Lawmakers seek child labor protections in WA for family vlog content

OLYMPIA – The videos look like home movies – birthday parties, road trips, bedtime routines – but for thousands of families, they are also a source of income. Now, Washington Democratic lawmakers are debating a bill that would give children appearing in monetized online content legal protections, trust accounts for their earnings and the ability to remove content featuring them once they reach adulthood.

House Bill 2400 would require social media creators based in Washington or having a substantial connection to the state earning $12,000 or more annually from video content to register with the state. It would also mandate platforms and advertisers to place a portion of a child creator’s earnings into a trust until they turn 18.

Supporters say the legislation addresses long-standing concerns about child labor, consent and digital permanence in an industry that has grown rapidly with little oversight.

“This is our attempt to prevent situations like Ruby Franke from happening – to prevent an ‘8 Passengers’ situation from happening in the state of Washington,” said prime sponsor Rep. Kristine Reeves, D-Federal Way, referring to the Utah family vlogger convicted of child abuse. “Your children are not property, and they deserve to be protected.”

Under the bill, the trust amount would reflect how prominently a child appears in a video, with funds split equally if multiple children are featured. Platforms and advertisers connected with Washington would be responsible for setting up the accounts, shifting some financial responsibility beyond parents.

Reeves said the legislation is designed to treat social media content creation as a business practice – a shift that brings online creators under existing consumer protection and labor frameworks.

“So much already exists in state law,” she said. “This applies the same concepts here.”

If the law passes, social media services would be required to submit annual reports beginning in 2027, detailing how many paid creators they host, how many are minors and how often children appear in monetized content. Lawmakers say the data would help enforce the law and better define the scope of child involvement online.

The state Department of Revenue would oversee registration and enforcement. Paid creators who fail to register could face civil fines, while violations related to trust accounts could trigger lawsuits and statutory damages of up to $50,000.

The bill would allow people ages 18 to 23 to request the permanent deletion of monetized content featuring them as children. Platforms would have 30 days to comply, either by removing the content or obscuring the individual’s likeness, and would be required to monitor and remove reposts.

Some creators say they support the bill’s intent but worry about how it would work in practice.

“I actually got a business credit card so that I can track everything I spend on creating content, from camera gear to equipment,” George Ma, a Pacific Northwest food vlogger who does not feature children, said at a public hearing Tuesday in the House Consumer Protection and Business Committee. He said the proposal highlights broader challenges with transparency in online monetization.

“It’s very hard to tell when a video actually produces monetary profit,” Ma said. “It’s even harder to tell if the kid consented or if the parent consented.”

Social media companies and business groups have raised concerns, particularly about being treated as third-party businesses responsible for trust accounts, fines and lawsuits. Reeves said negotiations are ongoing with platforms including Meta, TikTok and YouTube.

“A lot of this bill is responding to their concern about being a third-party platform,” she said. “What that regulation looks like, who pays the fines and fees – that’s still being negotiated.”

Experts say protections like those proposed in House Bill 2400 are long overdue. According to the American Bar Association, children in family vlogs are largely unregulated, leaving them vulnerable to long filming hours, privacy violations and potential exploitation by parents who control both the content and the revenue.

During the public hearing, lawmakers questioned how the bill would apply to globally hosted platforms and how it would distinguish between casual family posting and intentional monetization.

“There’s a difference between posting your kid and making the conscious choice to monetize your children,” Reeves told the committee, likening family vloggers to child actors who work under strict protections in Hollywood. “These kids are working. They deserve the same protections.”

Max Martin, representing the Association of Washington Business, spoke in opposition to the bill, citing concerns about the private right of action and arguing that enforcement should be handled solely by the state attorney general. Rose Feliciano testified in opposition on behalf of TechNet, a network of tech CEOs and senior executives, saying social media companies function as intermediaries and should not be held responsible for parents’ financial decisions.

Reeves noted that the proposal is the fourth legislative attempt to regulate child monetization online and is based on evidence that videos featuring children generate significantly more engagement.

“This bill is predicated on the reality that children get better clicks,” she said. “That’s the part we can’t ignore.”