Inconsistent Policy Enforcement on Identical ASINs (Case ID: 17734305391)

We are raising a formal and public concern regarding Amazon’s unfair and inconsistent enforcement of its policies related to play money that imitates currency. Our product, listed under ASIN: B0FXXXXXXX, was recently rejected by Amazon on the grounds that it does not comply with policies regarding imitation currency.

However, what makes this case deeply troubling—and frankly suspicious—is the fact that another product, ASIN: B00XXXXXXX, which is identical in function, purpose, and presentation, is fully allowed and continues to be sold without restriction.

We raised this issue with Seller Support under Case ID: 17734305391, and instead of receiving a transparent and logical explanation, we got a generic response that failed to explain why Amazon is applying different standards to identical products. This behavior lacks transparency and raises serious questions about whether decisions are being made discretionary or, worse, with bias.

Let’s not ignore the irony here: Amazon itself is the seller of the ASIN that is permitted to be sold. So while our identical product is being blocked without clear justification, Amazon conveniently continues to profit from selling the very same item — completely unchallenged.

We also submitted a policy violation report for the approved Amazon's ASIN, since, by Amazon’s own reasoning, it should be subject to the same restriction. This was logged under Case ID: 17828133431, yet we received nothing more than an automated dismissal:

"Thank you for your report of a suspected policy violation. We cannot take action on the report as no violation has been identified on the reported ASIN for the violation type selected."

How convenient.

This is not just a product listing dispute — it’s a violation of fair trade practices. Policies must be applied consistently and impartially across all sellers, whether small business or Amazon Retail. The appearance of arbitrary enforcement and lack of accountability raises serious legal and ethical questions.

We demand:

• A justification for why Amazon's ASIN is exempt from the same enforcement.
• A review of Amazon’s internal conflict of interest when it acts as both marketplace and competitor.

If Amazon continues to operate as both judge and player, it undermines the integrity of the entire platform and should be held accountable — legally, if necessary.