Amazon already restricts the sale of stolen goods, but it’s implementing a new standalone policy that goes into effect on June 30, 2025, because of new government regulations:
New policy reinforces our existing restriction against sale of stolen goods
Effective June 30, 2025, we’ll implement a new, dedicated stolen goods policy that reinforces our commitment to combat the sale of stolen goods to help protect customers.
To comply with new government regulations, we’re required to create this as a standalone policy, but this new policy is consistent with our existing efforts to investigate and prevent the sale of stolen goods. This new policy is also consistent with sellers’ existing requirements not to engage in illegal activities.
The sale of stolen goods is illegal. To comply with the policy, you should continue to ensure the legitimacy of your supply chain as described in our existing policies, such as the Responsible Sourcing documentation request requirements.
As a reminder, the sale of stolen goods may result in removal of listings, immediate loss of selling privileges, ineligibility for fund disbursement, disposal of inventory in our fulfillment centers at your expense, and other legal consequences.
The announcement sparked a discussion about other forms of seller and buyer misbehavior, with one seller writing that the “Responsible Sourcing documentation request requirements” policy Amazon had linked to in the announcement included a reference to “receipts.” They asked, “WHEN will your attorneys actually get SERIOUS and specifically state that OA and RA are NOT PERMITTED?” They were referring to the line on the page that stated, “Copies of invoices, receipts or other similar documents that demonstrate where your products are produced or manufactured.”
OA and RA stand for Online Arbitrage and Retail Arbitrage, respectively. Clearly the seller was concerned that Amazon wasn’t being clear enough that it prohibits such practices.
But a few lines down, the page states: “Your documents should be able to trace your products to the original manufacturer even if you did not purchase them directly from the original manufacturer. This may require requesting additional invoices or supply chain documentation from your supplier if you are not sourcing directly from the manufacturer.”
Clearly a receipt from a retail store would not have that information. But it’s not surprising that sellers get frustrated that some sellers continue to believe retail arbitrage is allowed on Amazon.
Another seller asked, “I primarily sell used books and records. Are they going to require receipts/invoices for them, too?”
A surprising percentage of comments were complaints about buyers who committed fraud against sellers. “Buyers need to be held to the same standards as sellers and ban those buyers who are repeated offenders,” a seller wrote.
“This is great progress, but I think it’s also important to address the issue of fraudulent buyer behavior,” another seller wrote. “Unfortunately, there are cases where buyers misuse the return system – for example, by returning empty boxes – which can be incredibly frustrating and costly for honest sellers.”
Another seller wrote in part, “Why do you allow bad actors to sell and steal brand owners listings, images, content? Why do you allow buyers to scam the sellers with fraudulent returns and refunds? These are serious issues as well that Amazon NEEDS to address and fix!”