XML 55 R20.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.4

Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Contractual Commitments We have $131.05 billion of non-cancelable contractual commitments as of December 31, 2025. These commitments are mostly related to third-party cloud capacity arrangements and our continued investments in servers and network infrastructure, data centers, and consumer hardware products in Reality Labs. The following is a schedule, by years, of non-cancelable contractual commitments as of December 31, 2025 (in millions):
2026 | $ | 30,634 |
2027 | 22,166 |
2028 | 21,221 |
2029 | 19,761 |
2030 | 19,407 |
Thereafter | 17,857 |
Total | $ | 131,046 |
Additionally, as part of the normal course of business, we have entered into multi-year agreements ranging from three to 25 years to purchase clean and renewable energy that do not specify a fixed or minimum volume commitment. The ultimate spend under these agreements may vary and will be based on actual volume purchased. Legal and Related Matters With respect to the cases, actions, and inquiries described below, we evaluate the associated developments on a regular basis and accrue a liability when we believe a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In addition, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that we may incur a loss in some of these matters. Unless otherwise noted, with respect to the matters described below that do not include an estimate of the amount of loss or range of possible loss, such losses or range of possible losses either cannot be estimated or are not individually material, but we believe there is a reasonable possibility that they may be material in the aggregate. We are also party to various other legal proceedings, claims, and regulatory, tax or government inquiries and investigations that arise in the ordinary course of business. Additionally, we are required to comply with various legal and regulatory obligations around the world. The requirements for complying with these obligations may be uncertain and subject to interpretation and enforcement by regulatory and other authorities, and any failure or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could eventually lead to asserted legal or regulatory action. With respect to these other legal proceedings, claims, regulatory, tax, or government inquiries and investigations, and other matters, asserted and unasserted, we evaluate the associated developments on a regular basis and accrue a liability when we believe a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In addition, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that we may incur a loss in some of these other matters. We believe that the amount of losses or any estimable range of possible losses with respect to these other matters will not, either individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business and consolidated financial statements. The ultimate outcome of the legal and related matters described in this section, such as whether the likelihood of loss is remote, reasonably possible, or probable, or if and when the reasonably possible range of loss is estimable, is inherently uncertain. Therefore, if one or more of these matters were resolved against us for amounts in excess of management's estimates of loss, our results of operations and financial condition, including in a particular reporting period in which any such outcome becomes probable and estimable, could be materially adversely affected. For information regarding income tax contingencies, see Note 14 — Income Taxes. Privacy and Related Matters Beginning on March 20, 2018, multiple putative class actions were filed in state and federal courts in the United States and elsewhere against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging various causes of action in connection with our platform and user data practices as well as the misuse of certain data by a developer that shared such data with third parties in violation of our terms and policies, and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. With respect to the putative class actions alleging fraud and violations of consumer protection, privacy, and other laws in connection with the same matters, several of the cases brought on behalf of consumers in the United States were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (In re Facebook, Inc., Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation). On December 22, 2022, the parties entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the lawsuit, which provided for a payment of $725 million by us and became final on May 14, 2025. In addition, our platform and user data practices, as well as the events surrounding the misuse of certain data by a developer, became the subject of U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), state attorneys general, and other government inquiries in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions. We entered into a settlement and modified consent order to resolve the FTC inquiry, which took effect in April 2020. Among other matters, our settlement with the FTC required us to pay a penalty of $5.0 billion which was paid in April 2020 upon the effectiveness of the modified consent order. In addition, in December 2025, we entered into a settlement agreement with California to resolve its lawsuit alleging violations of consumer protection laws, which is subject to court approval. Certain other state attorneys general inquiries and litigation and certain government inquiries in other jurisdictions remain ongoing. On June 1, 2023, the court presiding over the lawsuit filed by the District of Columbia granted our motion for summary judgment, resolving the case in our favor. On June 29, 2023, the District of Columbia filed a notice of appeal. The appeal was heard on January 30, 2025 and on July 31, 2025, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed the decision on procedural grounds and remanded the matter to the lower court. Trial in the New Mexico Attorney General's case, which has expanded to include various claims related to content moderation issues, is scheduled to begin on September 8, 2026. On July 16, 2021, a stockholder derivative action was filed in Delaware Court of Chancery against certain of our directors and officers asserting breach of fiduciary duty and related claims relating to our historical platform and user data practices, as well as our settlement with the FTC. On July 20, 2021, other stockholders filed an amended derivative complaint in a related Delaware Chancery Court action, asserting breach of fiduciary duty and related claims against certain of our current and former directors and officers in connection with our historical platform and user data practices. On November 4, 2021, the lead plaintiffs filed a second amended and consolidated complaint in the stockholder derivative action. The pending consolidated matter is In re Facebook Inc. Derivative Litigation. On January 19, 2022, we filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied in part on May 10, 2023. The insider trading claim was dismissed as to all defendants except Mark Zuckerberg, and the motion was denied as to the breach of fiduciary duty claims. Trial began on July 16, 2025. On July 17, 2025, the parties agreed to a settlement in principle to resolve all claims in the action, which is subject to court approval. On May 3, 2023, the FTC filed a public administrative proceeding (In the Matter of Facebook, Inc.) seeking substantial changes to the modified consent order, which took effect in April 2020 after its entry by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The changes sought by the FTC are set forth in a proposed order and include, among others, a prohibition on our use of minors' data for any commercial purposes, changes to the composition of our board of directors, and significant limitations on our ability to modify and launch new products. On May 31, 2023, we filed a motion before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking to enjoin the FTC from further pursuing its agency process to modify the modified consent order. On November 27, 2023, the district court denied our motion, and we then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (U.S. v. Facebook, Inc.) and sought to stay the FTC proceeding pending resolution of the appeal. Our motion for a stay pending appeal was denied in March 2024. After the underlying appeal was briefed and oral argument was held on November 5, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its decision on May 16, 2025, reversing the district court's denial of our motion on jurisdictional grounds, and directed the district court to consider the merits of our arguments. On July 10, 2025, the case was remanded to the district court to consider our claims in light of the Court of Appeals' determination that the district court retains jurisdiction over the entirety of the consent order. On December 23, 2025, the district court ordered a schedule for supplemental briefing in light of the Court of Appeals decision, with briefing due to be complete by May 2026. On November 29, 2023, we separately filed a complaint, also in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Meta Platforms, Inc. v. FTC), asserting constitutional challenges to the structure of the FTC, and seeking to preliminarily enjoin the FTC proceeding during the pendency of the litigation. On December 13, 2023, the FTC filed an opposition to our motion for preliminary injunction and a motion to dismiss the complaint. On March 14, 2024, the district court denied our motion to preliminarily enjoin the FTC proceeding during the pendency of the litigation, and also denied the FTC's motion to dismiss our complaint without prejudice, pending the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in SEC v. Jarkesy (Jarkesy). Our motion for a stay of the FTC proceeding pending appeal was denied in March 2024. Both the district court action and the appeal were stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in Jarkesy. Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Jarkesy on June 27, 2024, the government filed a renewed motion to dismiss, which was fully briefed as of October 18, 2024. On June 29, 2025, the district court granted our request for a stay in light of the Court of Appeals' May 16, 2025 decision in the jurisdictional case, and on January 20, 2026, the district court continued the stay and ordered the parties to file a status update by June 8, 2026. On April 1, 2024, we filed our response to the FTC's Order to Show Cause, arguing, among other things, that the Order to Show Cause proceeding was legally improper. Per FTC orders, we completed briefing on threshold legal issues on July 18, 2024, and the FTC held oral argument before the Commissioners on those issues on November 12, 2024. On January 10, 2025, the Commission issued a decision on certain threshold legal issues, including that the Commission has statutory authority to modify consent orders. The Commission stated that its decision is subject to Meta's jurisdictional challenges then pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in U.S. v. Facebook, Inc., and that the nature and scope of any further administrative proceedings would be addressed at a later date. On July 30, 2025, the Commission issued an order staying the Order to Show Cause proceeding pending final resolution of the two judicial cases we filed challenging the proceeding. Through the administrative process, the FTC could amend the order to impose the additional requirements set forth in the proposed order. We should have the opportunity to appeal an FTC decision modifying the order and could request the appellate court to stay the enforcement of the modifications to the order while the appeal is pending. It is unclear whether the appeal or the request for a stay would be successful. We also notify the Irish Data Protection Commission (IDPC), our lead European Union privacy regulator under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), of certain other personal data breaches and privacy issues, issue similar notifications to European regulators under other laws (such as UK GDPR and Member State implementations of the ePrivacy Directive), and are subject to inquiries and investigations by the IDPC and other European regulators regarding various aspects of our regulatory compliance. For example, the IDPC is continuing to assess the compliance of our "subscription for no ads" consent model with requirements under the GDPR. In addition, on May 12, 2023, the IDPC issued a Final Decision concluding that Meta Platforms Ireland's reliance on Standard Contractual Clauses in respect of certain transfers of European Economic Area (EEA) Facebook user data was not in compliance with the GDPR. The IDPC issued an administrative fine of EUR €1.2 billion as well as corrective orders, which is described further in "Legal Proceedings" contained in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The interpretation of the GDPR is still evolving, including through decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and draft decisions in investigations by the IDPC are subject to review by other European privacy regulators as part of the GDPR's cooperation and consistency mechanisms, which may lead to significant changes in the final outcome of such investigations. As a result, the interpretation and enforcement of the GDPR, as well as the imposition and amount of penalties for non-compliance, are subject to significant uncertainty. Although we are vigorously defending our regulatory compliance, we have accrued significant amounts for loss contingencies related to these inquiries and investigations in Europe, and we believe there is a reasonable possibility that additional accruals for losses related to these matters could be material individually or in the aggregate. In addition, we are subject to individual and class actions in Europe relating to matters that are or have been the subject of regulatory investigations. Beginning on June 7, 2021, multiple putative class actions were filed against us alleging that we improperly received individuals' information from third-party websites or apps via our business tools in violation of our terms and various state and federal laws and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief (for example, In re Meta Pixel Healthcare Litigation; In re Meta Pixel Tax Filing Cases; Frasco v. Flo Health, Inc.; Doe v. Hey Favor, Inc. et al.; Doe v. GoodRx Holdings, Inc. et al. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California; and Rickwalder, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. in the Santa Clara County Superior Court). These cases are in different stages, but several of our motions to dismiss have been denied in whole or in part, while certain others have been granted in whole or in part. In Rickwalder, the Superior Court denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification and the plaintiffs have appealed that decision. In Flo Health, on August 1, 2025, a jury returned a verdict on liability in favor of the plaintiffs and on behalf of a California subclass on the sole claim remaining against Meta under Section 632 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act. Plaintiffs are seeking $5,000 in statutory damages per class member and have asserted that there are up to approximately 1.6 million class members. The amount of potential damages is uncertain at this time. In addition, we are subject to individual and class actions in Europe, as well as regulatory investigations in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere, relating to similar matters with regard to our business tools. Competition We are subject to various litigation and government inquiries and investigations, formal or informal, by competition authorities in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions. Such investigations, inquiries, and lawsuits concern, among other things, our business practices in the areas of social networking or social media services, digital advertising, and/or mobile or online applications, as well as our acquisitions. For example, in 2019 we became the subject of antitrust investigations by the FTC and U.S. Department of Justice. On December 9, 2020, the FTC filed a complaint (FTC v. Meta Platforms, Inc.) against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging that we engaged in anticompetitive conduct and unfair methods of competition in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, including by acquiring Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 and by maintaining conditions on access to our platform. The FTC sought a permanent injunction against our company's alleged violations of the antitrust laws, and other equitable relief, including divestiture or reconstruction of Instagram and WhatsApp. On June 28, 2021, the court granted our motion to dismiss the complaint filed by the FTC with leave to amend. On August 19, 2021, the FTC filed an amended complaint, and on October 4, 2021, we filed a motion to dismiss this amended complaint. On January 11, 2022, the court denied our motion to dismiss the FTC's amended complaint. On April 5, 2024, we filed our motion for summary judgment and the FTC filed its opposition and its own motion for partial summary judgment on May 24, 2024. On November 13, 2024, the court granted in part and denied in part both our and the FTC's motions for summary judgment. Trial began on April 14, 2025 and concluded on May 27, 2025. On November 18, 2025, the court granted judgment in our favor. On January 20, 2026, the FTC filed a notice of appeal of that ruling. Multiple putative class actions have also been filed in state and federal courts in the United States and in the United Kingdom against us alleging violations of antitrust laws and other causes of action in connection with these acquisitions and/or other alleged anticompetitive conduct, and seeking damages and injunctive relief. Several of the cases brought on behalf of certain advertisers and users in the United States were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Klein et al., v. Meta Platforms, Inc.). On December 30, 2024, we filed our motion for summary judgment in the putative class action brought on behalf of certain advertisers, which is pending with the court. On January 24, 2025, the court denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification in the action brought on behalf of users, permitting it to proceed only on an individual basis as to the named plaintiffs. On September 29, 2025, in the user action, the court granted our motion, entering judgment in our favor. On October 27, 2025, plaintiffs in the user action filed a notice of appeal. On February 11, 2022, a putative class action was filed against us in the UK Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) under the UK collective proceedings regime (Lovdahl-Gormsen v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al.). On October 6, 2023, following the denial of class certification, the class representative submitted an amended claim alleging abuse of dominance relating to aspects of our data processing practices and seeking damages. The CAT certified the amended claim on February 15, 2024. Trial is scheduled to begin in September 2027. We are also subject to litigation in Europe brought by news and media companies alleging anticompetitive conduct in relation to aspects of our historic data processing practices. For example, on December 1, 2023, 87 news media companies filed a joint action against us in Spain in relation to our legal basis under the GDPR for behavioral advertising, alleging unfair competition and abuse of dominance (Asociacion de Medios de Informacion (AMI) v. Meta Ireland). On November 19, 2025, the court issued judgment against us, finding that AMI had failed to establish abuse of dominance but upholding its case on unfair competition and awarding damages of approximately EUR €542 million. We have appealed the decision. In addition, on October 24, 2024, ten radio and television publishers commenced a separate claim against us in Spain on the same basis (Union de Televisiones Comerciales Asociadas (UTECA) v. Meta Ireland). In addition, on April 29, 2025, a similar unfair competition claim was filed against us by 67 media companies in France (Amaury et al. v. Meta Platforms Ireland Limited). Trial is expected to take place in 2027. In December 2022, the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections alleging that we tie Facebook Marketplace to Facebook and use data in a manner that infringes European Union competition rules. On November 18, 2024, the European Commission issued a decision that Meta infringed Article 102 on the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union in relation to certain alleged business practices relating to Facebook Marketplace and imposed a fine of approximately EUR €798 million. We appealed the European Commission's decision on January 28, 2025. In March 2024, the European Commission opened an investigation into the compliance of our "subscription for no ads" consent model with requirements under Article 5(2) of the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The European Commission issued preliminary findings on July 1, 2024 reflecting its preliminary view that our model does not comply with such requirements. In April 2025, the European Commission issued a final decision that our "subscription for no ads" model does not comply with such requirements and imposed a fine of EUR €200 million. Based on feedback from the European Commission in connection with the DMA, we launched less personalized ads (LPA) in November 2024 and made significant modifications to LPA since the European Commission issued its final decision. We appealed the European Commission's decision on July 4, 2025, but further modifications to our model may be imposed during the appeal process, which could result in a materially worse user experience for European users and a significant impact to our European business and revenue. Securities and Other Actions Beginning on March 20, 2018, multiple putative class actions and derivative actions were filed in state and federal courts in the United States and elsewhere against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws, breach of fiduciary duties, and other causes of action in connection with our platform and user data practices as well as the misuse of certain data by a developer that shared such data with third parties in violation of our terms and policies, and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. Beginning on July 27, 2018, two putative class actions were filed in federal court in the United States against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws in connection with the disclosure of our earnings results for the second quarter of 2018 and seeking unspecified damages. These two actions subsequently were transferred and consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (In Re Facebook, Inc. Securities Litigation) with the putative securities class action described above relating to our platform and user data practices. In a series of orders in 2019 and 2020, the district court granted our motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims. On January 17, 2022, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the order dismissing their case, and on October 18, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decision affirming in part and reversing in part the district court's order dismissing the plaintiffs' case. We filed a petition for writ of certiorari on March 4, 2024 with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of the Ninth Circuit's order. The Supreme Court granted in part our petition for writ of certiorari on June 10, 2024, and following oral argument issued an order on November 22, 2024 dismissing the grant of certiorari as improvidently granted. On January 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit returned the case to the district court. On July 1, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint. On September 2, 2025, we filed a motion to dismiss the fourth amended complaint. We are also subject to other government inquiries and investigations relating to our business activities and disclosure practices. For example, beginning in September 2021, we became subject to government investigations and requests relating to a former employee's allegations and release of internal company documents concerning, among other things, our algorithms, advertising and user metrics, and content enforcement practices, as well as misinformation and other undesirable activity on our platform, and user well-being. We have since received additional requests relating to these and other topics. Beginning on October 27, 2021, multiple putative class actions and derivative actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws, breach of fiduciary duties, and other causes of action in connection with the same matters, and seeking unspecified damages (Ohio Pub. Empl. Ret. Sys. v. Meta Platforms, Inc.). On September 30, 2024, the court dismissed certain claims with leave to amend, but determined certain claims regarding content enforcement practices and user well-being could proceed against us and certain of our current and former directors and officers. On March 8, 2022, a putative class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws in connection with the disclosure of our earnings results for the fourth quarter of 2021 and seeking unspecified damages (Plumbers & Steamfitters Local 60 Pension Trust v. Meta Platforms, Inc.). On July 18, 2023, the court dismissed the claims against Meta and its officers with leave to amend. On September 18, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and on September 17, 2024, the court dismissed the claims with prejudice. On October 14, 2024, plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal and oral argument was held on January 6, 2026. Youth-Related Actions Beginning in January 2022, we became subject to litigation and other proceedings that were filed in various federal and state courts in the United States as well as other jurisdictions alleging that Facebook and Instagram cause "social media addiction" in users, with most proceedings focused on those under 18 years old, resulting in various mental health and other harms. Putative class actions have been filed in the United States, Brazil, Canada, Europe, and elsewhere on behalf of users in those jurisdictions, and numerous school districts, municipalities, and tribal nations have filed public nuisance claims in the United States, Brazil, and/or Canada based on similar allegations. On October 6, 2022, the U.S. federal cases were centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction Product Liability Personal Injury Litigation). Beginning in March 2023, U.S. states and territories began filing lawsuits on these topics in various federal and state courts. These additional lawsuits include allegations regarding violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), child sexual abuse material and other child safety concerns, as well as violations of state consumer protection laws, unfair business practices, public nuisance, and products liability, with proceedings focused on our alleged business practices (including the use of end-to-end encryption) and harms to users under 18 years old. Certain of the lawsuits described above have since expanded to include various other claims relating to our services, including with respect to age verification, AI and AI chatbots, deceptive advertising, illicit or illegal activity with respect to drugs, fraud, and firearms, and privacy-related matters, among others. These lawsuits seek damages and injunctive relief, and include cases filed by various state attorneys general in In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction Product Liability Personal Injury Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, as well as various state courts around the country. Trial in the first of the personal injury cases began on January 27, 2026 in Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 5255 pending in Los Angeles County California Superior Court. Trial in the first of the state attorneys general cases is currently scheduled to begin on February 2, 2026 in the First Judicial District Court of New Mexico, in a case brought by the New Mexico Attorney General. Trials in other state attorneys general cases are currently scheduled or expected to be scheduled in the second half of 2026 or in 2027. The first trial in the multidistrict litigation (In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction Product Liability Personal Injury Litigation) is a school district bellwether case and is scheduled to begin on June 15, 2026. Across the cases described above, the damages or penalties that plaintiffs have indicated they intend to seek range widely in amount, including in certain cases up to the high tens of billions of dollars. In addition, beginning in November 2024, counsel for over one hundred thousand individual claimants have sent mass arbitration demands relating to "social media addiction" and related harms allegedly caused by Instagram. We are also subject to government investigations and requests from multiple regulators in various jurisdictions globally concerning the use of our products and services, and the alleged mental and physical health and safety and privacy impacts on users, particularly younger users, as well as the accuracy of our statements about youth and parental features. On May 16, 2024, the European Commission opened formal proceedings assessing our compliance with certain requirements under Articles 28, 34, and 35 of the Digital Services Act (DSA), including the way in which we identified, assessed, and mitigated against certain systemic risks to minors and other vulnerable users that may stem from the design and functioning of Instagram and Facebook. Other Actions Beginning on August 15, 2018, multiple putative class actions were filed against us alleging that we inflated our estimates of the potential audience size for advertisements, resulting in artificially increased demand and higher prices. The cases were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (DZ Reserve v. Facebook, Inc.) and seek unspecified damages and injunctive relief. In a series of rulings in 2019, 2021, and 2022, the court dismissed certain of the plaintiffs' claims, but permitted their fraud and unfair competition claims to proceed. On March 29, 2022, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for class certification. On March 21, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the order granting class certification. On May 3, 2024, we filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, which was denied by the Ninth Circuit. We filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on October 2, 2024, which was denied. We then moved to compel arbitration, which the district court denied. We appealed the denial of our motion to compel arbitration to the Ninth Circuit on December 3, 2025. The matter is stayed in district court pending resolution of our appeal. Beginning on July 7, 2023, multiple cases, including putative class actions, were filed against us in the United States and elsewhere, alleging that we improperly acquired, distributed, and used various copyrighted materials and/or other types of data to train our artificial intelligence models and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. In the United States, statutory damages for copyright liability are calculated on a per work basis, which may result in substantial damages, particularly given the large volumes of data required to train AI models. The cases in the United States, which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Chabon, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. and Farnsworth v. Meta Platforms, Inc.) and U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Huckabee, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al., which was subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California), have been consolidated into Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. Motions for summary judgment were heard in this case on May 1, 2025, including on the issue of the applicability of the fair use defense to use of copyrighted books for generative AI model training. On June 25, 2025, the court granted our motion for summary judgment on fair use as to the named plaintiffs in the case. The parties will proceed to brief the remaining claim of copyright infringement due to alleged distribution of books to third parties during the downloading process. The court is scheduled to hear summary judgment motions on July 16, 2026. Beginning in November 2025, additional cases with similar claims were filed against us in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Entrepreneur Media v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Carreyrou et al. v. Anthropic PBC, et al. and TED Entertainment, Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc.). We expect some of these cases will be set for trial beginning in mid-2027. On April 30, 2024, the European Commission opened formal proceedings against us to assess Facebook and Instagram's compliance with certain requirements under Articles 14, 16, 17, 20, 24, 25, 34, 35, and 40 of the DSA, regarding a range of topics including elections, content reporting and appeals, third-party access to data, political content recommendations, potential deceptive advertising and disinformation, including the way in which we identified, assessed, and mitigated against certain systemic risks on Instagram and Facebook. The Commission issued preliminary findings with respect to some of these topics on October 24, 2025 reflecting its preliminary view that we have infringed DSA obligations related to notice and action mechanisms for illegal content reporting, content moderation decision appeals, and data access for researchers. We have an opportunity to respond to the preliminary findings, and would also have an opportunity to appeal a final decision by the Commission. We are also responding to regulatory inquiries and litigation related to allegedly deceptive advertising, including but not limited to financial scams and the use of our services to promote deceptive activity, in other parts of the world. We are also subject to other litigation and government inquiries and investigations relating to advertising on our platform and our alleged role in causing or contributing to various societal harms, including illegal activity with respect to drugs, fraud, deceptive activity, unlawful discrimination, and other harms potentially impacting large numbers of people. We have received additional requests relating to these and other topics including in connection with news outlet reporting regarding these issues in the fourth quarter of 2025. In addition, we are subject to litigation and other proceedings involving law enforcement and other regulatory agencies, including in particular in Brazil, Russia, and other countries in Europe, in order to ascertain the precise scope of our legal obligations to comply with the requests of those agencies, including our obligation to disclose user information in particular circumstances. A number of such instances have resulted in the assessment of fines and penalties against us. We believe we have multiple legal grounds to satisfy these requests or prevail against associated fines and penalties, and we intend to vigorously defend such fines and penalties. Indemnifications In the normal course of business, to facilitate transactions of services and products, we have agreed to indemnify certain parties with respect to certain matters. We have agreed to hold certain parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or out of intellectual property infringement or other claims made by third parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. In addition, we have entered into indemnification agreements with our officers, directors, and certain employees, and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain similar indemnification obligations. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification agreements due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, payments made by us under these agreements have not had a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, as of December 31, 2025, there was not a reasonable possibility we had incurred a material loss with respect to indemnification of such parties. Liabilities recorded for costs related to indemnification through December 31, 2025 were not material.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration