When I heard this, it stopped me in my tracks because 11 years ago, I too was grappling with my relationship with technology. In fact, I nearly ended my own life due to the effects of social media. Since that pivotal moment in my dorm room, I’ve been working to prevent teens from going down the same black hole by equipping them with the tools they need to thrive in the digital world. I’ve spent day after day in rooms with parents who have lost kids to suicide or had their teen’s college application rescinded due to deep fakes. I’ve spent the past year working with policymakers and educators to try to solve the issue of our time: phones in schools. I’ve spent my 10,000 hours in classrooms and in my DMs, listening to teens who will spend an average of 30 years of their lives on their phones.

The conclusion is consistent: phone bans and Big Tech lawsuits are not enough.

As we enter an even more crucial era of AI, we need to learn from the mistakes we made with social media. If social media is the stage, think of AI as the greenroom — the quiet space that our kids are going to not just for homework, but for advice, emotional support, and research, reaching it before they ever turn to a human.

We’ve built a cognitive nuclear weapon, handed it to children, and called it innovation. But this time it isn’t whistleblowers leaking documents from the inside. This time, people are throwing Molotov cocktails — literally and metaphorically. So what do we do?

To save our kids, we need to think bigger, smarter and move faster. I’m proposing a new incentive structure — call it the “Digital Harm Tax” — for Big Tech, modeled on a framework that already works: the Green Tax.

That means reengineering incentives and policies in place for companies and funding for education and solutions for our communities. Big Tech won’t change voluntarily — it’s behaving exactly as the system was designed — to maximize profits at any cost.

The Green Tax was originally created to account for the environmental costs and promote sustainability within businesses. Activities that contributed negatively to the environment were taxed, and environmentally sustainable practices were rewarded with tax deductions. It worked: the EU has halved emissions since implementing their tax structure in 2005. This tax finally gave companies motivation to prioritize accounting for these societal costs. Why? Because it would impact their bottom line. The Green Tax didn’t ask companies to grow a conscience. It made destroying things expensive and protecting them profitable.

So how would a “Digital Harm Tax” apply to Big Tech? Two mechanisms would drive it:

First, tax compulsive design features — infinite scroll, autoplay video, and endless chat — to reduce the number of kids sucked into doomsday content. Similarly, tax algorithmic amplification of distressing content and hyper-personalized targeting of minors so kids’ vulnerabilities and fears aren’t unnecessarily fueled for profit.

Second, reward platforms that protect kids with meaningful deductions. Platforms with safety features that alert parents to children’s mental health concerns would be rewarded. Companies that make AI unavailable for minors under 16, or build stopping mechanisms that give parents the option to slow content flooding their kids’ brains, could also see reductions. AI companies could even get a tax write-off for demonstrating culturally competent design — grounded in equity and built without bias.

The landmark Meta trial ruling last month signaled a shift in the tide. A California jury found Meta and YouTube liable for knowingly building addictive platforms that harmed children, resulting in a $3 million settlement. But $3 million against a trillion-dollar machine isn’t justice — it’s a rounding error. We don’t have time to fight each platform and harm one by one. We need tech on offense — protecting kids before the harm happens, not writing small checks after it does.

This is no longer about screen time, or even mental health alone. It’s about brain health. It’s about preserving the next generation’s ability to think, act, and solve the very crises we’re handing them.

As Laura Marquez-Garrett, senior counsel at the Social Media Victims Law Center, puts it: “These companies will not stop addicting and exploiting kids until we make that particular business decision less profitable than safety by design.”

We taxed pollution because it was killing the planet. It’s time we taxed digital harm before it costs us a generation. The Green Tax didn’t solve everything — but it changed what was possible. It’s time to do the same for tech.

We can’t keep letting Big Tech cash out on our kids.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.