IT’S RECENTLY BEEN revealed that a big chunk of the revenues of one of the biggest companies in Ireland is linked to fraud. 

Should authorities take action?

In theory, it seems like an obvious ‘yes’. But in practice, it’s less clear cut.

The company in question? Meta – which owns Facebook, Whatsapp and Instagram.

A recent report from Reuters revealed that the firm projected that 10% of its 2024 revenue would come from ads for scams and banned goods.

While 10% may not sound like much, for a business of Meta’s size, it’s enormous – 10% of its annual revenue equals $16 billion.

That 10% figure wasn’t an outside guess – it came from Meta’s own internal calculations.

According to internal documents seen by Reuters the tech giant also estimated that it shows its users about 15 billion ‘higher risk’ scam ads every day. That is, ads which show clear signs of being fraudulent.

That bears repeating – 15 billion. Not every month, or every week. Every. Single. Day.

How does Meta know this? Criminals don’t exactly just tell the company when they’re carrying out fraud.

According to Reuters’ reporting, the company has automated systems which track likely fraudulent behaviour. Meta only bans advertisers if it is ‘95% certain’ they are committing fraud, it’s reported. Any less, and it merely charges them a higher price to advertise – notionally, a way to discourage criminals who may be paying to show ads on its platforms.

AI scam ads 

Anyone who uses Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp – which is almost the entire adult population – will be familiar with the type of content we’re talking about, such as AI scam ads on Instagram. 

There are also a slew of Irish examples, such as Facebook ads using Irish celebrities to direct users to malware sites. 

Meta has its international headquarters in Dublin. A staggering amount of money flows through it – just over €85 billion in 2024. To illustrate the scale – this is not that far away from the Irish state’s entire budget in 2024 (€116 billion).

So if 10% of that money comes from scams and banned goods, we are talking about significant amounts of payments that may be linked to ads of that nature flowing through Irish accounts.

It’s worth noting that scam ads are a plague across most social media websites, not just Meta-owned ones. However, Meta’s platforms have perhaps the widest reach. 

Fraud is a growing problem – the number of Irish people getting scammed online has spiked in recent years. Fraud Smart, the anti-fraud initiative led by Banking and Payments Federation Ireland, said there had been a marked increase in pop-up adverts online and in AI-generated endorsements from celebrities on social media platforms. 

Many of those impacted are vulnerable retirees. 

These may be people losing their life savings, their homes. And Meta platforms are often how they first come into contact with the scammers who go on to rob them.

So we come back to the question posed initially – will Irish authorities take action?

Well, it doesn’t look promising.

To start, it’s worth noting that Irish officials are aware of this problem.

Earlier this year, the Department of Finance suggested introducing rules to force social media companies to vet who can post ads on their platforms.

However, the Department of Enterprise pushed back. As reported by the Irish Times, it warned that introducing more stringent requirements could be bad for business and would be ‘contrary to Ireland’s digital agenda’.

Asked by The Journal to explain its opposition to the move, the Department of Enterprise pointed to the EU Digital Services Act.

It said that the measure, which came into force last year, introduces new obligations for social media companies to “protect users and consumers of online services”.

However, fraud has continued to rise during that time – both in Ireland and across the EU as a whole.

While you could argue it’s early days for the Act, the Department of Finance at least seemed to think additional measures are required.

In its response to The Journal, The Department of Enterprise also did not address whether it thinks social media companies should have to vet ads.

It referenced Coimisiún na Meán (CnaM), which serves as one of Meta’s most important Irish regulators, and the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC), which plays a secondary role in combating misleading ads.

The Journal asked both bodies if they are investigating reports of Meta profiting from fraud.

CnaM did not directly address the issue.

Instead, it spoke generally about its various anti-fraud initiatives, such as forging a closer partnership with the CCPC.

It also referenced how the European Commission has taken action against Meta under the EU Digital Services Act. Last year, it issued a preliminary finding which said that Meta had breached the Act – no final penalty or fine has been issued yet.

However, this is only action at an EU level – not something initiated by an Irish watchdog.

The CCPC’s response also pointed to the EU’s work. Regarding its own role in combating scams, it mainly focused on how it runs information campaigns.

In its statement to The Journal, the CCPC said it is “urging consumers to take extra care when shopping because it can be so easy to lose large amounts of money in just a few clicks”.

Finally, The Journal also asked An Garda Síochána if law enforcement investigated reports of Meta’s scam revenues. It again referenced the Digital Services Act and highlighted how CnaM is the lead regulator for the Digital Services Act, while the CCPC takes a secondary role.

The Garda spokesperson did not address whether gardaí themselves have investigated social media giants. 

Gardaí do, obviously, investigate scams that may originate on Facebook and other Meta platforms and regularly issue anti-fraud warnings. In a case that came before the courts in December, it was heard that officers investigating a €27,000 “smishing scam” that involved Facebook were met “with resistance” from the tech firm.

Odds stacked against consumer

The issue with the advice about vigilance from the likes of the CCPC is obvious – it shifts responsibility for the scam ads. Rather than focusing on the parties that profit from the fraud, it is instead up to the consumer to not get scammed.

This is despite the fact that the odds are increasingly stacked against them.

According to the documents covered in the Reuters report, users who click on scam ads are likely to see more of them because of Meta’s ad-personalisation system, which seeks to deliver similar ads based on the user’s interests.

With improvements in AI, fraudulent ads are also becoming both more convincing and better targeted. 

There have been multiple cases of high profile Irish people taking legal action against Meta over these ads.

And it’s not just Meta - Taoiseach Micheál Martin took action against Google for the same thing.

Again, the responsibility falls on the individual.

What does Meta have to say?

A spokesperson for Meta said that scams were spiking across the internet and were being driven by criminals and sophisticated, organised crime syndicates who were “constantly evolving their schemes to evade detection”.

They added: “We are focused on rooting them out by using advanced technical measures and new tools, disrupting criminal scam networks, working with industry partners and law enforcement, and raising awareness on our platforms about scam activity. And when we determine that bad actors have violated our rules prohibiting fraud and scams, we take action.”

The internal documents show, however, that left to police scams itself, Meta is often slow to take action.

For example, Reuters reported that, according to a 2023 document, Meta users filed 100,000 “valid” reports of contact from scammers. Meta “ignored or incorrectly rejected” 96% of reports, the publication added. However another document from the same period noted that safety staff hoped improve their performance and significantly reduce that figure.

In its response to The Journal, Meta highlighted various measures it had put in place to tackle ads which violated its fraud policies over the last 18 months and said it had stepped up actions to detect and remove such content.  

So where does this leave us?

We have a company which has been shown to have displayed billions of suspected scam ads to its customers in the space of just a single day. 

However, none of Ireland’s officials – regulators, government, or law enforcement – seem to be taking much action.

Almost all seem happy to point to EU enforcement – while sidelining Ireland’s own role as the international HQ for these social media firms, and where many of their corporate entities are based.

The Irish state received €366.8 million in corporate tax from Meta last year. It’s almost certain that a portion of that came from ads linked to fraud.

The enormous riches which the Irish state receives from the presence of these major firms is clearly a factor in the stance of entities like the Department of Enterprise. 

Big Tech needs to be kept sweet. 

Not just the corporate tax, but all the jobs and spin-off revenue which they provide. It’s crucial for the country’s finances.

But no company should be above the law. Meta – by its own admission, as shown in the internal documents examined by Reuters – is one of the world’s biggest enablers of scams.

Official Ireland has looked the other way for long enough – it’s time for action.