Facebook insists the scheme is a vital way of recovering some of the US$1 billion ($1.3 billion) it spends each year on development.
But the announcement will spark renewed debate over whether the company is using its 800-million strong database to endorse advertisers without giving anything back to users or seeking their permission.
Some Facebook users in the United States have taken to the courts to contest this new method of advertising.
Last week a San Jose judge allowed plaintiffs to bring a case against Facebook in which they argued it was using their names and likenesses without authorisation and they therefore deserved a cut of the revenue.
Facebook tried to have the claim thrown out but District Judge Lucy Koh allowed the case to proceed.
"In the same way that celebrities suffer economic harm when their likeness is misappropriated for another's commercial gain without compensation, plaintiffs allege that they have been injured by Facebook's failure to compensate them for the use of their personal endorsement," she said.
Facebook said: "We ... continue to believe that the case is without merit."
The case will be heard next year.
And in Europe, the data protection commission of the Republic of Ireland has forced Facebook to change its policy of retaining two years' worth of information about the adverts that users click on.
In a report, the Irish commission was also critical of the way that people can be added to Facebook Groups without consent, and noted that people should be able to delete content and know that it had been removed.
Facebook said it would seek user consent ahead of being added to a Group, and that it will provide more information about data deletion.
"Social adverts" will come under the control of users via their privacy settings under the new proposals, and users will be given the option to block or control adverts they don't want to see again.
- Independent
