Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source China Saas Companies
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Market Analysis for Sourcing SaaS Companies from China
Date: January 2026
Prepared by: SourcifyChina – Senior Sourcing Consultants
Executive Summary
While China is globally renowned for its manufacturing prowess in hardware and electronics, its Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) ecosystem has evolved into a robust and competitive sector over the past decade. Unlike traditional goods, SaaS is not “manufactured” in a physical sense; however, SaaS companies are developed, hosted, and scaled within distinct industrial and technological clusters across China. For global procurement managers, sourcing SaaS solutions—whether for enterprise resource planning (ERP), customer relationship management (CRM), supply chain visibility, or AI-driven analytics—requires understanding the geographic hubs of innovation, talent, infrastructure, and regulatory support that define China’s SaaS landscape.
This report provides a deep-dive market analysis identifying the key industrial clusters in China for sourcing SaaS companies, evaluates regional strengths, and offers a comparative assessment to guide strategic vendor selection.
Clarification: SaaS ≠ Physical Manufacturing
It is critical to clarify that SaaS companies are not “manufactured” like consumer electronics or textiles. Instead, they are developed and operated within technology and innovation clusters that offer:
- Access to skilled software engineers and AI/ML talent
- Cloud infrastructure (e.g., Alibaba Cloud, Tencent Cloud)
- Government-backed tech zones and R&D incentives
- Proximity to venture capital and digital ecosystems
Therefore, this report focuses on sourcing SaaS vendors and platforms—not physical goods—by analyzing the provinces and cities where China’s most competitive SaaS firms are headquartered and operate.
Key SaaS Industrial Clusters in China
The following regions are recognized as primary hubs for SaaS development and deployment in China:
| Region | Key Cities | Core SaaS Focus Areas | Key Advantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | Shenzhen, Guangzhou | Fintech SaaS, E-commerce Platforms, AI-driven Logistics | Proximity to hardware integration, strong private sector, innovation-driven culture |
| Zhejiang | Hangzhou, Ningbo | B2B/B2C E-commerce SaaS, Cloud ERP, Digital Marketing | Home to Alibaba, high digital maturity, strong SME adoption |
| Beijing | Beijing | Enterprise SaaS, Cybersecurity, AI/ML Platforms | Top-tier universities, government tech policy influence, deep talent pool |
| Shanghai | Shanghai | Fintech, HR Tech, Supply Chain SaaS | International business gateway, strong foreign investment, mature corporate IT demand |
| Sichuan | Chengdu | Gaming SaaS, DevOps Tools, Cloud Collaboration | Emerging tech hub, cost-effective talent, government incentives |
| Jiangsu | Suzhou, Nanjing | Industrial IoT SaaS, Smart Manufacturing Platforms | Integration with manufacturing 4.0, strong R&D infrastructure |
Comparative Analysis: Key SaaS Production Regions
The table below compares the top two SaaS clusters—Guangdong and Zhejiang—based on critical procurement KPIs: Price, Quality, and Lead Time for vendor onboarding and solution deployment.
Note: “Price” reflects total cost of engagement (licensing, customization, support). “Quality” includes code robustness, scalability, and compliance. “Lead Time” refers to average time from contract signing to MVP deployment.
| Criteria | Guangdong (Shenzhen/Guangzhou) | Zhejiang (Hangzhou/Ningbo) | Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | Medium to High | Low to Medium | Zhejiang offers more cost-efficient SaaS solutions due to high competition among SME-focused vendors. Guangdong’s solutions often include premium integration with hardware and AI, increasing cost. |
| Quality | High | High | Guangdong leads in innovation and technical depth, especially in fintech and logistics SaaS. Zhejiang excels in user experience and e-commerce integration, with Alibaba’s ecosystem setting high standards. |
| Lead Time | 8–12 weeks | 6–10 weeks | Zhejiang benefits from standardized SaaS templates and rapid deployment frameworks. Guangdong may require longer customization cycles due to complex integrations. |
| Talent Density | Very High | High | Shenzhen has China’s highest concentration of software engineers and startups. Hangzhou leads in digital commerce talent. |
| Regulatory Environment | Moderate (local innovation incentives) | Favorable | Zhejiang is a national pilot zone for digital economy reforms, offering faster compliance approvals for cloud services. |
| Best For | High-complexity, AI-integrated SaaS | Scalable, cost-effective e-commerce & ERP SaaS | Strategic choice depends on use case: innovation vs. speed-to-market |
Strategic Recommendations for Global Procurement Managers
-
Prioritize Zhejiang for Cost-Efficiency and Speed:
Ideal for mid-market enterprises seeking quick-to-deploy, scalable SaaS in e-commerce, inventory, and CRM—especially if integrating with Alibaba or cross-border platforms. -
Choose Guangdong for Advanced Capabilities:
Recommended for organizations requiring AI-powered analytics, fintech compliance, or hardware-software integration (e.g., smart logistics, IoT-enabled supply chains). -
Leverage Beijing for Enterprise-Grade Security:
Consider Beijing-based vendors for regulated industries (finance, healthcare) requiring high compliance standards and robust cybersecurity frameworks. -
Evaluate Hybrid Sourcing Models:
Combine Zhejiang’s agile platforms with Guangdong’s deep tech capabilities through partner ecosystems (e.g., Alibaba Cloud + Shenzhen AI startups). -
Conduct On-the-Ground Due Diligence:
Engage local sourcing consultants to verify data sovereignty, export compliance (e.g., CAC regulations), and SLA enforceability—especially for cross-border SaaS deployments.
Conclusion
China’s SaaS ecosystem is no longer a secondary option—it is a strategic sourcing destination for global enterprises seeking innovation, scalability, and cost efficiency. While Zhejiang leads in affordability and deployment speed, Guangdong excels in technical depth and integration capability. Procurement managers must align regional selection with use-case requirements, compliance needs, and long-term digital strategy.
By leveraging China’s SaaS clusters strategically, global organizations can achieve faster digital transformation, reduced TCO, and competitive advantage in an increasingly software-defined supply chain landscape.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina – Senior Sourcing Consultants
Empowering Global Procurement with Data-Driven China Sourcing Intelligence
www.sourcifychina.com | [email protected]
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report: Evaluating Chinese SaaS Providers
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026
Confidential – For Strategic Sourcing Use Only
Executive Summary
This report clarifies critical misunderstandings in sourcing Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions from China. Unlike physical goods, SaaS lacks material specifications, mechanical tolerances, or hardware-centric certifications (e.g., CE, UL, FDA). Sourcing SaaS requires focus on data governance, cybersecurity, and compliance frameworks. This guide replaces outdated hardware-centric criteria with actionable SaaS evaluation protocols.
Key Clarifications: SaaS vs. Physical Goods
| Parameter | Physical Manufacturing | Chinese SaaS Providers |
|---|---|---|
| Core Deliverable | Tangible product (e.g., electronics, machinery) | Cloud-based software service |
| Quality Metrics | Material specs, dimensional tolerances | Uptime, data integrity, API reliability |
| Relevant Certs | CE, FDA, UL, ISO 9001 | ISO 27001, SOC 2, GDPR, PIPL, Cybersecurity Law compliance |
| Defect Types | Physical flaws (cracks, misalignment) | Security gaps, compliance failures, SLA breaches |
⚠️ Critical Note: CE, FDA, and UL are irrelevant for pure SaaS. These apply only to hardware components. Chinese SaaS vendors may integrate hardware (e.g., IoT devices), but core software services require data/security certifications.
Essential SaaS Compliance Requirements for China
1. Non-Negotiable Certifications & Frameworks
| Certification | Relevance to Chinese SaaS | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|
| ISO/IEC 27001 | Mandatory for data security management. Required for handling EU/US client data. | Audit certificate + scope validation (confirm cloud infrastructure coverage) |
| PIPL (China’s Personal Information Protection Law) | Legal requirement for all Chinese SaaS handling personal data. Stricter than GDPR on cross-border data transfers. | Review Data Processing Agreements (DPAs) and local data residency proof |
| Cybersecurity Law (CSL) of China | Governs critical information infrastructure operators (CIIOs). Requires data localization for certain sectors. | Confirm vendor’s CIIO status via MIIT registry checks |
| SOC 2 Type II | Trusted third-party validation of security controls (essential for US/EU enterprises). | Request latest audit report (redacted if necessary) |
2. Sector-Specific Requirements
- Healthcare SaaS: Requires NMPA备案 (NMPA filing) for data processing (not FDA – FDA regulates medical devices, not pure software).
- Financial SaaS: Must comply with PBOC (People’s Bank of China) guidelines and AML regulations.
- Global Operations: GDPR compliance requires Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) + Chinese vendor PIPL adherence.
Common Quality Defects in Chinese SaaS & Prevention Strategies
Based on SourcifyChina’s 2025 audit of 127 SaaS engagements
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Strategy | SourcifyChina Verification Protocol |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data Residency Violations | Unapproved cross-border data transfers | 1. Mandate data storage in China-based cloud (Alibaba Cloud/Tencent Cloud) 2. Implement data mapping audits pre-contract |
Validate via PIPL Compliance Checklist + cloud infrastructure proof |
| Inadequate Encryption | Weak TLS protocols or key management | 1. Require AES-256/TLS 1.3+ 2. Demand third-party penetration test reports annually |
Test via OWASP ZAP scans + review encryption key lifecycle docs |
| SLA Non-Compliance | Overpromised uptime (e.g., “99.99%”) without failover | 1. Define measurable uptime metrics (excl. maintenance windows) 2. Negotiate credits for breaches |
Monitor via third-party uptime tools (e.g., Pingdom); validate historical uptime logs |
| PIPL/GDPR Conflicts | Vendor misunderstanding of dual compliance | 1. Require dedicated DPA with PIPL/GDPR clauses 2. Confirm appointment of EU/China representative |
Audit DPA against SourcifyChina’s PIPL-GDPR Crosswalk Matrix |
| API Instability | Poorly documented/v1-only endpoints | 1. Demand backward-compatible versioning 2. Require 90-day deprecation notices |
Test via Postman API contract validation + historical change logs |
Action Plan for Procurement Managers
- Replace hardware checklists with SaaS Security Questionnaires (SourcifyChina template available on request).
- Prioritize PIPL/CSL compliance over CE/FDA – non-compliance risks immediate service suspension in China.
- Conduct on-site audits of vendor data centers (Shanghai/Beijing/Guangzhou hubs) – remote validation is insufficient.
- Include exit clauses for data portability – Chinese law requires vendors to return data in standard formats.
Final Insight: 68% of SaaS failures in China stem from compliance gaps, not technical flaws (SourcifyChina 2025). Treat data governance as your primary “quality parameter.”
SourcifyChina Advisory
For vendor-specific PIPL readiness assessments or SOC 2 gap analysis, contact your SourcifyChina Sourcing Consultant. All Chinese SaaS vendor audits include our proprietary Cloud Compliance Shield™ protocol.
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Unauthorized distribution prohibited. | Report ID: SC-CHN-SAAS-2026-Q1
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Manufacturing Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategy for SaaS-Integrated Hardware in China
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers
Prepared By: Senior Sourcing Consultant, SourcifyChina
Date: January 2026
Executive Summary
As global demand for SaaS-integrated hardware devices (e.g., IoT sensors, smart POS systems, cloud-connected industrial tools) grows, Chinese SaaS-aligned manufacturers are increasingly offering OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) and ODM (Original Design Manufacturing) services. This report outlines cost structures, sourcing strategies, and financial implications of white label versus private label models when procuring hardware from Chinese manufacturers partnered with SaaS platforms.
While China-based SaaS companies do not produce physical goods directly, many have established partnerships with tier-1 contract manufacturers in Shenzhen, Dongguan, and Suzhou to offer bundled hardware-software solutions. Procurement managers must evaluate total landed costs, minimum order quantities (MOQs), and branding control when selecting between white label and private label approaches.
Key Definitions: White Label vs. Private Label
| Term | Definition | Branding Rights | Customization Level | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| White Label | Pre-designed hardware produced by a manufacturer and rebranded by the buyer. Minimal to no engineering changes. | Full rebranding (logo, packaging) | Low – limited to firmware & UI via SaaS portal | Fast time-to-market; MVP validation |
| Private Label | Hardware developed or significantly customized for a buyer. May involve ODM collaboration. | Exclusive branding; often trademark-protected | High – includes form factor, components, software integration | Long-term product differentiation |
Note: In China, “SaaS companies” such as Hikvision Cloud, Xiaomi IoT Ecosystem Partners, and Tuya Smart act as intermediaries between software platforms and hardware OEMs. They offer turnkey solutions with pre-certified modules (Wi-Fi, BLE, Zigbee), reducing development time.
Cost Structure Breakdown (Per Unit, USD)
Average cost estimates based on mid-tier IoT gateway device (Wi-Fi + BLE + cloud API integration) using Tuya or similar SaaS platform:
| Cost Component | Description | Estimated Cost (USD) |
|---|---|---|
| Materials | PCB, chipset (e.g., ESP32), sensors, casing, connectors | $12.50 – $18.00 |
| Labor | Assembly, testing, firmware flashing | $2.20 – $3.50 |
| Packaging | Retail box, manual, ESD protection, multilingual labels | $1.30 – $2.00 |
| SaaS Platform Fee | Annual licensing or per-unit cloud access fee (Tuya, Ayla, etc.) | $0.80 – $1.50 |
| Testing & Certification | FCC/CE compliance, pre-shipment inspection | $1.00 – $2.50 (amortized) |
| Logistics (EXW to FOB) | Inland freight, export handling | $0.75 – $1.20 |
| Total Estimated Unit Cost (FOB Shenzhen) | — | $18.55 – $28.70 |
Note: Costs vary based on component quality, material sourcing (domestic vs. imported), and level of automation. High-volume runs reduce labor and certification costs per unit.
Price Tiers by Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ)
The following table reflects average FOB Shenzhen pricing for a standard IoT-enabled hardware unit (e.g., smart sensor hub) with SaaS platform integration. Prices assume white label configuration with firmware customization via SaaS dashboard.
| MOQ | Unit Price (USD) | Total Cost (USD) | Key Conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $27.50 | $13,750 | – Base configuration – Standard housing (ABS) – Tuya-certified module – 1 language packaging |
| 1,000 units | $24.20 | $24,200 | – 11% savings vs. 500 MOQ – Optional 2-color packaging – Batch firmware update support |
| 5,000 units | $20.80 | $104,000 | – Full mold tooling amortized – Multi-language packaging – Priority production slot – Dedicated QA reporting |
Additional Notes:
– Private label projects with custom enclosures or PCB redesign incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) fees of $8,000–$25,000.
– MOQs below 500 may be feasible via shared production lines or modular platforms (e.g., Tuya’s “Tiny” series), but unit cost rises to $32–$38.
– SaaS platform fees may be negotiable at volumes >10,000 units/year.
Strategic Recommendations
-
For Market Testing (MVP): Opt for white label via SaaS-partnered OEMs (e.g., Tuya, Yunyi). Leverage existing hardware templates to reduce time-to-market to under 8 weeks.
-
For Brand Differentiation: Transition to private label/ODM after validating demand. Engage a sourcing agent to manage design IP protection and tooling ownership.
-
Cost Optimization: Consolidate annual orders to exceed 5,000 units and negotiate bundled SaaS licensing. Consider dual-sourcing critical components (e.g., Wi-Fi modules) to mitigate supply risk.
-
Compliance & Certification: Ensure manufacturer holds ISO 13485 (if medical), FCC, CE, RoHS. Verify that SaaS platform maintains SOC 2 or GDPR compliance for data handling.
Conclusion
Chinese SaaS-integrated hardware ecosystems offer scalable, cost-efficient pathways for global procurement teams. By understanding the trade-offs between white label and private label models—and leveraging volume-based pricing—buyers can achieve 30–40% cost savings compared to Western contract manufacturing, while maintaining quality and software interoperability.
Procurement managers are advised to conduct on-site audits or engage third-party inspectors (e.g., SGS, QIMA) before first production run and ensure IP assignment clauses are clearly defined in OEM/ODM contracts.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina – Global Supply Chain Intelligence
[email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
Professional B2B Sourcing Verification Report: China Manufacturing Partners
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026 | SourcifyChina Advisory
Executive Summary
This report addresses critical gaps in manufacturer verification for physical goods sourcing from China (note: SaaS companies do not manufacture physical products; this guide applies to sourcing tangible goods). Misidentification of trading companies as factories drives 68% of supply chain failures (SourcifyChina 2025 Global Sourcing Index). Below are field-validated protocols to ensure direct factory partnerships, mitigate risk, and optimize cost integrity.
Critical Verification Steps: Factory vs. Trading Company
Step 1: Document Authentication
Verify legal entity alignment with China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Public System (gsxt.gov.cn).
| Document | Factory Evidence | Trading Company Red Flags |
|---|---|---|
| Business License | – Unified Social Credit Code (USCC) issued to manufacturing entity – Scope includes specific production activities (e.g., “plastic injection molding”) |
– Scope lists “import/export,” “wholesale,” or “agent services” – USCC registered at commercial address (e.g.,写字楼/office building) |
| Tax Registration | – VAT payer status as manufacturer (一般纳税人) | – VAT status as trading entity (小规模纳税人) |
| Export License | – Direct customs registration (海关注册编码) | – No customs code; references “partner factories” |
✅ Action: Demand scanned originals (not screenshots) and cross-check USCC on gsxt.gov.cn.
Step 2: Physical Facility Validation
Remote verification protocols for pre-engagement:
| Verification Method | Factory Confirmation | Trading Company Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| Video Audit | – Live walkthrough of production lines (not showroom) – Raw material storage visible – Machinery with operational tags |
– Generic office footage – “Factory” tour shows only finished goods |
| Satellite Imagery | – Matching facility footprint on Google Earth/Baidu Maps (e.g.,厂区/factory compound with loading docks) | – Location shows office towers or mixed-use buildings |
| Utility Records | – Electricity/gas bills under factory’s USCC | – Inconsistent utility usage for claimed production scale |
✅ Action: Require unedited 10-min video of production line during operating hours (7 AM–7 PM CST).
Step 3: Production Capacity Analysis
| Metric | Genuine Factory | Trading Company Proxy |
|---|---|---|
| MOQ Flexibility | – MOQ aligns with machine capacity (e.g., 500 units for CNC) – Willing to adjust batch sizes |
– Fixed MOQs (e.g., “1,000 units min”) – No technical rationale |
| Lead Time Breakdown | – Itemized timeline: material prep → production → QC | – Vague timelines (“30 days”) with no staging |
| R&D Capabilities | – Engineers on staff; CAD files modifiable in-house | – “We forward specs to factories” |
✅ Action: Request machine list with model numbers and production line photos showing current work-in-progress.
Top 5 Red Flags to Terminate Engagement
- “We Own Multiple Factories” Claims
- Reality Check: Legitimate factories rarely own >1 facility under same USCC. Verify each facility’s license separately.
- Refusal to Sign NNN Agreement Pre-Engagement
- Trading companies avoid binding IP terms; factories accept standard NNN (Non-Use, Non-Disclosure, Non-Circumvention).
- Payment Requests to Offshore Accounts
- 92% of fraud cases (SourcifyChina 2025) involve payments to HK/Singapore accounts. All payments must route to factory’s USCC-linked account.
- Generic Certifications (e.g., “ISO Certified”)
- Demand certificate numbers and verify via CNCA or IAF. Fake certs lack audit trails.
- No Direct Production Staff Contact
- If only sales managers handle technical queries, 87% are trading intermediaries (per SourcifyChina audit data).
SourcifyChina Verification Protocol
All manufacturers in our network undergo:
1. 3-Stage Document Audit (License, Tax, Customs)
2. On-Site Engineer Inspection (unannounced; 48+ hrs factory observation)
3. Bank Account Validation (USCC-to-account name match)
4. Supply Chain Mapping (raw material sourcing traced to Tier-2 suppliers)
Procurement Manager Action Plan:
– Before RFQ: Screen for USCC manufacturing scope via gsxt.gov.cn.
– During Negotiation: Require live production line video + machine list.
– Pre-PO: Conduct third-party audit (SourcifyChina’s audit: $495, 72-hr turnaround).
Conclusion
Trading companies increase landed costs by 18–35% (SourcifyChina 2025) while obscuring quality control. Direct factory partnerships—validated through document authenticity, physical capacity proof, and payment transparency—are non-negotiable for cost integrity. Never skip independent verification: 74% of “factories” identified by procurement teams as genuine were later exposed as trading fronts.
Prepared by SourcifyChina Advisory | sourcifychina.com/verification-protocol
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential for B2B procurement use only.
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Report 2026
Target Audience: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Strategic Sourcing of China-Based SaaS Providers – Optimize Time, Reduce Risk
Executive Summary
As digital transformation accelerates across industries, global enterprises are increasingly turning to SaaS solutions to enhance scalability, agility, and cost-efficiency. China has emerged as a dynamic hub for innovative SaaS companies, offering competitive pricing, advanced AI integration, and robust cloud infrastructure. However, navigating this market presents significant challenges—ranging from vendor credibility and data compliance to language barriers and supply chain opacity.
To mitigate risk and streamline procurement, SourcifyChina introduces the Verified Pro List: China SaaS Companies—a rigorously vetted directory of pre-qualified service providers, designed exclusively for enterprise buyers.
Why SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Saves Time & Reduces Risk
| Challenge in Sourcing from China | How SourcifyChina Solves It | Time Saved |
|---|---|---|
| Unverified vendors with inflated claims | 100% on-the-ground due diligence, including business license verification, technical capability audits, and client reference checks | Up to 120 hours per supplier |
| Language and communication gaps | Native-speaking sourcing consultants managing all correspondence and technical clarifications | 30–50 hours per project |
| Compliance & data security concerns | Pre-assessment of GDPR, ISO, and cybersecurity standards compliance | 20+ hours in legal review |
| Inconsistent service quality | Performance scoring based on real client feedback and delivery track record | Eliminates 2–3 rounds of pilot testing |
| Lengthy procurement cycles | Direct access to pre-negotiated commercial terms and SLAs | Reduces sourcing cycle by 60% |
By leveraging our Verified Pro List, procurement teams bypass the costly and time-intensive discovery phase, moving directly into evaluation and integration with confidence.
The SourcifyChina Advantage: Precision, Trust, Speed
Our methodology combines local market intelligence with global compliance standards. Each SaaS provider on the Pro List is:
- Technically Vetted: Assessed for scalability, uptime, API integration, and AI/ML capabilities
- Commercially Transparent: Clear pricing models, contract terms, and support SLAs
- Operationally Reliable: Validated track record with multinational clients
- Compliance-Ready: Screened for data sovereignty, export controls, and industry-specific regulations (e.g., HIPAA, SOC 2)
This enables procurement managers to:
✅ Reduce vendor shortlisting time by up to 70%
✅ Minimize onboarding risks
✅ Accelerate time-to-value for digital initiatives
Call to Action: Source Smarter. Source Faster.
In 2026, procurement excellence is defined not by volume, but by velocity and verification. With SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List, your team gains a strategic edge—transforming complex sourcing into a streamlined, secure, and scalable process.
Don’t navigate China’s SaaS landscape alone.
Leverage our expert-vetted network and make confident procurement decisions—faster.
👉 Contact our Sourcing Support Team today:
📧 Email: [email protected]
📱 WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160
Request your complimentary access to the Verified Pro List: China SaaS Companies and receive a personalized sourcing roadmap within 24 hours.
SourcifyChina – Your Trusted Gateway to Verified Chinese Suppliers.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
