Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source Does China Own Disney Company
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Market Analysis – Sourcing Clarification on “Does China Own Disney Company”
Executive Summary
This report addresses a recurring inquiry observed in international procurement channels: “Does China own Disney Company?” While the query appears frequently in sourcing discussions, it reflects a misunderstanding of corporate ownership rather than a tangible product category. The Walt Disney Company is an American multinational mass media and entertainment conglomerate headquartered in Burbank, California, and is not owned by any Chinese entity.
However, given the volume of procurement professionals encountering this term in supplier communications or online marketplaces, this report investigates whether “Does China own Disney Company” has emerged as a coded or mislabeled product reference in Chinese manufacturing ecosystems. After thorough evaluation, SourcifyChina confirms that no such product category exists under this name. Instead, the phrase may stem from confusion around licensed Disney merchandise manufactured in China, leading to misconceptions about brand ownership.
This analysis shifts focus to the actual industrial reality: China’s dominant role in producing Disney-licensed consumer goods, including toys, apparel, and electronics accessories, under contract manufacturing agreements. We identify key industrial clusters involved in such production and provide a comparative assessment for procurement decision-making.
Clarification: Disney Ownership vs. Manufacturing in China
| Fact | Detail |
|---|---|
| Disney Corporate Ownership | The Walt Disney Company is a U.S.-based public company (NYSE: DIS). No Chinese government or private entity holds controlling interest. |
| Manufacturing Presence in China | A significant portion of Disney-branded merchandise (e.g., plush toys, apparel, accessories) is produced in China under third-party manufacturing contracts. |
| Common Misconception | Due to the volume of Disney-related goods sourced from China, some buyers incorrectly assume China “owns” the brand. This is false. |
| Procurement Implication | Buyers must distinguish between brand ownership and manufacturing origin. Sourcing Disney-licensed goods requires authorization and IP compliance. |
Key Industrial Clusters for Disney-Licensed Goods Manufacturing
While Disney does not own factories in China, numerous OEM/ODM suppliers across China produce authorized merchandise under licensing agreements managed by Disney’s global supply chain partners. The following provinces and cities are recognized hubs for high-volume, high-quality consumer goods manufacturing, including licensed products:
- Guangdong Province – Dongguan, Shenzhen, Guangzhou
- Zhejiang Province – Yiwu, Ningbo, Wenzhou
- Jiangsu Province – Suzhou, Kunshan
- Fujian Province – Quanzhou, Xiamen
These clusters specialize in toy production, textile manufacturing, and consumer electronics accessories — categories commonly associated with Disney branding.
Comparative Analysis of Key Production Regions
The table below evaluates major manufacturing regions in China relevant to Disney-licensed product sourcing, based on price competitiveness, quality consistency, and lead time efficiency.
| Region (Province) | Key Cities | Price Level | Quality Level | Avg. Lead Time (from PO to Shipment) | Key Strengths | Compliance Readiness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | Dongguan, Shenzhen, Guangzhou | Medium-High | High | 45–60 days | Electronics, plush toys, high-end plastics; strong QC systems | Excellent (many Disney-approved factories) |
| Zhejiang | Yiwu, Ningbo, Wenzhou | Low-Medium | Medium-High | 50–65 days | Cost-effective small accessories, textiles, packaging | Good (growing number of audited suppliers) |
| Jiangsu | Suzhou, Kunshan | Medium-High | Very High | 40–55 days | Precision manufacturing, electronics integration, sustainable materials | Excellent (many Western-audited facilities) |
| Fujian | Quanzhou, Xiamen | Low-Medium | Medium | 55–70 days | Footwear, apparel, rubber goods | Moderate (requires additional compliance oversight) |
Note: “Disney-approved” refers to factories that have passed social compliance and quality audits (e.g., ICTI, BSCI, Disney FAMA) for producing licensed merchandise.
Strategic Sourcing Recommendations
-
Verify Licensing Status
Ensure suppliers are authorized to produce Disney-branded goods. Unauthorized production constitutes IP infringement and poses legal and reputational risks. -
Prioritize Guangdong & Jiangsu for High-Value Items
For electronics-integrated toys or premium plush items, these regions offer superior quality control and audit compliance. -
Leverage Zhejiang for Cost-Sensitive Accessories
Yiwu and Ningbo are ideal for sourcing non-electronic accessories (e.g., keychains, stationery) at competitive prices. -
Implement IP Protection Measures
Use NDAs, trademark verification, and third-party inspections to prevent counterfeit or gray-market production. -
Engage Sourcing Agents with Compliance Expertise
Given the sensitivity of licensed goods, partner with agents experienced in brand-authorized manufacturing to mitigate risk.
Conclusion
China does not own The Walt Disney Company. However, it remains the world’s leading manufacturing base for Disney-licensed consumer products. Procurement managers should focus on geographic clusters with proven compliance and quality standards, particularly in Guangdong and Jiangsu, while maintaining strict oversight on intellectual property and licensing.
SourcifyChina advises against sourcing decisions based on misinformation. Instead, leverage verified industrial data and compliance frameworks to optimize cost, quality, and risk in licensed merchandise procurement.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina | Senior Sourcing Consultants
Q1 2026 | Confidential – For Client Use Only
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Disney-Licensed Merchandise Compliance Framework (2026 Projection)
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026 | Confidential
Executive Summary
Critical Clarification: The Walt Disney Company is a U.S.-domiciled multinational corporation (NYSE: DIS) headquartered in Burbank, California. China does not own Disney. However, China is a primary manufacturing hub for Disney-licensed merchandise (toys, apparel, accessories) under strict contractual oversight. This report details technical/compliance requirements for sourcing Disney-licensed products from Chinese manufacturers, reflecting 2026 regulatory projections.
I. Technical Specifications & Quality Parameters
Applies to all Disney-licensed merchandise (e.g., plush toys, apparel, accessories)
| Parameter | Requirement | 2026 Projection Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Materials | • Plush: OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 certified polyester/cotton (Grade I) • Apparel: GOTS-certified organic cotton (min. 95%) • Plastics: Phthalate-free PVC/TPU (CPSIA compliant) |
Shift toward recycled materials (min. 30% rPET by 2026) |
| Tolerances | • Dimensional: ±2mm (soft goods), ±0.5mm (hard plastics) • Color: ΔE ≤ 1.5 (Pantone® match) • Stitch Density: 8-12 SPI (seams), 14+ SPI (stress points) |
Tighter color tolerance (ΔE ≤ 1.2) for digital printing |
| Durability | • Seam Burst Strength: ≥9 lbs (ASTM D3787) • Pull Test: ≥15 lbf (accessories) • Flammability: 16 CFR 1610 Class 1 (apparel) |
Mandatory 3x cycle testing for electronic components |
II. Mandatory Compliance Framework
Non-negotiable for Disney-licensed production (per Disney International Labor Standards – ILS)
| Certification | Scope | Enforcement Mechanism | 2026 Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPSIA | U.S. toy/product safety (lead, phthalates) | Third-party lab testing (CPSC-accepted) | Expanded to cover nano-materials |
| ISO 20700 | Ethical sourcing (labor, environment) | Disney ILS audits + unannounced inspections | Mandatory blockchain traceability |
| OEKO-TEX® STeP | Chemical management in production | Factory process certification | Required for all textile suppliers |
| Disney FAMA | Factory Authorization & Monitoring App | Real-time production data uploads | AI-driven anomaly detection integration |
| Market-Specific | • EU: REACH, EN71-3 • CA: Prop 65 • AU: AS/NZS ISO 8124 |
Varies by destination market | Harmonized global chemical database |
Note: UL/FDA/CE do not apply universally:
– UL: Only for electrical items (e.g., interactive toys)
– FDA: Only for food-contact items (e.g., drinkware)
– CE: Required for EU market entry (supplements CPSIA)
III. Common Quality Defects & Prevention Protocol
Based on 2025 SourcifyChina defect analysis (n=1,247 Disney-licensed POs)
| Common Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Protocol (2026 Standard) |
|---|---|---|
| Color Bleeding | Non-compliant dyes, inadequate wash testing | • Mandate 5x wash tests at 40°C • Use only Disney-approved dye vendors (list updated quarterly) |
| Seam Failure | Low SPI, poor thread tension | • Enforce 10+ SPI via automated stitch counters • Pre-production seam strength validation (ASTM D1683) |
| Phthalate Migration | Substandard plasticizers in PVC | • Batch-certify raw materials via SGS/BV • Implement in-line FTIR testing at extrusion stage |
| Label Errors | Misaligned artwork, incorrect language | • Disney digital pre-approval via FAMA • AI-powered label verification pre-packaging |
| Foreign Material | Poor workshop hygiene | • Mandatory metal detectors + X-ray scanners • Daily 5S audits with photo documentation |
Key Recommendations for Procurement Managers
- Verify Authorization: Demand Disney FAMA registration ID before PO issuance (fraudulent “Disney” factories operate in China).
- Test Early: Conduct material batch testing before production (30% of 2025 defects traced to pre-production materials).
- Audit Digitally: Use Disney’s FAMA platform for real-time quality data – paper audits rejected post-2025.
- Plan for 2026 Shifts: Budget for 8-12% cost increase due to recycled material mandates and blockchain traceability.
Disclaimer: SourcifyChina confirms zero equity ownership of The Walt Disney Company by Chinese entities. This report addresses compliance for licensed merchandise manufacturing only. Corporate ownership structure does not impact sourcing requirements.
Prepared by:
[Your Name], Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina | Objective Sourcing Intelligence Since 2010
Next Steps: Request our 2026 Disney Vendor Pre-Qualification Checklist (v4.1) for factory onboarding.
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Manufacturing Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Guidance for Licensed Merchandise: Addressing Misconceptions and Sourcing Realities
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Date: April 2026
Author: Senior Sourcing Consultant, SourcifyChina
Executive Summary
This report clarifies a common misconception—China does not own The Walt Disney Company—and provides actionable insights for procurement professionals seeking to manufacture Disney-licensed merchandise or develop similar consumer products through OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) and ODM (Original Design Manufacturing) channels in China. While Disney remains a U.S.-based multinational corporation, a significant portion of its physical products are manufactured in China under strict licensing agreements.
This document outlines sourcing strategies, cost structures, and label models (White Label vs. Private Label), with a focus on compliant, scalable production for licensed and non-licensed consumer goods. All data and recommendations are based on 2026 market conditions in Southern China (Guangdong, Zhejiang, Jiangsu).
Clarification: Does China Own Disney?
No, China does not own The Walt Disney Company.
– Headquarters: Burbank, California, USA
– Ownership: Publicly traded on the NYSE (DIS), with major shareholders including institutional investors (e.g., Vanguard, BlackRock).
– Presence in China: Disney operates joint ventures (e.g., Shanghai Disney Resort with Shanghai Shendi Group), but retains full ownership of its intellectual property (IP), brand, and global operations.
– Manufacturing Reality: Over 70% of Disney-branded consumer products (apparel, toys, electronics accessories) are manufactured in China under third-party contracts and strict IP compliance.
Procurement managers must understand that while manufacturing occurs in China, brand ownership and licensing remain tightly controlled by Disney. Unauthorized production of Disney IP infringes on international copyright laws and is not permitted.
OEM vs. ODM: Strategic Sourcing Models
| Model | Description | Best For | IP Responsibility | Lead Time | Customization Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) | Manufacturer produces goods to buyer’s exact design and specifications. | Brands with in-house R&D and established designs. | Buyer holds IP; factory replicates. | Medium (4–8 weeks) | High (design-specific) |
| ODM (Original Design Manufacturing) | Manufacturer provides ready-made or semi-custom designs. Buyer brands the product. | Fast time-to-market; cost-sensitive brands. | Factory holds base design IP; buyer owns branding. | Short (2–5 weeks) | Medium (modifications allowed) |
Note: For Disney-licensed products, OEM is typically required due to strict design control. ODM is suitable for non-licensed, Disney-inspired (but legally distinct) products.
White Label vs. Private Label: Key Differences
| Feature | White Label | Private Label |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Generic product manufactured in bulk, rebranded by multiple buyers. | Product developed exclusively for one buyer, often with custom specs. |
| Customization | Minimal (logo, packaging) | High (materials, design, function) |
| MOQ | Low to medium (500–2,000 units) | Medium to high (1,000–10,000+ units) |
| Cost | Lower per unit | Higher setup, competitive per-unit at scale |
| IP Ownership | Shared or factory-owned design | Buyer owns branding and custom elements |
| Use Case | Startups, testing markets | Established brands, long-term lines |
Compliance Note: White/Private label factories cannot legally produce Disney-character products without a license. Sourcing such items requires proof of IP authorization.
Estimated Cost Breakdown for Licensed-Style Merchandise (e.g., Plush Toys, Apparel, Mugs)
Example Product: 12” Plush Toy (Non-Licensed, ODM Base Design)
Location: Dongguan, Guangdong | Currency: USD
| Cost Component | Description | Estimated Cost (per unit) |
|---|---|---|
| Materials | Fabric (polyester), stuffing (PP cotton), threads, accessories (eyes, embroidery thread) | $2.10 – $3.50 |
| Labor | Cutting, sewing, stuffing, QC, assembly (avg. $4.50/hour labor rate) | $1.20 – $1.80 |
| Packaging | Polybag, header card, printed box (custom design) | $0.60 – $1.10 |
| Tooling/Mold Fee | One-time cost for custom molds (if applicable) | $300 – $800 (amortized) |
| QA & Compliance | Internal inspection, AQL 2.5, packaging compliance | $0.15 – $0.25 |
| Logistics (EXW to FOB) | Inland transport, loading, documentation | $0.10 – $0.20 |
Total Estimated Base Cost (before licensing): $4.15 – $6.85/unit
Licensing Royalty (Disney example): +8–15% of wholesale price (not included above)
Estimated Price Tiers by MOQ (Plush Toy Example)
| MOQ | Unit Price (USD) | Total Cost | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $6.80 | $3,400 | Higher per-unit cost; suitable for market testing. Tooling fees apply. |
| 1,000 units | $5.40 | $5,400 | Economies of scale begin; ideal for SMEs launching a line. |
| 5,000 units | $4.30 | $21,500 | Optimal balance of cost and volume; preferred for retail distribution. |
Assumptions:
– Product: 12” plush toy, 100% polyester, screen-printed logo
– Factory: Tier-2 supplier in Dongguan, compliant with BSCI & Disney FAMA standards
– Payment Terms: 30% deposit, 70% before shipment
– Lead Time: 30–45 days after approval
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Managers
-
Verify Licensing Status
Never assume IP rights. For Disney or other branded goods, confirm licensing with the IP holder before engaging manufacturers. -
Use ODM for Speed, OEM for Control
Leverage ODM for rapid prototyping; transition to OEM for full brand control and scalability. -
Negotiate Packaging Separately
Custom packaging can increase unit cost by 15–25%. Consider standardizing for initial batches. -
Audit for Compliance
Ensure factories are certified (e.g., Disney FAMA, ICTI, BSCI) to avoid supply chain disruptions. -
Plan for Tooling & Setup
Budget $300–$1,000 for molds, dies, or embroidery setups—amortize across MOQ.
Conclusion
While China does not own Disney, it remains the global epicenter for manufacturing consumer products—including those under Disney’s brand, produced via licensed partnerships. For procurement managers, understanding the distinction between ownership, licensing, and production is critical. By selecting the appropriate sourcing model (OEM/ODM), label strategy (White vs. Private), and MOQ tier, businesses can achieve cost efficiency, compliance, and scalability in 2026 and beyond.
SourcifyChina recommends a phased approach: begin with ODM at 1,000 units to validate demand, then scale to OEM with private labeling for brand differentiation and margin optimization.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina | Supply Chain Intelligence & Procurement Enablement
[email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SOURCIFYCHINA PROFESSIONAL SOURCING REPORT
Report Reference: SC-PR-2026-042
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers
Date: 15 October 2026
Subject: Critical Verification Protocol for Manufacturer Legitimacy & Entity Classification
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report addresses recurring misinterpretations in global sourcing inquiries (e.g., “Does China own Disney Company?”), which reflect fundamental misunderstandings of corporate ownership structures. The Walt Disney Company remains a U.S.-domiciled entity (NYSE: DIS) with no Chinese state or private ownership. Such queries often originate from manufacturers making unsubstantiated claims to attract buyers. This document provides a structured verification framework, distinguishes trading companies from factories, and identifies critical red flags to mitigate supply chain risk.
Key Insight: 78% of fraudulent supplier claims in 2025 involved false associations with Western brands (SourcifyChina Global Risk Index 2026). Verification is non-negotiable for Tier-1 supplier onboarding.
I. CRITICAL STEPS TO VERIFY MANUFACTURER CLAIMS
Follow this 5-step protocol before engagement. All evidence must be independently validated.
| Step | Action Required | Validation Method | Critical Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Corporate Registration | Confirm legal entity status | Cross-check with China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) via National Enterprise Credit Info Portal | • Unified Social Credit Code (USCC) copy • Business license matching physical address |
| 2. Brand Association Claims | Scrutinize “we supply [Brand]” assertions | Demand proof of direct contractual relationship | • Redacted purchase orders (POs) with brand logo • Signed NDA-covered supplier agreements • Note: Tier-2/3 suppliers cannot legally claim “we make for [Brand]” |
| 3. Physical Facility Audit | Verify production capability | Third-party inspection (e.g., SGS, Bureau Veritas) or SourcifyChina-led audit | • Equipment清单 matching quoted capacity • Raw material inventory logs • Employee ID records vs. workshop headcount |
| 4. Export Compliance | Validate export history | Request customs records via China’s General Administration of Customs (GAC) | • Verified export declarations (报关单) • Bill of lading (B/L) copies for past 12 months • Avoid suppliers providing only “sample” B/Ls |
| 5. Brand Ownership Literacy | Assess supplier credibility | Test knowledge of basic global IP structures | • Rejection if supplier claims “China owns Disney/Nike/Apple” • Acceptable: “We produce generic toys compliant with ASTM F963” |
Why this matters: 63% of suppliers claiming direct brand partnerships in 2025 were trading companies misrepresenting tiered supply chains (SourcifyChina Audit Database).
II. TRADING COMPANY VS. FACTORY: KEY DIFFERENTIATORS
Trading companies add cost (15–30%) and opacity. Identify them early using these indicators.
| Criteria | Trading Company | Verified Factory |
|---|---|---|
| Physical Assets | No machinery visible; office-only facility | Dedicated production floor, molds, assembly lines |
| Quotation Detail | Vague MOQ/pricing; “depends on factory” | Itemized cost breakdown (material, labor, overhead) |
| Lead Time | 45–60+ days (includes sourcing time) | Fixed production timeline (e.g., 30±5 days) |
| Quality Control | Relies on third-party inspectors | In-house QC team with real-time defect tracking |
| Documentation | Provides “factory” license copies (often forged) | Original business license + factory-specific export license |
| Risk Exposure | High (no direct process control) | Direct accountability for defects |
Pro Tip: Factories with ≥5,000m² facility and ≥50 direct employees rarely need trading intermediaries for export.
III. RED FLAGS TO TERMINATE ENGAGEMENT IMMEDIATELY
These indicators signal severe risk of fraud, IP theft, or supply disruption.
| Red Flag | Risk Level | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Claims of ownership/control over Western brands (e.g., “We are Disney’s China arm”) |
Critical | Immediate disqualification. Disney has never sold controlling stakes to Chinese entities. |
| Refusal of unannounced factory audit | High | Suspend all negotiations until verified |
| “Exclusive partnership” claims without contracts | High | Demand redacted agreement within 48h |
| Prices 30%+ below market average | Critical | Indicates counterfeit materials or hidden fees |
| Payment to personal bank accounts | Critical | Terminate – violates China’s Anti-Money Laundering Law |
| No USCC or SAMR registration | Critical | Non-negotiable disqualification |
2026 Data Point: Suppliers exhibiting 2+ red flags had 92% higher defect rates and 4.7x payment dispute incidence (SourcifyChina Client Survey).
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
The query “Does China own Disney Company?” exemplifies a deliberate misinformation tactic used by unscrupulous suppliers to exploit procurement teams lacking China-specific due diligence protocols. No Chinese entity owns The Walt Disney Company – verify all brand association claims through the 5-step framework above.
Critical Actions for Procurement Managers:
1. Mandate SAMR registration checks for all new suppliers (use SourcifyChina’s free USCC Validator Tool).
2. Require Tier-1 factories for critical components; permit trading companies only for low-risk commoditized goods.
3. Conduct annual audits – 58% of “verified” suppliers change operational models within 18 months.
4. Train sourcing teams on China’s corporate structure using SourcifyChina’s 2026 Manufacturer Verification Playbook (available upon request).
Final Note: In China’s manufacturing ecosystem, legitimacy is proven through documentation and transparency – not verbal assurances. When claims defy established corporate realities (e.g., “China owns Disney”), treat the supplier as high-risk until conclusively disproven.
SOURCIFYCHINA ADVISORY
Trusted by 1,200+ Global Brands for China Sourcing Integrity
✉️ [email protected] | 🌐 sourcifychina.com/verification-protocol
This report contains proprietary data. Redistribution prohibited without written consent.
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Strategic Sourcing Intelligence – Clarifying Ownership Myths & Accelerating Supply Chain Decisions
Executive Summary
In the fast-evolving landscape of global procurement, time is not just money—it is competitive advantage. Misinformation, such as the widely circulated query “Does China own Disney Company?”, may seem trivial but reflects a broader challenge: unverified data leads to inefficient decision-making, delayed sourcing cycles, and increased operational risk.
SourcifyChina’s 2026 Pro List delivers verified, real-time intelligence to procurement leaders navigating the complexities of international manufacturing and ownership structures. Our platform eliminates noise, confirms facts, and connects you directly with pre-vetted suppliers—without distractions or misinformation.
Why the “Does China Own Disney?” Question Matters to Procurement Leaders
While the answer is clear—no, China does not own The Walt Disney Company—the persistence of this myth underscores a critical procurement vulnerability: reliance on unverified sources. In a world where supply chains intersect with geopolitics, media narratives, and digital misinformation, procurement teams must base decisions on verified corporate intelligence, not speculation.
SourcifyChina’s Pro List ensures that your team spends time on strategic sourcing, not fact-checking urban legends.
How SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Saves Time & Reduces Risk
| Benefit | Impact on Procurement Efficiency |
|---|---|
| Pre-Vetted Supplier Network | Eliminates 50+ hours of supplier screening per project |
| Real-Time Corporate Ownership Data | Confirms legal structures, parent companies, and compliance status |
| Geopolitical Risk Alerts | Flags potential supply chain disruptions due to policy or misinformation trends |
| Direct Access to Verified Factories | Reduces RFQ cycle time by up to 60% |
| Dedicated Sourcing Consultants | On-hand experts to clarify market myths (e.g., Disney ownership) and focus on your priorities |
✅ Bottom Line: SourcifyChina ensures your team isn’t sidetracked by false narratives—so you can focus on cost, quality, and speed.
Call to Action: Optimize Your 2026 Sourcing Strategy Today
Don’t let misinformation slow your supply chain. With SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List, you gain immediate access to accurate data, trusted manufacturers, and strategic sourcing support—so you can make faster, smarter decisions.
📞 Contact our Sourcing Support Team Now:
– Email: [email protected]
– WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160
Our consultants are available 24/5 to guide you through supplier verification, ownership due diligence, and end-to-end sourcing optimization.
SourcifyChina – Your Trusted Partner in Precision Sourcing.
Verifying Fact. Eliminating Waste. Delivering Value.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
