks.
That raises the accreditation bar for good reason. Accredited firms may receive account identifiers, balances, transaction histories and other highly sensitive information. The commercial question now is how much proof Canada requires and what it costs credible firms to provide it.
Finance Canada estimates the proposed regulations will generate C$13.2 billion in benefits over ten years while adding about C$457.7 million in regulatory costs. Under the government's central scenario, roughly 680 businesses participate initially, including 578 small businesses, with an estimated average annualized regulatory cost of C$89,133 for each small business.
Large financial institutions can spread fixed security, legal and reporting costs across millions of customers. Smaller fintechs can't. Canada needs to keep poorly prepared firms away from consumer financial data without making the cost of proving readiness another advantage for incumbents.
The OPC also wants Finance Canada to narrow an exception that allows some publicly available information to be used without consent. Its recommendation is that public data should not include information where a consumer still has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Information can technically be public without someone expecting it to be collected, combined with financial records and reused inside a commercial service. Open banking makes those combinations easier and potentially more valuable.
The final rules therefore need to protect against a consent loophole where one piece of public information becomes a reason to use financial information in ways the customer didn't reasonably expect.
The proposed regulations already require vulnerability management, authentication, encryption, network protection, employee training and tested incident-response plans, with those controls applied in proportion to the sensitivity of the data. The OPC wants an additional obligation requiring firms to keep those safeguards appropriate as technology and cyber risks evolve.
That's certainly more demanding than completing a checklist once. After a breach, a firm could still have to show that its security was appropriate for the data it held and the risks it should reasonably have been managing.
For banks and fintechs, security readiness therefore becomes an ongoing operating requirement. Canada's proposed open banking requirements already span accreditation, authentication, security, technical standards, liability, complaints and Bank of Canada supervision. Companies preparing to participate need proof that those controls actually work, not just policies saying they exist.
The Bank of Canada will supervise consumer-driven banking participants while the Privacy Commissioner continues to oversee federal private-sector privacy obligations. A serious data breach can involve both, so the OPC wants explicit authority for the regulators to coordinate their work and share information where necessary.
Without that, companies can face overlapping requests and investigations while an important issue still falls between mandates. When customer data is exposed, management needs to know who must be notified, what each regulator expects and how the two authorities will divide the work.
Clear coordination is especially important because Canada is trying to replace a system millions of people already use. Finance Canada estimates roughly nine million Canadians currently rely on financial-data services using credential-based screen scraping. Regulated API access should reduce important security and liability risks, but only if supervision works cleanly when something goes wrong.
The OPC is asking Finance Canada to be more precise about what data moves, who can receive it and what firms must prove before they get access. Those protections however cost money. Independent security work, technical compliance, authentication, insurance, reporting and complaint processes all consume capital that a younger company could otherwise spend on product development, hiring or customer acquisition.
The answer isn't weaker safeguards. Financial transaction data is too sensitive for that. The challenge is to determine whether each requirement addresses a real risk and whether the cost is proportionate to the firm, activity and data involved.
Canada's C$13.2 billion benefit estimate assumes firms enter the market and build services people want to use. Open banking opportunities in Canada already span verification, cash-flow tools, SME services, financial management and future payment initiation, but APIs alone won't create competition.
Consumers need providers they trust, and credible challengers need a realistic way to qualify. The final rules will help decide both.
How high can Canada raise the privacy and security bar for open banking before the cost of clearing it starts protecting incumbents from the competition the system is supposed to create?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
The Privacy Commissioner wants clearer rules in five areas: exactly what financial data can be shared, what firms must prove before accreditation, when publicly available data can be used without consent, how security safeguards should keep pace with changing threats, and how the Bank of Canada and Privacy Commissioner coordinate oversight.
No. The 60-day consultation on the proposed Consumer-Driven Banking Regulations closed on August 26, 2026. Finance Canada now has to decide what changes to make before the regulations are finalized.
Yes. Stronger accreditation, security, insurance and compliance requirements can improve consumer trust and keep poorly prepared firms out, but they also raise the cost of participation. The challenge is setting a high enough bar to protect financial data without making open banking too expensive for credible smaller fintechs to enter.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
August 26, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Regulation And Policy, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Competition And Market Structure

On August 26, 2026, U.S. attorneys general announced a settlement with Meta worth up to US$17.1 billion over allegations that Facebook and Instagram were designed to keep children and teens engaged despite risks to their health and well-being. If the court approves the agreement, Meta also has to limit how long minors can use its apps, restrict overnight access and school-hour notifications, strengthen age checks and give families more control over what young users see.
Meta isn't required to admit it did anything wrong under the settlement. It does expect to record an approximately US$10 billion legal expense in Q3 2026. Governments aren't only extracting billions from Meta. They're putting enforceable limits on features that help determine how often young people open Facebook and Instagram, how long they stay and what keeps them scrolling.
Users under 18 will start with a combined two-hour daily limit across Facebook and Instagram. Parents can approve more time, but teens can't simply turn the limit off themselves. Meta also has to block most access from midnight to 6 a.m. by default and mute most notifications during school hours.
The agreement goes deeper. Teens get regular break prompts and more control over personalized feeds, autoplay and visible like counts. Meta also has to strengthen age assurance, identify children under 13, improve parental controls and maintain protections against harmful content and unwanted adult contact.
Recommendations, notifications, autoplay and frictionless consumption help technology companies turn attention into usage, retention and advertising revenue. That's why the settlement is strategically important. A feature can be commercially valuable for years and still become expensive if evidence eventually shows that the same behaviour driving engagement is contributing to harm.
NCFA's Algorithms Go On Trial As AI Scales Across Society unveiled the lawsuits challenging recommendation systems, infinite scroll, autoplay and notifications as deliberate product choices rather than simply arguing about what users post. Those cases have now produced jury findings, large financial awards and operating restrictions. The debate over addictive design is becoming much harder for boards to leave with legal counsel or the product team.
Meta can afford the settlement though. The company earned enough to absorb an approximately US$10 billion quarterly legal charge without changing the financial guidance it gave investors in July. Markets also reacted positively after the settlement was announced, reflecting relief that Meta avoided the potentially larger uncertainty of continuing the federal trial.
That is precisely why boards should study what happened.
Years of complaints, research, lawsuits and internal evidence accumulated around the same basic concern: were Facebook and Instagram using product features to keep children engaged in ways that could harm them? The exposure grew from a difficult policy issue into jury verdicts, court-ordered controls and now one of the largest state settlements ever reached with a single company.
August coverage of the New Mexico Meta ruling showed how quickly the consequences were already expanding. That case combined a US$375 million jury award with a further US$567 million abatement fund and requirements affecting teen usage, notifications, age assurance, adult contact and AI chatbot interactions involving minors.
If management keeps getting signals that a profitable feature may be harming young users and keeps pushing it anyway, the issue eventually belongs with the board. Investors should know when those warnings reach directors, what they’re told and who can decide that the revenue is no longer worth the risk.
Meta also negotiated an unusually strategic feature into the settlement.
Its own disclosure describes an approximately US$18 billion payment structure over ten years. About US$12.7 billion is allocated to participating states regardless of what competitors do. Roughly US$5.3 billion is released only if both TikTok and YouTube adopt specified teen protections and make matching payments.
That gives Meta billions of reasons to bring its competitors along.
Commercially, the logic makes sense given the amount of competition. If Facebook and Instagram restrict teen usage while TikTok and YouTube remain more permissive, users and coveted 'attention' can migrate to competing apps. Meta bears the cost while rivals gain more opportunity to capture the hours, content consumption and advertising inventory Meta gives up.
The terms get tougher if TikTok and YouTube participate. Meta's daily limit falls from two hours across Facebook and Instagram to one hour per app, while its nighttime block expands from midnight to 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. through 7 a.m.
So Meta isn't simply asking competitors to copy its safety policies. It is trying to prevent child-safety rules from becoming a competitive handicap carried mainly by Facebook and Instagram.
TikTok and YouTube haven't agreed to the framework. Until they do, Meta could still end up operating under restrictions its largest rivals don't share.

Concern about how digital products affect children has been building for years. In 2023, NCFA analyzed Canadian research into children's privacy and consent that called for stronger safeguards to be built into digital products from the start. Children don't assess consent, persuasive design or data collection the way adults do, yet personalization and recommendation systems routinely influence what they watch, read and do next.
Meta's settlement gives those concerns a much larger financial consequence. Governments are no longer relying only on warnings or disclosure requirements. They are specifying age checks, usage limits, notification controls, parental oversight and independent monitoring.
Once those requirements appear in a multibillion-dollar agreement, other platforms know what regulators may ask for next. The settlement doesn't create legal precedent, but it gives attorneys general a detailed set of measures they can use in future negotiations and enforcement.
AI companions and conversational assistants can respond personally, remember context and keep conversations going. Research into youth use of AI reported that 72% of teens had tried AI companions and examined evidence of young people using generative AI for emotional and mental health support.
AI can change the type of exposure a child experiences. A recommendation feed influences what a young person sees next. An AI system can respond directly, adapt to the conversation and encourage the user to keep engaging.
For companies serving children or vulnerable users, it's even more important to know what the system is encouraging, where harmful patterns are appearing and who can change the product when the interaction becomes uncomfortable.
The same principle can be seen in fintech where younger customers use digital wallets, investing apps, financial education tools and AI assistants. Meta's settlement rules don't apply to those products. The relevant lesson is that companies need to understand how their own systems influence behaviour before a regulator or court does it for them.
Meta's US$17.1 billion settlement shows how expensive the problem can become when concerns about engagement, harm and product design build for years without a convincing response.
When a company knows a profitable engagement feature may be harming young users, who should have the authority to decide when growth has gone too far?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |