← All jurisdictions

Asia

Singapore

41%DSA alignment

Singapore runs a binding IMDA online-safety code regime delivering several genuine DSA-style user-protective elements (publicly published annual online-safety reports, child-safety duties and app-store age assurance backed by S$1m fines) but has no ad repository, researcher access, reach disclosure, recommender-transparency, minor-ad ban or independent-audit mandate.

In forceBroadcasting Act + Code of Practice for Online Safety (2023)Β· IMDA
Partly in forceCode of Practice for Online Safety β€” App Distribution Services (2025)Β· IMDA
In forceOnline Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act + Online Safety Commission (2025)Β· Online Safety Commission

Scored against the DSA

Each obligation the DSA imposes on very large platforms, and whether Singapore’s law requires the same. Cells cover DSA-style, user-protective transparency and accountability only.

  • Required by law
  • Partial / emerging
  • No such obligation
  • Undetermined

Transparency

  • No such obligation

    Public ad libraryDSA Art. 39

    No public all-ads library mandate.

  • Required

    Transparency reportsDSA Art. 15 / 24 / 42

    The Online Safety Code requires designated social media services to submit annual online-safety reports published on IMDA's website.

    Source β†—
  • No such obligation

    Researcher data accessDSA Art. 40

    No DSA Art. 40 analogue.

  • No such obligation

    Reach disclosureDSA Art. 24(2)

    No periodic public active-user disclosure duty; designation thresholds are IMDA-side.

Accountability

  • Systemic risk assessmentDSA Art. 34–35

    The Code imposes binding risk-mitigation and child-safety-by-design duties, but no standalone documented systemic risk-assessment obligation.

    Source β†—
  • No such obligation

    Independent auditDSA Art. 37

    No external audit mandate; IMDA assesses compliance itself via the annual reports.

  • No such obligation

    Algorithmic transparencyDSA Art. 27 / 38

    No recommender-transparency duty or chronological-feed requirement.

  • Required

    Regulator + penaltiesDSA Art. 49–52, 74

    IMDA may impose financial penalties up to S$1,000,000 for Online Safety Code non-compliance under the Broadcasting Act.

    Source β†—

Child protection

  • No such obligation

    No profiling ads to minorsDSA Art. 26(3) / 28

    No profiling-based-ad ban for minors (the Code restricts harmful content to children, not ad targeting).

  • Required

    Age assuranceBeyond the DSA

    The App Distribution Services Code requires designated app stores to implement age assurance from 1 April 2026 to block under-18 downloads of age-inappropriate apps.

    Source β†—
  • Required

    Child-safety duty of careDSA Art. 28

    The Online Safety Code imposes child-safety duties: minimise minors' exposure to harmful content and provide differentiated child accounts with restrictive default settings.

    Source β†—

On the horizon

What's being debated

Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act + Online Safety Commission

Designated social-media services must file annual online-safety/transparency reports to IMDA and provide reporting tools, with a new Online Safety Commission empowered to order takedowns and victim redress.

Latest: The Online Safety Commission began operations on 29 June 2026 under the OSRAA regime, building on the 2023 Code of Practice for Online Safety. source β†—

Compare every jurisdiction

Singapore is one of 30 non-EU jurisdictions we scored against the DSA. See them all side by side.