Our Chinese Company Verification Methodology

1. Identify the entity before checking it

A website, marketplace shop or English trading name may not identify the company that will sign the contract or receive payment. Every entity named in the quotation, contract, invoice and bank instructions is mapped first. A genuine record for Company A cannot support a transaction carried out by unexplained Company B.

2. Chinese legal company name

The exact Chinese legal name is the starting point for a mainland company check. An English name is often a translation or brand. If only the English name is available, the entity remains unconfirmed until a Chinese name or readable business license can be matched.

3. Unified Social Credit Code

The Unified Social Credit Code (USCC) is an 18-character identifier for legal persons and other organizations. Where a document displays a USCC, it should match the code associated with the intended legal entity. A match supports identity; it does not support a conclusion about reliability, finances or production capability.

4. Registration status and core fields

Where lawful sources allow, the check may cover company status, establishment information, legal representative, registered address and business scope. The source and wording are kept with the finding. “Registered” is not rewritten as “safe” or “officially endorsed.”

5. Registered address

The registered address is compared with the supplier’s documents. It may be different from an office, warehouse or production site. Even a perfect match does not confirm a factory. If the operating location matters, the factory address needs separate evidence or an on-site factory verification.

6. Business scope

Business scope can indicate registered activities such as manufacturing, wholesale, sales or import-export. It cannot show whether those activities take place today, whether equipment is present or whether capacity is available for a particular order.

7. Document comparison

The legal name, addresses and responsible entities are compared across the business license, PI, contract, website, marketplace profile, payment instructions and claimed factory address. Where any of those documents displays a USCC, the code is checked against the intended legal entity. Explained relationships are noted. A material mismatch stays “unclear” or “conflicting” until evidence resolves it.

8. Online identity consistency

Website operator details, domain, marketplace identity and contact information can support an entity match. They can also expose a mismatch. Design quality, platform badges and domain age are not substitutes for legal identity.

9. Public risk indicators

Depending on access and scope, lawful public information may include registration filings, abnormal-operation or serious-law-breaking listings and administrative penalties. The report states what was searched and what was visible. It does not imply access to every court, enforcement or commercial database.

The absence of a visible record does not mean there is no risk.

10. Manufacturer and trading-company indicators

Product breadth, business scope, addresses, visible equipment, production evidence, certificates, staff roles and contracting entities are considered together. None proves the operating model on its own. The report describes the support and uncertainty behind the assessment.

11. When the desktop review is not enough

Physical confirmation may be appropriate when addresses conflict, factory control is unclear, the beneficiary does not match, production claims remain unsupported or the order value makes the uncertainty material. A visit should answer a defined question—not simply produce factory photos.

12. On-site verification

Subject to access and permission, a visit can record signage, location, accessible production areas, visible equipment, products or materials, observable staff activity and permitted photos or video. The finding is limited to what was observable at that place and time. It is not a formal compliance audit, ownership certificate or capacity guarantee.

13. Evidence grading

Findings use five plain-language states. There is no automated risk score.

14. Limitations

• Information may be unavailable, delayed, incomplete, translated imperfectly or changed after the review.
• Supplier-provided documents may require further authentication.
• Public records do not prove product quality, solvency, capacity or future conduct.
• For a limited liability company, registered capital reflects the amount subscribed by its shareholders under the applicable registration rules. It is not the same as cash on hand, net worth or guaranteed financial strength. Capital rules differ for other entity types.
• Remote checks cannot confirm every physical asset, employee, process or inventory claim.
• An on-site visit records observable conditions and does not eliminate undisclosed subcontracting or later changes.
• A report supports a business decision but is not legal, financial, tax, compliance or certified quality advice.
• No verification process eliminates commercial risk or guarantees performance.

15. Human review before delivery

Final findings are reviewed before delivery. The check covers entity matching, source attribution, material inconsistencies and the line between evidence and inference. Limitations must be visible in the report, not hidden in a general disclaimer.

16. Last reviewed

This methodology was last reviewed on 2026-08-31. The date changes only when this content is materially reviewed or updated, not on every build.

Continue your review