by Emily Pecot
Goldman Sachs, an investment bank firm, estimates the value of the social media influencer economy at around $250 billion and projects that it will reach $480 billion by 2027. According to a 2023 survey by Morning Consult, a global market research company, 57% of Gen Z (those born between 1997 and 2012) aspire to be content creators or social media influencers. Some of the younger members of Gen Z are getting a jump start on their careers and becoming kidfluencers.
Kidfluencers are minors who either create monetized social media content themselves or appear in family vlogs that are posted on YouTube, Instagram, or TikTok. Creators generate revenue through sponsorships and product placements, as well as the number of subscribers their channel has. The money generated can really add up for some kidfluencers.
For example, Ryan Kaji started reviewing toys on YouTube when he was just three years old. Today, at the age of 14, he remains one of the most recognizable kidfluencers worldwide, earning an estimated $35 million in 2024, according to Forbes, which ranks Ryan as the 7th highest-paid creator on YouTube.
Thousands of kidfluencers create content that generates revenue for themselves, their families and social media companies. A 2023 Harvard University study revealed that in 2022, social media platforms made nearly $11 billion in ad revenue from U.S. creators under the age of 18. Yet, most of these kids have virtually no legal protection.
The 2025 Netflix documentary series Bad Influence: The Dark Side of Kidfluencing and the 2025 Hulu series Born to Be Viral: The Real Lives of Kidfluencers revealed the hidden world of child content creation, drawing attention to ethical issues and, in some cases, abuse surrounding this form of entertainment. The Hulu series, for example, portrays some of the kids as reluctant participants at times, not wanting to be on camera at certain moments. Demonstrating how much money is at stake, one father in the series says, “There are some days where we could pay for an entire college career in one day.”
The Netflix series documents the story of Piper Rockelle, who began her career as a kidfluencer at the age of eight under the direction of her mother, Tiffany Smith, who manages Piper’s YouTube channel. Several of Piper’s friends who were also featured on her channel filed a lawsuit in 2022 against Smith, claiming she created an abusive and high-stress environment to create new content for the channel. The suit was settled in 2024 for $1.85 million.
The federal gap
Child actors on film sets or in commercials have labor law protections; however, kidfluencers fall into a legal gap, leaving them open to exploitation, sometimes by their own parents. The challenge is whether laws can keep up with a rapidly changing industry where a child’s bedroom can become a workplace and family dinner can become content, all with the click of a record button.
Leah Plunkett, a professor at Harvard Law School and Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, explains kidfluencer vulnerability.
“The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act leaves regulation of child entertainers as well as children in family businesses largely to the states,” says Professor Plunkett who is the author of Sharenthood: Why We Should Think Before We Talk about Our Kids Online. “Because child and teen influencers fall into this space where they are both performers as well as, oftentimes, in a family business, they really are at the mercy of state laws in one or both of those areas.”
Coogan laws protect child entertainers
In the 1920s, child actor Jackie Coogan became one of Hollywood’s first child stars, beginning his career in the 1921 Charlie Chaplin film The Kid when he was just six years old. You may be familiar with his work if you’ve ever watched an episode of the 1960s series The Addams Family—he played Uncle Fester.
In his years as a child actor, Coogan earned approximately $4 million—around $77 million in today’s dollars. When Coogan turned 21, he found out that his mother and stepfather had spent much of his income and there was very little left.
Coogan sued them in 1938. The publicity surrounding the trial led to California passing the California Child Actor’s Bill, also known as the Coogan Act, in 1939. The law requires that employers of child actors must deposit 15% of their earnings into a trust account, which the child can access when they turn 18. Coogan laws, similar to California’s, were enacted in New York, Illinois, Louisiana and New Mexico, but not until the early 2000s.
“The central insight of the Coogan Law is designed to recognize that minor performers may be very vulnerable to exploitation by the adults in their lives, including but not limited to their own parents,” Professor Plunkett says.
Matt McGee, founder of the Minor Performer Alliance, a national non-profit organization located in California that advocates for child entertainers, says that traditional Coogan laws apply only to formal entertainment contracts, like those signed between production companies and child actors. McGee points out that kidfluencers don’t qualify.
“Do kidfluencers have agreements or contracts with their parents? Unlikely,” McGee notes. “Or how about a 15-year-old who is producing content on their own? Do they have a contract? No, of course not.”
Beyond financial protections, McGee points out that traditional child entertainment regulation has “very specific laws that are designed to make sure these kids are getting their education, that they’re not being overworked, that they’re getting time to rest and play. None of that exists in the social media world.”
Providing some protection
Some states are creating new laws or updating existing child labor laws for the digital age. So far, four states, Illinois, California, Minnesota and Utah, have passed laws to protect kidfluencers.
In July 2024, Illinois became the first state to enact a law specifically for kidfluencers. SB 1782 states that if at least 30% of an adult’s paid content in a 30-day period includes a child’s name or image and the content earns at least 10 cents per view, a portion of the income must be deposited into a trust account. If a child appears in 50% of videos that generate revenue, the trust fund must receive 25% or more of the total earnings.
“These laws eliminate the formal contract aspect of the Coogan law,” says McGee.
The law also allows kidfluencers alleging rights violations to sue for lost income and receive punitive damages if adults knowingly or recklessly break the law.
California expanded its Coogan law in January 2025, extending protections to kidfluencers and increasing the percentage of earnings that must be saved in trusts to 30%. Minnesota enacted its own version in 2025, offering similar financial protection. Minnesota’s law also banned children under 14 from creating monetized content, and addressed privacy concerns by allowing minors to request family content be removed.
“That’s a pretty big assertion of minors’ digital privacy rights as effectively giving not just a vote but potentially a veto over a family’s digital entertainment business,” Professor Plunkett notes.
In March 2025, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed HB 322, protecting kids’ earnings and privacy when they’re featured in money-making online content. A high-profile child abuse case involving Utah-based family vlogger Ruby Franke helped push the legislation forward.
Franke pleaded guilty to four counts of aggravated child abuse under accusations that she physically abused her six children by, among other things, denying them food and water unless they performed more enthusiastically for her YouTube channel, which had 2.5 million subscribers. In 2024, Franke was sentenced to 30 years in prison.
In June 2025, the New Jersey Assembly passed A4302, which requires family members and caregivers who operate vlogs on social media platforms for compensation and use children or minors in their care in the vlog, to compensate the children or minors.” At press time, the bill is pending with the New Jersey Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee before going to a full vote in the New Jersey Senate.
The enforcement challenge
While these laws attempt to catch up to the industry, enforcing them is difficult. Traditional child entertainment laws control work hours and education requirements. When content creation happens at home, it often looks just like family life, making oversight nearly impossible.
For example, McGee asks, “If a 2-year-old is opening toys and it gets 100 million views that generates $100 million dollars, how much of that money is the child entitled to? All of it because he’s the star? Or none of it because he would have been opening the toys anyway, and the parents actually did all the filming, editing, preparation, and distribution? How do you define how much a child has earned?”
McGee also points out that the state has the authority to ensure compliance, which he says, would typically go through a welfare worker or studio teacher.
“But if nobody knows a shoot is happening or when it’s happening, it’s very difficult to report a violation,” he says.
Professor Plunkett notes the challenge in legislating what parents or guardians can share online about their family life and says this raises questions about protecting children versus respecting family privacy.
“There are a lot of arguments to be made that, absent this new generation of laws, a child who is appearing in family influencer content in particular is not actually working,” Professor Plunkett says. “They’re just in their house and their parent is making a decision to share with the outside world what’s happening in the house. There are some very legitimate, very urgent questions about family liberty, autonomy, and privacy.”
Despite growing awareness, Professor Plunkett says federal action on this issue seems unlikely.
“States really remain at the forefront of the law reform movement for child and teen influencers specifically,” Professor Plunkett says. “It would be wonderful to see our federal government step in with ethical, practical legislative interventions that could move quickly. But we are, I think, going to continue to see states really be at the forefront here.”
Discussion Questions
- Do kidfluencers deserve the same protection as child entertainers? Why or why not?
- What do you think of Matt McGee’s scenario about the 2-year-old opening toys? What do you think is a fair distribution of the revenue in that case? Explain your answer.
- According to the article, the social media influencer economy is projected to grow to $480 billion by 2027. Why do you think it is so popular? What draws viewers in? Explain your answer.
Glossary Words
minor—a person under 18 years of age.
punitive damages—damages that exceed simple compensation and usually awarded to punish a defendant in a civil case.
This article originally appeared in the winter 2026 issue of The Legal Eagle, NJSBF’s legal newspaper for kids.