Amazon compliance documents: what Seller Central asks for and why
Almost every document Amazon requests exists because a law requires it. Knowing which law tells you what will satisfy the request and what will not.
⚠️ Amazon's own requirements live in Seller Central and change without notice. This post is about the laws behind the requests, which change more slowly and explain what will actually satisfy one. Always check the current policy in your account.
Regulatory citations checked on 6 September 2026.
The requests are not arbitrary
A marketplace asking for a "compliance document" is almost always asking for something a statute or regulation already requires you to have. That reframing is useful: it turns "what does Amazon want?" into "what does the rule require?" — a question with a findable answer.
| Typical request | What it actually is |
|---|---|
| Children's Product Certificate | 16 CFR §1110.11 certificate, backed by third-party testing |
| General Certificate of Conformity | The same, for non-children's products under a CPSC rule |
| Test report from an accepted lab | 16 CFR §1112 accepted body, scope-specific |
| Prop 65 warning confirmation | 27 CCR §25603 content |
| Tracking label image | 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(5) markings |
| Supplier declaration | Whatever the underlying substance rule requires |
The four reasons a document gets rejected
In our experience, rejections cluster:
1. The certificate names no rules. §1110.11(a)(2) requires each applicable safety rule listed separately. "Complies with all applicable CPSC regulations" is not a citation, and a reviewer cannot match it to the category. This is the single most common defect. See GCC vs CPC.
2. The lab is not accepted for that rule. Acceptance is scope-specific — a body applies for recognition against particular rules and test methods, not blanket approval. A real report from a real lab still fails if the rule you cite falls outside its scope. See choosing a lab.
3. The certificate is the factory's, not yours. For imported goods §1110.7 makes the importer the finished product certifier. A supplier's certificate is an input to yours, not a substitute, and it usually names the supplier as certifier — which is visibly the wrong party.
4. The test date is stale. §1110.11 asks for the most recent testing date, and §1107.21 sets periodic intervals. A three-year-old report on an annual interval invites the follow-up question.
The one that costs the most
A material change you were not told about. Under §1107.23, a change in design, manufacturing process or component sourcing that could affect compliance requires a new certificate supported by new testing.
The listing does not change, the model number does not change, and nothing notifies anyone. It surfaces when a document is requested and the dates do not line up with a product that has quietly been made differently for eight months.
Prepare before you are asked
The pattern that works is boring: hold the documents against the product, with dates, before anyone asks. Requests usually come with a short window and a suspended listing attached, and that is the worst moment to discover a certificate names the wrong party.
A workable minimum per SKU:
- the certificate, naming each rule separately, with you as certifier
- the underlying test report, from a lab accepted for those rules
- the test date, and the interval you are operating on
- the tracking label as it actually appears on the product
- any substance declarations, with dates
- the answer to "what changed since [date]?" from your supplier
In Aleph, you upload these documents against each product they cover, with their dates, so a document request is a lookup rather than a hunt through email.
General information, not legal advice, and not a statement of Amazon policy. Check Seller Central for current requirements and talk to counsel about your products.