Nearly 30% of the people who reported losing money to scammers in 2025 told the Federal Trade Commission that the first contact came through social media, and reported losses in that group reached $2.1 billion. The agency repeated the figure on September 24, 2026, when it asked for public comment on whether its impersonation rule should be updated to address platforms that carry scam ads. That notice is an early step, and no new requirement has been adopted.
Affiliate links — we may earn a commission.
How the FTC counted the 2025 social media losses
The fuller count sits in an FTC Data Spotlight published April 27, 2026 by staff of the agency’s Division of Consumer Response and Operations. It puts reported losses to scams that began on social media at $2.1 billion for 2025, eight times the $261 million reported for 2020. The same document says nearly 30% of the people who reported a money loss named social media as the place the scam started.
The scope matters. Every figure comes from reports that people chose to file, so the totals are self-reported and cover only those who said their first contact was on social media. They are not a measure of all scam losses, and they are not the whole of fraud in the United States. In the Spotlight’s ranking of first-contact methods for 2025, a website or app came first at 31%, social media second at 28%, then phone calls at 11%, email at 10% and text messages at 7%.
Investment scams make up more than half of the social media total
Within the $2.1 billion, the Spotlight identifies investment scams as the largest category, at $1.1 billion, or more than half of the social media total. Shopping scams are the second type it highlights, and it says they account for more than 40% of social media scam victims. Romance scams are the third: nearly 60% of the people who reported a romance scam said it started on social media, and those reports carried $298 million in losses.
The staff report names Facebook as the platform with the most reported losses, followed distantly by WhatsApp and Instagram. By age, social media was the costliest way for scammers to make first contact for every group under 80. For people in their 60s and 70s it was also the most commonly reported way the scam began, which makes a platform-level question more than an abstract one for retirees who use these services to keep up with family.
A September notice asks whether ad tools help impersonators
The September 24 announcement is an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, a request for information that comes before any proposed rule. According to the FTC release, the Commission voted 2-0 to send it to the Federal Register. The notice concerns the Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses and asks whether the ad-optimization practices of social media, search engines and other digital marketplace platforms help impersonation scams reach people.
The questions it poses are specific. It asks about the financial incentives that drive the platforms, whether those practices amount to unfair or deceptive acts, and what regulatory measures might follow, including vetting advertisers, monitoring ads and removing scam content. The comment period runs for 60 days after the notice is published in the Federal Register, which the release describes as still to come, and submitted comments will be posted to Regulations.gov. Until a rule is proposed, finalized and takes effect, platforms face no new obligation from this notice.
Where the scam begins, and what the FTC tells people to check
The Spotlight’s own advice is short. It recommends limiting who can see a person’s posts and contacts on social media, and checking a seller by searching the company name along with the words “scam” or “complaint” before paying for a deal. Both steps aim at the moment a stranger or a lookalike account makes contact.
The FTC’s September 28 consumer alert on health insurance scams shows the same pattern in a different setting. Its authors, staff of the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, write that “bad actors often use web addresses that look similar to government website addresses,” and tell readers to look for small “Ad” or “Sponsored” labels and to check for .gov endings. Suspected scams go to ReportFraud.ftc.gov and to a state attorney general, and Medicare-related ones to Medicare.gov or 800-633-4227.
Those steps deal with the message once it arrives. A separate question is how a scammer knows whom to approach and what to say. Names, phone numbers and home addresses that sit on data-broker and people-search lists can give a scammer that detail before any contact is made, and a service such as Incogni sends removal requests to those brokers on a customer’s behalf. Nothing in the FTC’s notice addresses brokers; its questions are aimed at the platforms and their advertising tools.
The FTC’s own framing keeps the numbers in proportion. Christopher Mufarrige, director of the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in the release that consumers reported nearly $3.5 billion in losses to impersonation fraud in 2025, and that the true cost is likely far higher. The release adds that the agency received more than 1 million imposter scam reports that year, which is the base the new rulemaking notice rests on.
Personal details that reach scammers before the first message
Scammers working through social media rarely start from nothing, because a name, a phone number or a home address tells them whom to approach and what to say. Those details often sit on data-broker and people-search lists, which are separate from the platforms the FTC is asking about. Less personal data on those lists can mean fewer scam calls, texts and emails, though it does not close off an ad or a direct message.
Drafted with AI assistance from FTC publications, then checked against those sources before publication.
Warren Cohen is a finance writer based in Phoenix, Arizona, covering personal finance topics including credit, banking, and beginner investing. He earned his degree in business administration from Arizona State University and began his career working in consumer finance, where he gained direct experience with lending and credit systems. He now writes for personal finance websites and fintech platforms, focusing on clear, practical content that helps readers make informed financial decisions.
