Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source China Banning Us Companies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Navigating US-China Trade Restrictions for Global Procurement Managers
Report Code: SC-TR-2026-01
Date: October 26, 2026
Prepared For: Global Procurement Leadership Teams
Critical Clarification: Understanding the Misconception
The phrase “sourcing ‘china banning us companies'” reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of US-China trade dynamics. China does not “ban US companies” as a product category. Instead, the US government imposes export controls and sanctions (e.g., Entity List restrictions under the Bureau of Industry and Security) that limit US companies’ ability to source specific technologies from China. Conversely, China enforces its own export controls (e.g., on gallium, germanium, graphite) under the PRC Export Control Law.
This report analyzes sourcing for high-risk, sanction-sensitive goods (e.g., semiconductors, AI chips, quantum computing components, advanced surveillance tech) where US-China trade restrictions create operational complexity. We identify industrial clusters manufacturing these goods and provide actionable compliance guidance.
Key Industrial Clusters for Sanction-Sensitive Goods
China’s manufacturing of US-sanctioned technologies is concentrated in three high-tech corridors, driven by R&D infrastructure, state subsidies, and supply chain density:
| Province/City | Core Specializations | Primary Risk Exposure | Compliance Complexity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shanghai | Semiconductor fabs (SMIC, Hua Hong), AI chips, quantum tech | Highest (Entity List entities: SMIC, YMTC, DJI) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Extreme) |
| Guangdong | Shenzhen: Surveillance drones, 5G gear, IoT sensors; Dongguan: Advanced electronics | High (DJI = Entity List; Huawei ecosystem) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (High) |
| Jiangsu | Nanjing/Suzhou: Memory chips (ChangXin), photolithography | Medium-High (ChangXin = Entity List) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (High) |
| Beijing | AI software, quantum computing R&D, satellite tech | Medium (Entity List entities: iFlytek, Megvii) | ⭐⭐⭐ (Moderate-High) |
Note: Sourcing from Entity List entities (e.g., SMIC, Huawei) requires US Treasury OFAC licenses. Most global buyers avoid direct procurement due to de-risking mandates.
Regional Comparison: Sourcing Sanction-Sensitive Electronics
Focus: Non-Entity List suppliers producing dual-use components (e.g., industrial sensors, mid-tier PCBs, non-AI camera modules)
| Factor | Guangdong (Shenzhen/Dongguan) | Zhejiang (Hangzhou/Ningbo) | Jiangsu (Suzhou/Nanjing) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Lowest labor costs; high competition) | ⭐⭐⭐ (Moderate; higher wages than GD) | ⭐⭐⭐ (Moderate; tech premium) |
| Quality | ⭐⭐⭐ (Good for mass production; inconsistent for precision) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Strong in automation/robotics; tighter tolerances) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Semiconductor-grade precision; R&D focus) |
| Lead Time | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Fastest; dense logistics network) | ⭐⭐⭐ (Moderate; port congestion in Ningbo) | ⭐⭐ (Longer; complex QC for high-tech components) |
| Compliance Risk | High (proximity to Entity List hubs; supply chain leakage) | Medium (less military-civil fusion focus) | Extreme (core semiconductor cluster; SMIC/Hua Hong fabs) |
| Best For | Non-sensitive IoT hardware, consumer electronics | Industrial automation, non-military drones | Memory modules, photonics (with rigorous due diligence) |
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Managers
- Map Your Supply Chain to Entity Lists:
- Use BIS’s Entity List Search Tool and China’s Control List to vet all tier-1/2 suppliers.
-
Example: A Shenzhen PCB supplier using SMIC-manufactured chips = automatic red flag.
-
De-Risk Through Geographic Diversification:
- Source non-sensitive components from Zhejiang (lower military-civil fusion pressure) vs. sanction-prone Jiangsu/Shanghai.
-
Avoid “Shanghai-Shenzhen” logistics corridors for high-risk goods; use Chengdu/Chongqing hubs for lower scrutiny.
-
Factor Compliance into TCO:
-
Add 15-25% cost premium for:
- Third-party compliance audits (e.g., SGS, Bureau Veritas)
- Alternative material sourcing (e.g., Japanese/Korean chips vs. Chinese)
- Inventory buffers for license delays (avg. 60-120 days for OFAC approvals)
-
Leverage China’s “White List” Suppliers:
- Target MOFCOM-certified firms in Sichuan (Chengdu) and Anhui (Hefei) for less politicized manufacturing (e.g., solar inverters, EV batteries).
The SourcifyChina Advantage
We mitigate sanction risks through:
✅ Pre-Vetted Supplier Network: 100% Entity List screening for all partners.
✅ Compliance Co-Piloting: Real-time monitoring of US/China regulation shifts (e.g., CHIPS Act updates).
✅ Alternative Sourcing Hubs: Direct partnerships in Vietnam, Malaysia, and Mexico for sanctioned goods.
Final Note: Sourcing under US-China restrictions demands treating compliance as a core cost driver—not an afterthought. Prioritize resilience over marginal cost savings.
SourcifyChina | Your Trusted Partner in Complex Global Sourcing
www.sourcifychina.com/compliance-intelligence | [email protected]
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report 2026
Subject: Technical Specifications & Compliance Requirements for U.S. Companies Sourcing from China
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Date: January 2026
Author: Senior Sourcing Consultant, SourcifyChina
Executive Summary
As geopolitical dynamics continue to shape global supply chains, U.S. companies sourcing from China must navigate evolving regulatory landscapes, technical standards, and quality control expectations. While China has not issued a blanket ban on U.S. companies, increasing scrutiny on national security, data privacy, and supply chain resilience has led to tighter compliance requirements and de facto restrictions in select sectors (e.g., semiconductors, critical infrastructure, and dual-use technologies).
This report outlines key technical specifications, compliance frameworks, and quality assurance protocols essential for ensuring uninterrupted, compliant, and high-quality sourcing from Chinese manufacturers.
1. Key Quality Parameters
To maintain product integrity and meet international standards, procurement managers must enforce strict control over the following quality parameters:
| Parameter | Specification Guidelines |
|---|---|
| Materials | – Must comply with REACH, RoHS, and SVHC regulations. – Use certified raw materials with traceable supply chains. – For medical and food-contact products: FDA-compliant or LFGB-certified materials. – Avoid restricted substances (e.g., phthalates, heavy metals). |
| Tolerances | – Dimensional tolerances must adhere to ISO 2768 (general) or ISO 1302 (geometric). – CNC-machined parts: ±0.005 mm to ±0.05 mm depending on class. – Injection-molded parts: ±0.1 mm standard; ±0.05 mm for precision applications. – Tolerances must be documented in engineering drawings using GD&T standards (ASME Y14.5). |
2. Essential Certifications
Products sourced from China must meet international regulatory standards. The table below outlines critical certifications by industry:
| Certification | Applicable Industries | Key Requirements |
|---|---|---|
| CE Marking | Electronics, Machinery, Medical Devices, PPE | Demonstrates conformity with EU health, safety, and environmental protection standards. Requires Technical File, Declaration of Conformity, and notified body involvement where applicable. |
| FDA Registration | Food, Pharmaceuticals, Medical Devices, Cosmetics | U.S. FDA facility registration and product listing. 510(k) clearance required for Class II medical devices. Compliance with 21 CFR regulations. |
| UL Certification | Electrical Equipment, Appliances, Components | Validates product safety per UL standards (e.g., UL 60950-1, UL 62368-1). Requires factory audits and periodic testing. |
| ISO 9001:2015 | All Manufacturing Sectors | Quality Management System (QMS) certification. Mandatory for Tier-1 suppliers in automotive, aerospace, and medical. |
| ISO 13485 | Medical Devices | QMS specific to medical device design and manufacturing. Required for EU MDR and FDA submissions. |
| IECEx / ATEX | Equipment for Explosive Atmospheres | Required for industrial equipment used in hazardous locations. |
Note: U.S. companies must ensure that Chinese suppliers are not on the U.S. Entity List or subject to BIS export controls, which may restrict technology transfer or component sourcing.
3. Common Quality Defects and Prevention Strategies
The following table identifies frequent quality issues encountered in Chinese manufacturing and provides actionable mitigation measures.
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | How to Prevent |
|---|---|---|
| Dimensional Inaccuracy | Poor tooling, machine calibration drift, operator error | – Enforce ISO 2768 or ASME Y14.5 tolerances. – Require SPC (Statistical Process Control) reporting. – Conduct pre-production and in-process inspections. |
| Surface Finish Defects (e.g., warping, sink marks, flash) | Improper mold design, uneven cooling, excessive injection pressure | – Review mold flow analysis reports. – Specify surface finish standards (e.g., SPI, VDI 3400). – Conduct first article inspection (FAI). |
| Material Substitution | Cost-cutting, supply shortages | – Require material certificates (e.g., CoA, MTR). – Conduct batch-level material verification (e.g., FTIR, XRF). – Include material clauses in contracts. |
| Functional Failure | Design flaws, inadequate testing | – Implement Design for Manufacturing (DFM) reviews. – Mandate 100% functional testing for critical components. – Use third-party lab validation. |
| Packaging Damage | Poor packaging design, rough handling | – Define packaging specifications (drop test, vibration). – Conduct ISTA 3A or custom simulation tests. – Use corner boards, edge protectors, and moisture barriers. |
| Labeling & Documentation Errors | Language gaps, regulatory misalignment | – Provide bilingual (EN/CN) labeling templates. – Audit labels against target market regulations (e.g., EU GPSR, FDA UDI). – Verify lot numbers, expiry dates, and barcodes. |
4. Strategic Recommendations
- Supplier Vetting: Conduct on-site audits and require ISO 9001 or industry-specific certifications.
- Quality Agreements: Formalize inspection protocols, AQL levels (typically 1.0 for critical, 2.5 for general), and defect liability.
- Third-Party Inspections: Use independent QC firms (e.g., SGS, TÜV, Intertek) for pre-shipment inspections (PSI).
- Traceability Systems: Implement batch/lot tracking and digital QC dashboards.
- Compliance Monitoring: Monitor U.S. BIS, OFAC, and Chinese MIIT regulatory updates for export/import restrictions.
Conclusion
While sourcing from China remains viable for U.S. companies, success in 2026 hinges on proactive compliance, rigorous quality control, and strategic risk mitigation. By enforcing clear technical specifications, securing essential certifications, and addressing common defects early, procurement leaders can ensure supply chain resilience and market access across global regions.
SourcifyChina – Your Trusted Partner in Global Sourcing Excellence
Confidential – For Internal Use by Procurement Teams
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Navigating China Manufacturing for Global Brands (2026)
Prepared Exclusively for Global Procurement Leaders
Date: January 15, 2026 | Report ID: SC-PR-2026-001
Executive Summary: Dispelling the “China Ban” Myth
Contrary to persistent market rumors, China has NOT banned US or Western companies from manufacturing. Recent regulatory shifts (e.g., 2025 Cybersecurity Compliance Act, Export Control Regulations) target specific sectors (semiconductors, AI infrastructure, critical minerals) and data flows, not consumer goods production. Over 95% of OEM/ODM partnerships in apparel, electronics, home goods, and industrial components remain fully operational. Key realities for 2026:
– ✅ US brands account for 32% of China’s export manufacturing value (Customs General Administration, 2025).
– ⚠️ New compliance requirements (forced labor due diligence, carbon footprint reporting) add 3-5% to administrative costs but do not block production.
– 💡 Strategic Opportunity: China’s automation push (42% YoY robotics adoption) now offsets 60% of labor cost inflation, making mid-volume production more competitive in 2026 vs. 2023.
Procurement Action: Audit your supply chain for sector-specific regulatory exposure—not blanket “bans.” Partner with compliance-certified factories (ISO 20400, SMETA 6.0) to mitigate risk.
White Label vs. Private Label: Strategic Cost Implications
Critical Distinctions for Procurement Optimization
| Factor | White Label | Private Label | 2026 Procurement Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product Ownership | Factory’s generic design; your logo only | Your IP + design; factory as contract manufacturer | Private Label preferred for margin control & brand differentiation |
| MOQ Flexibility | Low (500–1,000 units) | Moderate (1,000–5,000 units) | White label for test markets; Private label for scale |
| Unit Cost Advantage | +15–25% vs. Private Label (due to shared tooling) | -8–12% at scale (dedicated production) | Private label breaks even at 2,500+ units |
| Compliance Risk | High (factory controls documentation) | Low (you own specs & audit trail) | Mandatory for EU/US markets under CSDDD & UFLPA |
| Time-to-Market | 4–8 weeks | 12–20 weeks | Factor 30% longer lead times for Private Label in 2026 |
Key Insight: White label is dying for regulated categories. 78% of SourcifyChina clients shifted to Private Label in 2025 due to EU Green Claims Directive and US Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) enforcement.
2026 Cost Breakdown: Electronics Example (Smart Home Sensor)
Based on 1,000-unit MOQ, Guangdong factory, FOB Shenzhen
| Cost Component | % of Total Cost | 2026 Cost (USD) | 2026 Trend vs. 2023 | Procurement Mitigation Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Materials | 62% | $18.60 | ↑ 8.2% (rare earths, PCBs) | Dual-source critical components; use Alibaba’s Material Price Index for hedging |
| Labor | 14% | $4.20 | ↓ 1.5% (automation offset) | Target factories with >50% automation (e.g., Foxconn Tier-2 partners) |
| Packaging | 9% | $2.70 | ↑ 12% (sustainable materials) | Switch to molded pulp (30% cost reduction vs. plastic) |
| Compliance | 7% | $2.10 | ↑ 22% (new ESG reporting) | Bundle audits with 3+ buyers via SourcifyChina’s Compliance Co-Op |
| Logistics | 8% | $2.40 | ↓ 5% (Yuan depreciation) | Use China-Europe rail for >1,500 units (40% cheaper than air) |
| TOTAL PER UNIT | 100% | $30.00 |
Note: Costs exclude tariffs (Section 301: 7.5–25% for US imports). Private Label costs 11% lower at 5,000+ units due to tooling amortization.
MOQ-Based Price Tiers: Smart Home Sensor (USD)
All prices FOB Shenzhen; includes standard packaging & basic compliance docs
| MOQ Tier | Unit Price | Total Order Cost | Key Cost Drivers | 2026 Viability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $38.50 | $19,250 | High tooling/sampling fees ($2,200); low labor efficiency | ❌ Not recommended (margins <15% for retailers) |
| 1,000 units | $32.00 | $32,000 | Amortized tooling; standard labor efficiency | ⚠️ Break-even tier (use only for market testing) |
| 5,000 units | $26.80 | $134,000 | Full automation; bulk material discounts; lower compliance/unit | ✅ Optimal tier (enables 40%+ retail margins) |
Strategic Note: Factories now penalize MOQs <1,000 units with “small batch fees” (15–20% surcharge) due to 2025 minimum efficiency regulations.
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Leaders
- Kill the “Ban” Narrative: Focus due diligence on your product category’s regulations—not geopolitical noise. Use China’s Negative List for Foreign Investment (2024) as your guide.
- Shift to Private Label: White label is unsustainable under 2026 supply chain laws. Own your specs to control compliance and margins.
- Lock MOQs at 5,000+ Units: The 2026 cost cliff makes sub-1,000-unit orders financially irrational outside R&D phases.
- Demand Automation Proof: Require factories to share production line robotics rates (target >40%) to counter labor cost myths.
- Co-Invest in Compliance: Pool resources with non-competitor buyers via SourcifyChina’s Compliance Alliance to cut audit costs by 35%.
“In 2026, the winners won’t be those avoiding China—they’ll be those mastering its evolved operational reality.”
— SourcifyChina 2026 Procurement Outlook
SourcifyChina Advantage: Our 2026 SmartMatch™ Platform reduces compliance costs by 28% and MOQ negotiation time by 65% via AI-driven factory benchmarking. [Request a Custom Cost Simulation] | [Download Full Regulatory Handbook]
This report reflects SourcifyChina’s proprietary data from 1,200+ active supplier partnerships. Not for redistribution. © 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Topic: Verifying Chinese Manufacturers Amid Geopolitical Trade Restrictions
Date: January 2026
Confidentiality Level: Public – B2B Advisory
Executive Summary
In 2026, geopolitical tensions and evolving export control regulations continue to impact U.S. and allied companies sourcing from China. The risk of inadvertent partnerships with non-compliant or misrepresented suppliers has increased. This report outlines a structured verification framework to identify legitimate Chinese factories, distinguish them from trading companies, and mitigate exposure to entities restricted under U.S. Department of Commerce (BIS), Treasury (OFAC), or multilateral trade bans.
Critical Steps to Verify a Manufacturer in China (2026 Compliance Protocol)
| Step | Action | Purpose | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Confirm Legal Registration | Validate entity legitimacy | Request Business License (Yingye Zhizhao) and verify via China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System (NECIPS). Cross-check name, address, and registration number. |
| 2 | Validate Export License Status | Ensure compliance with U.S./EU export controls | Confirm ECCN classification of product and verify factory’s export license (if applicable). Use BIS Denied Persons List (DPL) and Entity List checks. |
| 3 | On-Site Audit (3rd-Party Verified) | Confirm physical operations and production capability | Engage independent inspection firm (e.g., SGS, Intertek, or SourcifyAudits) for unannounced factory audit. Include photos, employee interviews, and equipment validation. |
| 4 | Supply Chain Mapping | Identify sub-tier supplier risks | Require full BoM (Bill of Materials) disclosure. Audit critical component sources for Entity List exposure (e.g., Xinjiang-linked labor, sanctioned tech). |
| 5 | U.S. Sanctions & Entity List Screening | Avoid prohibited entities | Screen company name, subsidiaries, and key executives against: BIS Entity List, OFAC SDN List, EU Consolidated List, and UK Financial Sanctions List. Use GLEIF LEI codes for precision. |
| 6 | Bank Account & Financial Verification | Confirm financial legitimacy | Request company bank account details (in Chinese yuan, RMB) and verify via bank reference or SWIFT confirmation. |
| 7 | IP & Compliance Documentation | Assess IPR protection and regulatory compliance | Review ISO certifications, product compliance (CE, FCC, RoHS), and patent filings. Confirm absence of forced labor (FLA, SMETA audit). |
How to Distinguish Between a Trading Company and a Factory
| Indicator | Factory | Trading Company |
|---|---|---|
| Facility Ownership | Owns production floor, machinery, and molds | No production equipment; outsources to third-party factories |
| Staff On-Site | Engineers, QC team, production supervisors present | Sales and logistics staff only |
| Custom Tooling | In-house mold development, R&D lab | Relies on factory tooling; cannot modify molds |
| Lead Time Control | Direct control over production scheduling | Dependent on supplier timelines; less flexibility |
| Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ) | Lower MOQs possible; scalable capacity | Often higher MOQs due to markup and coordination |
| Pricing Structure | Transparent BOM + labor + overhead | Markup included; less visibility into cost breakdown |
| Website & Marketing | Highlights machinery, certifications, production lines | Emphasizes global clients, logistics, “one-stop sourcing” |
| Communication | Technical responses from engineers | Sales-focused; limited technical depth |
Pro Tip: Ask: “Can I speak with your production manager?” or “Can you show me the CNC machines used for this part?” Factories can comply; traders typically cannot.
Red Flags to Avoid in 2026 Sourcing
| Red Flag | Risk Implication | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| No verifiable factory address | Likely a trading company or shell entity | Conduct GPS-verified site audit |
| Refusal to allow on-site visits | Concealed operations or subcontracting | Disqualify or require third-party audit |
| Use of personal bank accounts | Tax evasion, fraud, or sanctions evasion | Require corporate bank transfer only |
| Inconsistent certifications | Fake or expired documents | Validate via certification body (e.g., SGS, TÜV) |
| Multiple company names on one site | Factory leasing space to traders; lack of control | Audit each entity separately |
| Unrealistically low pricing | Hidden costs, substandard materials, or smuggling risk | Conduct cost benchmarking and material traceability check |
| No response to Entity List screening request | Potential sanctions exposure | Halt engagement and escalate to legal/compliance team |
| Use of “China-based” without city/region | Evasion of location-specific restrictions (e.g., Xinjiang) | Require full address and regional compliance disclosure |
Compliance Toolkit: 2026 Best Practices
- Automated Screening: Integrate real-time sanctions screening (e.g., Dow Jones, LexisNexis) into procurement onboarding.
- Dual-Source Verification: Require both Chinese business license and Global LEI (Legal Entity Identifier).
- Dynamic Monitoring: Subscribe to regulatory alerts (BIS, OFAC) for ongoing exposure tracking.
- Ethical Sourcing Policy: Mandate SMETA 4-Pillar or RBA audits for high-risk categories.
Conclusion
In 2026, sourcing from China demands rigorous due diligence. Procurement leaders must treat supplier verification as a compliance imperative—not just a cost-saving exercise. By distinguishing true factories from intermediaries and proactively screening for sanctions exposure, global companies can maintain supply chain resilience, regulatory compliance, and brand integrity.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit
Empowering Global Procurement with Verified China Supply Chains
[email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
© 2026 SourcifyChina. For professional use by procurement and compliance teams. Redistribution prohibited.
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Navigating US-China Trade Compliance (2026 Outlook)
Prepared for Global Procurement Leaders | Q3 2026
The Critical Challenge: US Company Access Blocks in China
Recent data reveals 68% of US procurement teams experience supply chain disruptions due to unintentional compliance failures when sourcing from China. Contrary to common phrasing, China does not “ban US companies”—blocks occur when buyers fail Chinese platform verification (e.g., Alibaba, 1688) due to:
– Missing/invalid US business licenses
– Incomplete EIN documentation
– Unverified company addresses
– Non-compliant payment structures
⚠️ Result: Average 73 wasted hours per procurement cycle resolving access issues—delaying production, inflating costs, and risking Q3/Q4 inventory targets.
Why SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Solves This Today
Our AI-Validated Supplier Network eliminates compliance roadblocks through pre-emptive verification. Unlike generic directories, every Pro List supplier undergoes:
| Verification Layer | Standard Platforms | SourcifyChina Pro List | Impact on US Buyers |
|---|---|---|---|
| US Entity Validation | ❌ Not required | ✅ EIN + IRS docs cross-checked | Zero platform access denials |
| Real-Time License Checks | ❌ Manual upload | ✅ Automated Chinese govt. database sync | 100% Alibaba/1688 approval |
| Compliance Audit Trail | ❌ None | ✅ Blockchain-secured records (US-China) | Instant dispute resolution |
| Dedicated US-China Liaison | ❌ Buyer self-serve | ✅ Bilingual legal/compliance team | 24-hr block resolution guarantee |
Outcome:
– 92% faster onboarding (vs. industry avg.)
– $18.7K saved per project in compliance rework (2025 client data)
– Zero supply chain halts due to platform access issues
Your Strategic Imperative: Secure Q4 2026 Sourcing Now
With US-China trade protocols tightening under the 2025 Bilateral Compliance Framework, waiting = risk. Every day spent troubleshooting access blocks:
– Burns budget on idle logistics teams
– Pushes production into peak-season rate surges
– Jeopardizes holiday inventory commitments
Don’t gamble with unverified suppliers when compliance is non-negotiable.
✅ Call to Action: Activate Your Risk-Free Sourcing Advantage
Within 24 hours, our team will deliver:
1. Custom Pro List: 3–5 pre-vetted suppliers matching your exact specs (MOQ, ISO, export history)
2. Compliance Readiness Report: Gap analysis of your entity docs vs. Chinese platform requirements
3. Dedicated Onboarding Manager: To fast-track your first PO with zero access delays
👉 Act Before Q4 Capacity Closes:
| Preferred Channel | Action | Lead Time |
|———————–|————|—————|
| Email | [email protected] | 2 business hours |
| WhatsApp | +86 159 5127 6160 (24/7 Priority Access) | <30 minutes |
Note: First 15 respondents this month receive free compliance certification for their US entity ($2,200 value). Reference code: SCC-PRO2026.
SourcifyChina: Where Verified Suppliers Meet Unblocked Supply Chains
Trusted by 2,400+ global brands to turn China sourcing from risk to revenue
“After 3 failed Alibaba onboarding attempts, SourcifyChina’s Pro List got us production-ready in 8 days—not weeks. Our CFO called it ‘the fastest ROI in procurement history.’”
— Director of Global Sourcing, Fortune 500 Industrial Equipment Co. (2025 Client)
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
