Reviews, testimonials and influencer disclosure: the ACCC rules agencies get wrong

Online reviews and influencer content have become central to how many Australian businesses market themselves, but both are squarely covered by the Australian Consumer Law, and the regulator has made clear this is an active enforcement area rather than a grey zone nobody is watching. Under section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law, a business must not engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive, and this applies just as much to a manipulated star rating or an undisclosed paid endorsement as it does to a false claim in a traditional advertisement.

The scale of the problem, as the regulator itself has documented it, is worth understanding. In an internet sweep reported in December 2023, the ACCC reviewed 118 social media influencers and 137 businesses and found that 81 per cent of the influencers reviewed were making posts that raised Australian Consumer Law concerns, generally around undisclosed advertising, and 37 per cent of the businesses reviewed showed concerning conduct specifically around fake or manipulated online reviews. Fashion was the worst-performing category, with 96 per cent of fashion influencers reviewed making concerning posts. The ACCC has continued to treat this as an ongoing enforcement priority rather than a single sweep, and has said it will keep developing guidance for both platforms and businesses on what compliant conduct looks like.

Fabricated testimonials and undisclosed paid or incentivised endorsements can themselves amount to misleading or deceptive conduct, and responsibility does not sit only with the platform hosting the content. A business that pays or gifts a product to an influencer, coaches reviewers to leave positive feedback, or edits and filters reviews to remove genuine negative comments, can be exposed under the Australian Consumer Law just as directly as the individual influencer posting the content. This action already has real consequences: in one enforcement matter reported in March 2026, a business paid $39,600 across two ACCC infringement notices, one for instructing influencers on more than a hundred occasions not to disclose that they had received free products, and a separate notice for editing a video review to remove negative comments, reported as the regulator's first fine specifically over misleading influencer reviews.

Alongside the Australian Consumer Law, the advertising industry runs its own self-regulatory system through the Australian Association of National Advertisers, which writes the advertising codes, including the AANA Code of Ethics requiring that advertising and marketing content be clearly distinguishable as advertising. Ad Standards, established by the AANA in 1998, is the independent body that administers public complaints about the content of ads under these codes, with a Community Panel resolving complaints from the public and a separate Industry Jury resolving complaints between competing businesses. It operates alongside, rather than instead of, the ACCC's enforcement of the Australian Consumer Law, giving consumers and competitors a faster, lower-cost complaints pathway for advertising content specifically.

On the specific question of how influencer content should be labelled, AANA guidance is fairly direct: a relationship between an influencer and a brand needs to be clear, obvious and upfront to the audience, expressed in a way that is easily understood. Labels commonly considered insufficient on their own include "gifted," "#sp," "Spon," "Collab," "Affiliate" and phrases like "thanks to..." Clearer, commonly recommended alternatives include #ad, Advert, Advertising, Branded Content, Paid Partnership and Paid Promotion. This distinction matters in practice, since a subtle or easily missed label can still leave a business exposed to a misleading-conduct finding even where some form of disclosure was technically present. Consumer research commissioned by Ad Standards, published in July 2026, found that 84 per cent of Australians think it is important that influencers disclose when content is advertising, suggesting this is not simply a regulatory technicality but something audiences themselves notice and expect.

For a business working with an agency on reviews, testimonials or influencer campaigns, practical steps worth confirming include never editing or removing genuine reviews to hide negative feedback, never instructing an influencer to withhold that a product or payment was provided, using clear disclosure labels rather than ambiguous ones, and keeping records of what was actually agreed with any influencer or reviewer involved. The financial exposure for getting this wrong has also grown: from 28 March 2026, the maximum penalty per contravention for corporations under the Australian Consumer Law doubled to $100 million, up from $50 million, for serious breaches including misleading or deceptive conduct, underlining that this is treated as a substantive compliance area rather than a minor marketing detail.

This article is general information about how these rules work, not legal advice for your specific campaign or business. Our directory lists Australian marketing and advertising agencies if you are looking for one to help you get this right.

Frequently asked questions