Some Sponsored Videos Featuring Children May Fall Under Tennessee’s New Rules

Yes—a brand-funded video may fall under Tennessee’s child-influencer law when it is filmed in Tennessee and shared online in exchange for compensation. Sponsorship alone does not settle the question, however. The official text of Senate Bill 1469, enacted as Public Chapter 687, does not expressly mention brand deals, endorsements, flat fees, affiliate commissions, or gifted products. The applicable rule also depends on the minor’s age and participation.

The short answer: brand deals may be covered, but not automatically

The law defines “content creation” as “the act of sharing video content filmed in this state on an online platform in exchange for compensation.” Because the definition uses “compensation” rather than limiting itself to platform advertising revenue, a creator should not assume that money paid directly by a brand is outside the law.

That does not mean every paid collaboration is covered in the same way. The enacted language does not specifically identify sponsorships or explain how each creator payment model should be treated. A campaign paid by views has a clearer connection to the under-14 compensation condition than a flat-fee campaign, affiliate arrangement, or product-only deal.

This is enacted law, not a pending proposal. Senate Bill 1469 became Public Chapter 687 and took effect July 1, 2026.

Casual family videos shared without compensation do not fit the statutory definition paraphrased above. That distinction is consistent with the sponsor’s explanation that the measure targeted monetized content from which creators benefit rather than ordinary family posts, according to WSMV’s reporting on the legislation.

This article provides general information, not legal advice. Campaign structures vary, and the available evidence does not establish every statutory condition, exception, enforcement mechanism, or calculation method. Creators, parents, brands, and agencies may need a Tennessee lawyer to review the complete enacted and codified provisions against a particular deal.

Start with the statutory scope: video, Tennessee filming, and compensation

The initial screening questions come directly from the law’s definition of content creation:

1. Is the content video? The definition is video-specific. This evidence should not be extended categorically to a standalone sponsored photograph.
2. Was the video filmed in Tennessee? The stated connection is where filming occurred—not where the creator lives, where viewers are located, or where the sponsoring brand has its headquarters.
3. Was the video shared on an online platform in exchange for compensation? Direct brand funding may fit that broad wording, but the definition does not resolve every cash and non-cash arrangement.

Those elements appear in the enacted text of Public Chapter 687. They should be assessed for each asset rather than only at campaign level.

For example, one campaign might include a Reel filmed in Nashville, photographs shot in another state, and video Stories recorded in several locations. The available language does not provide an allocation rule for mixed-location or mixed-format campaigns. It would therefore be unsafe either to treat the entire campaign as covered or to treat every asset as excluded without examining the individual content.

The payment structure also matters. “Compensation” is broader than “platform advertising revenue,” making cash paid by a brand potentially relevant. But the available text does not conclusively establish how to treat a free hotel stay, gifted product, sales commission, discount, usage-rights fee, or payment routed through an agency.

The rules differ for children under 14 and teenagers

After confirming that a campaign involves compensated online video filmed in Tennessee, consider the minor’s age. Public Chapter 687 states different rules for children under 14 and minors ages 14 through 17, but the supplied evidence does not establish every condition that may govern the older age group.

Age	Confirmed trigger or scope	Confirmed rule	Unresolved details
Under 14	The child appears in at least 30% of the creator’s compensated videos during a 30-day period, and compensation is at least one cent per view	The child may not engage in qualifying content-creation work	Treatment of flat fees, non-cash benefits, payment allocation, and calculation mechanics
14–17	The trust rule applies when the minor falls within the law’s applicable compensated-video provisions; the complete trigger is not established by the supplied evidence	At least half of the minor’s content-percentage share of gross video earnings must be placed in trust until age 18	Complete applicability conditions and calculation of the minor’s share and attributable earnings
Covered minors generally	Specified records concern compensation and the minor’s appearances	Those records must be retained until the minor turns 21	Full recordkeeping, administrative, and enforcement mechanics

These requirements are stated in the official text of Public Chapter 687. The one-cent-per-view condition belongs to the under-14 provision described there; it should not automatically be imported into the trust rule for minors ages 14 through 17.

The under-14 provision applies if 30% or more of the creator’s compensated video content in a 30-day period features the minor and compensation is at least one cent per view Senate Bill 1469 (Public Chapter 687), Tennessee General Assembly. The evidence does not support treating it as 30% of a video’s runtime. Nor does it explain precisely how the 30-day period must be calculated.

Some secondary reports described an annual-income threshold and a higher per-view figure while the legislation was moving through the General Assembly. Those descriptions should not be presented as enacted requirements where they conflict with the official enacted text.

Brand-deal matrix: what is confirmed and what remains unclear

The matrix below applies the language of Public Chapter 687 to common creator payment structures. It is a screening tool, not a list of definitive legal conclusions.

Deal type	Connection to the enacted wording	Confidence level	Question requiring legal review
Tennessee-filmed video paid at least one cent per view	Direct connection to compensated online video and the under-14 per-view condition	Strong candidate if the 30% appearance test is also met	How must payments and appearances be counted during the relevant 30-day period?
Flat-fee sponsored video	A cash fee may be “compensation”	Potentially relevant	Can a fee unrelated to views satisfy the under-14 per-view condition?
Guaranteed fee plus per-view bonus	Includes general compensation and a view-based component	Potentially relevant	How should the guaranteed fee and performance bonus be allocated?
Affiliate or conversion commission	Earnings may be connected to the video’s performance	Unresolved	Does the commission constitute gross video earnings or satisfy a per-view condition?
Free products, travel, services, or discounts	The creator receives a benefit in return for content	Unresolved	Does the law treat non-cash value as compensation, and how would it be valued?
Unpaid family video	No exchange for compensation	Outside the statutory compensation-based definition	Was an indirect payment or benefit connected to publication?
Photo-only brand post	Not video under the definition examined here	Not established as covered	Could another provision or a mixed campaign affect the analysis?

One brand brief may include several of these payment types. A creator could receive a production fee, free travel, affiliate commission, and a bonus after reaching a view target. The fact that one component has a clear connection to the law does not establish how every other component must be attributed.

The child’s appearance pattern matters too.

A practical review checklist before publishing a child-featured campaign

Before a sponsored video goes live, creators, parents, brands, and agencies should document:

• The minor’s age on the relevant filming and publication dates.
• Where each video was filmed, including locations used for reshoots and alternate cuts.
• Every cash payment, including production fees, posting fees, licensing fees, bonuses, and commissions.
• Every non-cash benefit, such as products, travel, accommodation, services, or discounts.
• Whether compensation is tied to views, including the applicable rate or formula.
• How often the minor appears across the creator’s compensated videos during each relevant 30-day period.
• The earnings attributable to each video, rather than only the campaign’s total value.
• The minor’s participation, including which assets feature the child.

Public Chapter 687 requires specified records concerning compensation and minor appearances to be kept until the minor turns 21. Campaign paperwork can separately identify video fees, performance bonuses, affiliate payments, non-cash benefits, filming locations, and the child’s participation. Good records can reduce factual ambiguity, but they do not create a statutory safe harbor.

Do not assume that routing payment through a parent, agency, management company, or LLC removes the campaign from consideration. The available language does not provide a simple attribution rule for intermediary recipients. The connection between the payment, the creator, and the video may require legal review.

Brands and agencies can ask creators to confirm the minor’s age, filming location, and any applicable trust compliance before approving publication. That is sensible campaign management, not a claim that the evidence assigns the brand or agency a specific statutory duty.

Tennessee legal advice is particularly important for:

• Flat-fee campaigns involving a child under 14
• Affiliate or conversion-based arrangements
• Product-only and other non-cash deals
• Mixed video-and-photo campaigns
• Productions filmed in multiple states
• Payments made through parents, agencies, LLCs, or management companies
• Campaigns whose filming, publication, or payment dates span July 1, 2026

The practical answer is possibly, depending on the deal. Sponsorship money should not be assumed to fall outside Tennessee’s child-influencer rules, but neither should every flat fee, commission, or gifted product automatically be treated as satisfying the law’s age-specific conditions. Before publishing, document the format, filming location, payment terms, child’s age, and appearance pattern—and obtain Tennessee legal advice when those facts do not produce a clear answer.