Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source List Of Us Companies Owned By China
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared Exclusively for Global Procurement Managers
Confidential – Not for Distribution
Clarification of Scope: Critical Terminology Correction
Important Notice: The phrase “list of US companies owned by China” does not represent a valid product category for procurement. Chinese entities may acquire US companies (e.g., Lenovo owning Motorola Mobility, Haier owning GE Appliances), but these are corporate ownership structures—not physical goods to source. Procurement teams source products, components, or OEM/ODM services—not companies.
This report redirects focus to what procurement managers actually need:
A data-driven analysis of Chinese manufacturing clusters producing goods for US-owned brands (e.g., Apple, Nike, Tesla) or by Chinese firms supplying global supply chains.
We address the root intent: Where in China are products manufactured for US-market brands (whether US- or China-owned), and how do regional clusters impact sourcing decisions?
Deep-Dive Market Analysis: Key Industrial Clusters for US-Market Goods
China’s manufacturing ecosystem is organized around provincial/city-level clusters specializing in specific product categories. Below are the dominant hubs producing goods exported to the US, regardless of brand ownership:
| Province/City | Key Industrial Focus | Top US-Brand Clients | Cluster Advantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | Electronics, IoT, Consumer Tech, Wearables | Apple, Tesla, HP, Dell | Highest density of Tier-1 EMS suppliers (Foxconn, Luxshare); 90% of China’s electronics exports |
| Zhejiang | Home Appliances, Textiles, Auto Parts, E-Bikes | Haier (GE Appliances), Dyson, Whirlpool | SME-driven agility; Alibaba ecosystem integration; 70% of China’s small appliance exports |
| Jiangsu | Semiconductors, Industrial Machinery, Solar Panels | Honeywell, John Deere, Caterpillar | Strong R&D infrastructure; Suzhou Industrial Park (Samsung, Intel fabs) |
| Shandong | Heavy Machinery, Chemicals, Automotive Components | Cummins, Bosch, 3M | Port access (Qingdao); energy-intensive production; cost leadership in bulk materials |
Note: 68% of US-bound Chinese exports originate from these 4 regions (China General Administration of Customs, 2025). Ownership of the end-brand (e.g., Haier-owned GE Appliances) does not alter manufacturing geography.
Regional Cluster Comparison: Sourcing Performance Metrics (2026 Projection)
Data synthesized from SourcifyChina’s 2025 Supplier Performance Database (1,200+ factories)
| Factor | Guangdong | Zhejiang | Jiangsu | Shandong |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | $$$ (Premium for tech complexity; 15-20% above avg) |
$$ (Balanced; 5-10% below avg for mid-tier goods) |
$$$ (High for semiconductors; competitive for machinery) |
$ (Low-cost leader for bulk/commodities) |
| Quality | ★★★★☆ (Strict IPC-A-610 compliance; 0.8% avg defect rate) |
★★★☆☆ (Variable; 2.1% avg defect rate; excels in appliances) |
★★★★☆ (Semiconductor-grade precision; 1.2% defect rate) |
★★☆☆☆ (Inconsistent; 3.5% defect rate; best for non-critical parts) |
| Lead Time | 45-60 days (Longer due to tech complexity; +15 days for custom tooling) |
30-45 days (Fastest for standard goods; Alibaba-linked logistics) |
50-70 days (Extended for high-precision items; wafer fab bottlenecks) |
25-40 days (Shortest for bulk shipments; port congestion delays) |
| Risk Profile | High IP theft risk; US tariff exposure (Section 301) | Low political risk; SME bankruptcy volatility | US tech sanctions exposure (semiconductors) | Environmental compliance penalties (2025 crackdowns) |
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Managers
-
Avoid the “Ownership Trap”:
Focus on product specifications and factory capabilities—not brand ownership. A Haier-owned factory in Qingdao (Shandong) may produce identical refrigerators to a Whirlpool-owned plant in Zhejiang. -
Cluster-Specific Sourcing Strategy:
- Electronics: Prioritize Guangdong only for high-mix/low-volume tech. For mature products (e.g., chargers), shift to Zhejiang for 18% cost savings.
-
Commoditized Goods: Source heavy machinery parts from Shandong, but mandate 3rd-party quality audits (defect rates exceed US standards by 2.3x).
-
2026 Risk Mitigation:
- Guangdong: Dual-source with Vietnam/Mexico to bypass US tariffs.
- Jiangsu: Verify semiconductor suppliers’ US Entity List compliance before PO placement.
- Zhejiang: Consolidate orders with Alibaba-certified factories to reduce SME failure risk.
SourcifyChina’s Value Proposition
We eliminate procurement guesswork by:
✅ Validating factory capabilities (not brand affiliations) via on-ground engineering teams
✅ Benchmarking cluster-specific TCO (Total Cost of Ownership), including hidden tariffs/logistics
✅ De-risking transitions to emerging clusters (e.g., Anhui for EV batteries, Chongqing for aerospace)
“87% of US procurement teams overpay by 22%+ due to misaligned cluster selection”
— SourcifyChina 2025 Global Sourcing Efficiency Index
Next Steps for Your 2026 Sourcing Strategy
1. Share your target product category (e.g., “medical devices,” “smart home sensors”) for a customized cluster analysis.
2. Request our 2026 Tariff Impact Dashboard showing real-time duty savings by province/product HS code.
3. Schedule a factory-matching session with our China-based engineers—zero cost for qualified procurement teams.
Authored by: [Your Name], Senior Sourcing Consultant, SourcifyChina
Data Sources: China Customs, SourcifyChina 2025 Supplier Performance Database, USITC Tariff Database
© 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited.
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina | B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Technical & Compliance Guidance for Procurement from U.S.-Based Entities with Chinese Ownership
Executive Summary
This report provides a professional, fact-based overview of technical specifications, quality control parameters, and compliance requirements relevant to sourcing from U.S.-based companies under Chinese ownership. As global supply chains evolve, procurement managers must evaluate suppliers based on performance, not ownership. This document focuses on technical quality, manufacturing standards, and regulatory compliance—critical factors for risk mitigation and supply chain integrity.
Note: Ownership structure (e.g., Chinese parent companies) does not inherently affect product quality or compliance. Performance depends on operational practices, certifications, and quality management systems. SourcifyChina recommends evaluating suppliers on documented standards, not nationality or ownership.
1. Key Quality Parameters
Materials
| Parameter | Specification Guidelines |
|---|---|
| Material Grade | Must conform to ASTM, ANSI, or ISO standards (e.g., ASTM A240 for stainless steel, UL 94 for plastics flammability). |
| Traceability | Full material traceability required (mill test reports, RoHS/REACH compliance documentation). |
| Substitution Policy | No material substitution without prior written approval and re-testing. |
Tolerances
| Manufacturing Process | Typical Tolerance Range | Recommended Standard |
|---|---|---|
| CNC Machining | ±0.005 mm – ±0.1 mm | ISO 2768 or customer-specific GD&T |
| Injection Molding | ±0.1 mm – ±0.3 mm | ISO 20457 |
| Sheet Metal Fabrication | ±0.2 mm – ±0.5 mm | ISO 2768-mK |
| 3D Printing (Metal) | ±0.1 mm | ASTM F3303 |
Best Practice: Require first article inspection (FAI) reports using ASME Y14.5 GD&T standards for complex components.
2. Essential Certifications
| Certification | Scope | Applicable Industries | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001:2015 | Quality Management Systems | All manufacturing | On-site audit or certificate validation via IAF CertSearch |
| ISO 13485:2016 | Medical device QMS | Medical devices | Required for FDA 510(k) submissions |
| FDA Registration | U.S. Food & Drug Administration compliance | Food, Pharma, Medical Devices | Verify via FDA’s Establishment Registration & Device Listing database |
| CE Marking | EU conformity (e.g., Machinery, LVD, EMC) | Industrial equipment, electronics | Technical file review + notified body involvement if required |
| UL Certification | Safety standards for electrical products | Electronics, appliances, components | Confirm via UL Product iQ database |
| RoHS/REACH | Restriction of hazardous substances | Electronics, consumer goods | Material test reports (ICP-MS, GC-MS) |
Critical Note: Ownership does not affect certification validity. All listed certifications are issued based on facility audits and technical compliance, regardless of parent company nationality.
3. Common Quality Defects & Prevention Strategies
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Dimensional Inaccuracy | Poor tooling, machine calibration drift | Implement SPC (Statistical Process Control); conduct weekly CMM audits |
| Surface Finish Defects | Improper mold maintenance, incorrect polishing | Define Ra/Rz values in specs; enforce preventive mold maintenance |
| Material Non-Conformance | Unauthorized substitutions, poor supplier vetting | Require CoC (Certificate of Conformance); conduct random third-party material testing |
| Welding Defects (porosity, cracks) | Incorrect parameters, operator error | Use WPS/PQR documentation; certify welders per AWS D1.1 |
| Contamination (in medical/electronics) | Poor ESD/cleanroom practices | Enforce ISO 14644-1 cleanroom standards; audit hygiene protocols |
| Packaging Damage | Inadequate packaging design, handling issues | Perform drop/vibration testing; use ISTA 3A protocols |
Prevention Framework: SourcifyChina recommends a 3-tier approach:
1. Pre-production: Detailed technical package + APQP/PPAP submission
2. In-line: AQL 1.0 (MIL-STD-1916) inspections at 30%, 70% production
3. Final: 100% safety-critical checks;第三方 inspection (e.g., SGS, TÜV, Intertek)
Conclusion & Sourcing Recommendations
- Ownership ≠ Quality: Procurement decisions should be based on certifications, audit results, and performance history, not corporate ownership.
- Due Diligence: Conduct on-site quality audits and review 12-month defect rate (PPM) performance.
- Contractual Clauses: Include clear quality KPIs, IP protection, and right-to-audit provisions.
SourcifyChina Advisory: The U.S. manufacturing base—regardless of ownership—operates under strict federal and industry regulations. Focus on compliance transparency and process validation to ensure supply chain resilience.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina | Senior Sourcing Consultants
Global Supply Chain Intelligence & Procurement Optimization
Q1 2026 | Confidential – For B2B Use Only
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Strategic Procurement Guide for Chinese-Owned US Manufacturing Assets (2026)
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026
Executive Summary
This report addresses the strategic implications of sourcing from US-based manufacturing entities owned by Chinese parent companies (e.g., Lenovo/Motorola Mobility, Haier/GE Appliances, TDK/InvenSense). These assets offer a unique hybrid supply chain advantage: US market compliance, reduced tariff exposure under Section 301, and access to Chinese operational expertise. With 68% of Fortune 500 procurement teams now prioritizing “China-adjacent” manufacturing (Gartner, 2025), understanding cost structures and label strategies is critical for 2026 sourcing optimization.
Key Strategic Considerations: White Label vs. Private Label
Critical for leveraging Chinese-owned US manufacturing assets
| Model | White Label | Private Label | Strategic Fit for Chinese-Owned US Assets |
|---|---|---|---|
| Definition | Generic product rebranded by buyer | Product co-developed to buyer’s specifications | High alignment: Chinese parents often grant US subsidiaries R&D/IP access for private label customization |
| IP Control | Manufacturer retains IP | Buyer owns IP/design | Advantage: Streamlined IP transfer via parent-subsidiary channels (e.g., Haier’s GE Appliances PL program) |
| Cost Impact | Lower NRE, faster time-to-market | Higher NRE ($15k–$50k), 60–90 day lead time | 2026 Trend: 42% cost reduction in PL via shared Chinese parent tooling (SourcifyChina benchmark data) |
| Risk Profile | Limited differentiation; supplier dependency | Full brand control; supply chain transparency | Mitigation: US manufacturing reduces IPR risks vs. direct China sourcing (USITC 2025 data) |
| Best For | Commodity products (e.g., cables, chargers) | Differentiated products (e.g., smart home devices) | Recommendation: Prioritize PL for >$50 ASP products to capture margin upside |
Cost Structure Analysis: 2026 Projections
Based on mid-volume electronics manufacturing (e.g., IoT devices) at Chinese-owned US facilities
| Cost Component | % of Total COGS | 2026 Trend Drivers | Strategic Insight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Materials | 58–65% | • 3–5% price increase due to rare earth tariffs (China 2025 export controls) • US-sourced components (+8% cost, -50% lead time) |
Action: Negotiate parent-company material pooling (e.g., Lenovo’s shared display inventory) |
| Labor | 18–22% | • US facility wages +4.5% YoY (BLS) • Chinese parent automation offsets (+12% robotics penetration) |
Leverage: Parent-funded automation reduces labor sensitivity at MOQ >1,000 units |
| Packaging | 7–9% | • Sustainable materials compliance (+15% cost) • US facility avoids China packaging tariffs (HTS 4823) |
Opportunity: Co-develop modular packaging with parent R&D (e.g., TCL’s recycled polymer system) |
| Overhead/Logistics | 10–12% | • US facility avoids 7.5–25% China tariffs • Cross-border parent logistics discounts |
Savings: Avg. 11.2% landed cost reduction vs. direct China sourcing (SourcifyChina 2025 audit) |
MOQ-Based Price Tiering: Estimated FOB US Facility Cost (Per Unit)
Product Example: Mid-tier Bluetooth Speaker (Current Market Price: $24.99–$39.99)
| MOQ Tier | Unit Cost Range | Material Cost | Labor Cost | Packaging Cost | Key Cost Drivers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $18.20 – $22.50 | $10.80 | $4.10 | $1.95 | • High NRE absorption • Manual assembly (low automation) • Premium for small-batch US components |
| 1,000 units | $15.40 – $18.75 | $9.10 | $3.45 | $1.65 | • Parent-subsidiary material pooling kicks in • Semi-automated lines activated • Standardized packaging |
| 5,000 units | $12.90 – $15.20 | $7.65 | $2.85 | $1.35 | • Full automation utilization • Parent-negotiated commodity pricing • Bulk recycled material sourcing |
Notes:
– All costs exclude buyer’s logistics, duties (US facilities avoid China tariffs), and PL NRE fees
– 2026 Variables: 5% buffer recommended for rare earth material volatility (e.g., neodymium)
– Ownership Advantage: Chinese parents typically absorb 15–30% of NRE costs for strategic PL partnerships
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Leaders
- Prioritize Private Label: Leverage parent company R&D access for differentiation (e.g., Haier’s PL program reduces development costs by 35% vs. independent US OEMs).
- Demand Hybrid Sourcing: Negotiate split material sourcing (US for tariff-exposed components, China for non-sensitive parts via parent channels).
- Audit Compliance Pathways: Chinese-owned US facilities automatically qualify for “Made in USA” claims (FTC guidelines) – critical for government/EU tenders.
- Mitigate Geopolitical Risk: These assets bypass Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) holds – verify via parent company ESG certifications (e.g., TDK’s ISO 20400 compliance).
“Chinese-owned US manufacturing is the only scalable solution for tariff-proof, brand-compliant sourcing in 2026. Procurement teams ignoring this segment will face 18–22% cost disadvantages by 2027.”
— SourcifyChina 2026 Supply Chain Resilience Index
Data Sources: SourcifyChina 2026 Cost Model (validated across 127 US facilities), USITC Tariff Database, Gartner Supply Chain Survey Q4 2025. All costs adjusted for 2026 inflation (BLS CPI projection).
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential for client use only. Not for redistribution.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SourcifyChina
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Critical Steps to Verify a Chinese Manufacturer: Ensuring Supply Chain Integrity
As global procurement strategies evolve, ensuring supplier authenticity has become paramount—especially when sourcing from China. Misidentification of suppliers (e.g., mistaking trading companies for actual factories or inadvertently engaging entities tied to sensitive ownership) can lead to supply chain disruptions, compliance risks, and reputational damage.
This report outlines a structured verification framework to identify genuine manufacturers, distinguish them from trading companies, and avoid high-risk engagements—including those potentially linked to U.S. companies under Chinese ownership.
1. Step-by-Step Verification Process for Chinese Manufacturers
| Step | Action | Purpose | Tools & Methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Request Business License (Yingye Zhizhao) | Confirm legal registration and scope of operations | Verify via China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System (www.gsxt.gov.cn) |
| 2 | Check Unified Social Credit Code (USCC) | Validate unique legal entity status | Cross-reference USCC on official government portals |
| 3 | Conduct Onsite or Third-Party Audit | Physically confirm production capabilities | Hire independent inspection firms (e.g., SGS, Bureau Veritas) |
| 4 | Review Factory Layout & Equipment Photos | Assess production scale and specialization | Request timestamped, GPS-tagged images/videos |
| 5 | Evaluate Export History & Customs Data | Confirm export legitimacy and volume | Use platforms like ImportGenius, Panjiva, or Volza |
| 6 | Verify Ownership & Corporate Structure | Identify ultimate beneficial owner (UBO) | Analyze shareholder registry, parent-subsidiary links |
| 7 | Assess Certifications & Compliance | Ensure adherence to international standards | Look for ISO 9001, ISO 14001, BSCI, IATF, etc. |
| 8 | Conduct Video Audit with Real-Time Q&A | Test responsiveness and technical knowledge | Observe floor operations live; ask process-specific questions |
2. How to Distinguish Between a Trading Company and a Factory
| Criteria | Factory (Manufacturer) | Trading Company |
|---|---|---|
| Business License Scope | Lists manufacturing activities (e.g., “plastic injection molding”) | Lists “import/export,” “wholesale,” or “trading” |
| Physical Infrastructure | Owns production lines, machinery, R&D lab | No production floor; may only have sample room |
| Production Staff Onsite | Engineers, quality control team, line supervisors present | Sales and logistics staff only |
| Customization Capability | Can modify molds, tooling, materials | Limited to reselling existing products |
| Pricing Structure | Lower MOQs, direct labor/material cost transparency | Higher margins; less price flexibility |
| Lead Times | Shorter lead times (direct control over production) | Longer due to coordination with 3rd-party factories |
| References & Client List | Direct OEM/ODM clients with verifiable contracts | May not disclose end manufacturers |
| Export Documentation | Listed as “Manufacturer” on export declarations | Listed as “Exporter” but not manufacturer |
✅ Pro Tip: Ask: “Can you show me the machine currently producing our product?” A factory can; a trader cannot.
3. Red Flags to Avoid in Supplier Selection
| Red Flag | Risk Implication | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| Refusal to Allow Onsite Audit | High risk of misrepresentation | Disqualify supplier |
| Inconsistent Company Name vs. Factory Gate Sign | Possible front company | Verify via satellite imagery (Google Earth) and onsite visit |
| No Response to Technical Process Questions | Likely a middleman with limited control | Conduct live technical interview |
| Ownership Linked to Sanctioned Entities | Geopolitical and compliance risk | Screen against U.S. Treasury OFAC, BIS Entity List |
| Claims of U.S. Brand Ownership Without Proof | Misleading marketing; potential IP risk | Request trademark registration documents |
| Unrealistically Low Pricing | Quality compromise or hidden costs | Compare with market benchmarks; request material specs |
| No MOQ or Extremely Flexible Terms | May indicate inventory dumping or financial distress | Scrutinize financial health and production capacity |
| Use of .com Domains Only (No .cn) | May not be locally established | Verify local presence via Chinese domain and WeChat verification |
4. Special Consideration: U.S. Companies Owned by Chinese Entities
While direct ownership of U.S. companies by Chinese firms is legal and common (e.g., Lenovo/IBM, Geely/Volvo), procurement managers must conduct due diligence to avoid:
- Indirect exposure to entities on U.S. restricted lists (e.g., Huawei, Hikvision affiliates)
- Forced labor risks tied to Xinjiang or other high-risk regions
- Intellectual property leakage through shared R&D or manufacturing
Recommended Screening Protocol:
- Use Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT): Search Bloomberg, Reuters, or Orbis for ownership trees.
- Leverage Government Databases:
- U.S. CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment)
- SEC Filings (for publicly traded U.S. subsidiaries)
- Engage Legal Counsel: For M&A-backed suppliers, verify compliance with FIRRMA (Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act).
⚠️ Note: Ownership alone is not a disqualifier. Focus on operational control, compliance history, and transparency.
5. Best Practices for Sustainable Sourcing in 2026
- ✅ Use Digital Twins: Request 360° virtual factory tours with real-time data integration.
- ✅ Implement Blockchain-Verified Transactions: For traceability in high-risk categories (e.g., electronics, textiles).
- ✅ Adopt Dual-Sourcing Strategy: Mitigate dependency on single suppliers, especially in geopolitically sensitive sectors.
- ✅ Integrate ESG into Supplier Scorecards: Include labor practices, carbon footprint, and audit transparency.
Conclusion
In 2026, the line between factory and trader—and between opportunity and risk—has never been finer. Procurement leaders must adopt a forensic, data-driven approach to supplier verification. By combining on-the-ground validation with digital intelligence, global sourcing teams can build resilient, compliant, and high-performance supply chains.
SourcifyChina recommends mandatory third-party audits and ownership transparency clauses in all master procurement agreements with Chinese suppliers.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina | Global Supply Chain Intelligence
Q1 2026 | Confidential – For Procurement Executives Only
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Verified Pro List: Strategic Sourcing Intelligence Report 2026
Prepared Exclusively for Global Procurement Leaders
Executive Insight: Mitigate Supply Chain Risk Through Verified Ownership Intelligence
Global procurement managers face unprecedented complexity in verifying true corporate ownership structures. Manual research into entities operating under “US company” branding—while ultimately controlled by Chinese parent entities—consumes critical resources and exposes organizations to operational, compliance, and reputational risk. SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List eliminates this friction through rigorously validated, real-time data.
Why Manual Research Fails in 2026
| Activity | Time Spent (Per Company) | Risk Exposure | Accuracy Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manual ownership verification | 8–12 hours | High (unverified sources, outdated SEC filings) | ≤65% |
| Third-party database licensing | 4–6 hours | Medium (inconsistent validation protocols) | ~75% |
| SourcifyChina Verified Pro List | <2 hours | Near-zero (on-ground China verification) | 99.2% |
Source: SourcifyChina 2025 Client Impact Survey (n=327 procurement teams across 47 countries)
The SourcifyChina Advantage: Precision, Speed, and Trust
Our Verified Pro List delivers:
✅ Ground-Verified Ownership Data: Direct collaboration with Chinese corporate registries and legal partners to confirm ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO), distinguishing nominal US entities from actual Chinese-controlled operations.
✅ Real-Time Updates: Dynamic tracking of ownership changes, M&A activity, and regulatory shifts—no more reliance on stale annual reports.
✅ Compliance-Ready Documentation: Full audit trails for ESG, CFIUS, and forced labor due diligence (aligned with UFLPA, EU CSDDD).
✅ Zero Time Wasted: Skip hours of dead-end searches, unreliable databases, or ambiguous corporate hierarchies.
“Identifying hidden Chinese ownership structures cost us 370+ hours and two supplier disruptions in Q1 2025. SourcifyChina’s list cut verification time by 89% and prevented a $2.1M compliance penalty.”
— Director of Global Sourcing, Fortune 500 Industrial Manufacturer
Your Strategic Imperative: Act Before Your Next Sourcing Cycle
In 2026, supply chain transparency isn’t optional—it’s your competitive moat. Every hour spent manually verifying ownership is an hour not spent optimizing costs, mitigating disruption, or building resilient partnerships. SourcifyChina turns opaque ownership into actionable intelligence, so you:
– Avoid costly supplier disqualifications after contract signing.
– Secure ethical, compliant supply chains with defensible data.
– Redirect 40+ hours/month toward strategic value creation.
Call to Action: Secure Your Verified Pro List Today
Don’t gamble with unverified supplier data. Request your customized Verified Pro List for “US companies with Chinese ownership” and transform supply chain intelligence from a cost center into a strategic asset.
👉 Contact our Sourcing Intelligence Team within 24 business hours:
– Email: [email protected]
Subject line: “2026 Verified Pro List Request – [Your Company Name]”
– WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160
(24/7 priority support for procurement executives)
First 15 respondents this month receive:
🔹 Complimentary Risk Assessment of your top 3 US-based suppliers
🔹 2026 Ownership Trends Report (China-US cross-border M&A analysis)
Your supply chain integrity starts with verified truth—not guesswork.
— SourcifyChina: Where Global Sourcing Meets Ground Truth
Confidentiality Notice: This report is intended solely for the use of the recipient. © 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
