Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, has been under criticism due to its failure to prevent fraudulent financial advertisements on its websites in the United Kingdom.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) discovered that more than 1,000 unauthorized advertisements of high-risk financial products were shown on several Meta platforms within a week in November 2025. These advertisements were posted by unauthorized advertisers who were promoting currency trading and complicated financial instruments.
In a review conducted by the FCA, it was found that 1,052 high-risk financial product ads had been posted to the platforms of Meta in one week in November 2025. Among them, 56% were placed by rogue advertisers already identified to Meta by the FCA.
This implies that the fraud detection tools used by Meta could not prevent these fraudulent financial advertisements, which casts doubts on its capacity to implement its advertising policies.
The FCA targeted Meta Platforms, as they were discovered to host an unwarranted share of suspicious financial advertisements. In the UK, fraud has become the most prevalent, and social media platforms have been major vehicles of such fraud. The purpose of the review by the FCA was to determine whether Meta was effective in identifying and eliminating these advertisements, especially those that covered high-risk trading products.
In December 2025, FCA revisited the review and found the same. Most of the illegal ads were carried out by a few repeat offenders. Although Meta communicates regularly with the FCA, the review indicates that the attempts by the former to regulate fraudulent financial advertisements have not been effective enough.
One of the major issues in holding Meta responsible is that there is no legal jurisdiction within the UK to impose fines on the company for hosting illegal advertisements. Although the FCA may act against unqualified advertisers, it does not have the authority to punish Meta for running such advertisements.
Ofcom, the UK communications regulator, controls Meta, but currently, it has no powers to issue fines for scam ads. This problem was addressed by the Online Safety Act implemented in 2025, but the clause dealing with paid-for scam ads is not going to be enforced until 2027.
The FCA lacks the capacity to act because most rogue advertisers are located outside the UK. This makes enforcement more complex and permits fraudulent advertisements to be shown on the platforms of Meta. By contrast, Meta has less lenient rules in Australia, as it may be fined up to $50 million if it does not stop scam ads.
A test by Reuters highlighted discrepancies in Meta's fraud detection tools. In the UK, Meta approved a suspicious advertisement to promote an investment scheme that promised 10% weekly returns, but in Australia, where Meta has tightened its fraud detection systems, the ad was blocked. This underscores the countries' differences in fraud detection abilities across countries.
Also Read: Meta Pushes Back Avocado AI Launch, Licenses Gemini Tech
Meta has also advanced its ad verification systems. Internal reports reveal that billions of users have been exposed to fraudulent internet advertising on e-commerce scams, investments, and illegal products.
According to a study conducted by Reset Tech, more than half of advertisements displaying UK banks were probably spam-like fraudulent investment schemes and counterfeit credit proposals.
Although Meta has undertaken the initiative of enhancing its ad verification systems, there are concerns about how the company can handle fraudulent content at a global level, particularly in highly risky markets such as the UK. Furthermore, Meta stated that it will increase the portion of ad revenue that comes from verified advertisers to 70% in 2025.