In late 2023, Meta (the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp) introduced a new model in Europe that allows users to choose how their personal data is used for advertising. Unofficially known as “Pay or Consent,” this model offers two alternatives:
Paid subscription without personalized ads: Users pay a monthly fee (approximately €7.99 per month) to browse these social networks without personalized ads, meaning Meta commits to not using subscribers’ personal data for ad targeting. In other words, paying users get extra privacy.
Free use with personalized advertising: Users choose to continue using the platforms for free, but consent to their personal data being collected and processed so that the ads displayed are targeted based on their profile and activities. In this case, Meta collects information such as social media activity, contacts, and device data to target the ads displayed.
The subscription initially launched in November 2023 for users in the European Union, European Economic Area, and Switzerland. Initially, the standard advertised price was €9.99 per month (web version) or €12.99 on iOS/Android, covering one account; additional linked accounts would incur an additional monthly cost. However, in November 2024, after discussions with regulators, Meta reduced these prices by approximately 40%, to €5.99 (web) and €7.99 (mobile devices) per month, with €4–5 for each additional account. This reduction was intended to make the service more accessible and address the concerns of European authorities.
Why did Meta take this action? (GDPR and regulatory pressure)
The implementation of the paid model in Europe was not voluntary, but rather driven by strict regulatory requirements. Two European regulations are at the center of this discussion: the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The GDPR, in force since 2018, reinforced the need for free, informed, and unambiguous consent for the processing of personal data—especially for purposes such as behavioral advertising. The more recent DMA imposes specific obligations on big tech companies to promote competition and greater user protection. For example, the DMA now prohibits extensive user tracking for targeted advertising without explicit consent.
Given the European scenario, the question arises: could the Brazilian LGPD force a similar model here?
Although Meta has not yet officially implemented a subscription program without personalized ads in Brazil, there are signs that this may change. The main driver would be the evolution of LGPD enforcement. In recent years, the National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) has become more active and rigorous in its oversight of large technology companies. In July 2024, for example, the ANPD ordered the suspension of parts of Meta’s new privacy policy in Brazil, which allowed the use of user-published data to train artificial intelligence systems, citing evidence of LGPD violations. In this decision, the authority highlighted issues such as an inadequate legal basis, a lack of transparency, and limitations on data subjects’ rights, even imposing daily fines for non-compliance.
Although this specific case concerned the use of data for AI, the message is clear and extends to other areas: the ANPD does not hesitate to intervene against practices it deems abusive or unlawful. Personalized advertising could come under scrutiny in the future.
Another factor to consider is international alignment. Global companies tend to seek a certain uniformity in policies, even for operational convenience. If Meta has already built the infrastructure for a “no ads” subscription model in Europe, it’s plausible that it will consider expanding it to other regions as regulatory demand dictates..
Although there is no express obligation (as of yet) in the LGPD to offer an ad-free version, the law does impose a duty of full transparency regarding what data is collected and for what purpose. If a social network extensively uses personal data for advertising revenue, this must be made abundantly clear to the user, who in turn has the right to refuse or revoke consent. The lack of alternatives—that is, forcing the user to accept targeted advertising or abandon the service—can be interpreted as invalid consent (due to coercion) under the LGPD. In this sense, offering a paid alternative without data collection can be seen as a way to validate the consent of those who choose to continue with the free version. It would not be surprising to see the ANPD or even the Judiciary questioning the freedom of consent of Brazilian users if they have no real choice. The existence of a paid subscription, while potentially controversial (as it involves charging for privacy), at least materializes a choice for the user—which may be legally defensible.
So, could this “pay or consent” model happen in Brazil? In theory, yes, and there are both legal and strategic arguments to believe it’s only a matter of time before we see something similar..
On the other hand, challenges must be noted. Brazil, unlike the EU, does not have a joint regulatory ecosystem like GDPR + DMA + DSA; the LGPD acts alone on this issue. There are also economic considerations: the free, ad-supported model is what enables broad access to social networks. Charging a subscription may not be well received by a large portion of Brazilian users, and Meta naturally fears losing engagement (and advertising revenue) in an important market. Thus, the company may adopt a gradual approach: first, increase transparency and facilitate opt-out of personalized ads; then, if necessary, test an ad-free subscription with small groups or specific regions, and only then launch more widely if there is concrete regulatory pressure.
In conclusion, the LGPD already has the potential to transform the way digital marketing is done in Brazil. If the “novelty” of paying €7.99 per month for your privacy seemed distant, today it is no longer unthinkable. The European Union has shown a path, and while Brazil won’t simply copy and paste solutions from there, the underlying logic is the same: giving users real decision-making power over their data. Privacy, compliance, and digital law professionals should be aware: they may soon have to advise their clients or companies on subscription models vs. personalized ads here as well. And when that happens, it will be confirmation that the culture of data protection, driven by the LGPD, has indeed changed the rules of the game in the Brazilian market.
