China Customs Trademark Recordation: Stop Counterfeits Before They Leave the Factory

2026-09-09 · 18 min read · By Logo China Pro

A shipment of LABUBU dolls left a warehouse in Dongguan heading for Southeast Asia. The boxes looked authentic -- same packaging, same holographic stickers, same product codes. China Customs flagged the consignment at the border. Officials opened the containers and found 10,000 counterfeit POP MART toys. The seizure made headlines in January 2026, when the General Administration of Customs (GACC) used the case in a public enforcement briefing to signal its priorities for the year ahead. That single bust was not an outlier. It was one data point in a system that intercepted 86.42 million infringing goods across 53,200 inspection actions in 2024 alone.

For any brand owner manufacturing in China or sourcing from Chinese suppliers, customs recordation is the single highest-leverage enforcement tool available. A registered trademark in China protects against domestic infringement -- someone using the mark locally, selling fakes on Taobao, registering a similar company name. Customs recordation is different. It intercepts counterfeit exports before they ever leave the country. Most brand owners discover this distinction after a container of fakes has already landed in their destination market, triggering a costly multi-jurisdiction enforcement scramble. The ones who get it right set up the recordation first.

The filing is free. The approval takes 30 working days. The system it plugs into detained over 81 million items last year. The question is not whether customs recordation is worth the effort. The question is why more brand owners with Chinese manufacturing exposure have not done it yet.

The Numbers Behind the Border

These are not projections. They are audited enforcement figures published by GACC and the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR). The trend line runs in one direction: more inspections, more seizures, higher penalties. Cross-border e-commerce channels alone accounted for 24,600 seizure batches in 2025, reflecting the explosive growth of direct-to-consumer counterfeit shipments that bypass traditional wholesale distribution.

The question is whether your trademark sits inside that enforcement net or outside it.

A trademark registration without customs recordation is like having a security system that only covers the inside of the building while leaving the front door wide open. The registration gives you legal standing to sue infringers in Chinese courts. The recordation puts your mark into the system that stops goods at the border -- before litigation becomes necessary, before the fakes reach consumers, and before the enforcement cost escalates into six figures. The two measures are complementary, not interchangeable. Brands that rely solely on trademark registration while ignoring customs recordation leave their most vulnerable point exposed: the factory gate.

Why Customs Recordation Deserves a Spot in Every Brand Strategy

China produces the majority of the world's counterfeit goods. That is not a value judgment -- it is a function of manufacturing capacity. The same factories that produce legitimate products for global brands also sit one production run away from unauthorized overruns, diverted goods, and outright counterfeits. Domestic enforcement through SAMR handles the factory-floor side: market raids, warehouse inspections, administrative penalties. Customs enforcement handles the border.

The two systems serve different purposes. SAMR raids factories, markets, and warehouses inside China. Customs intercepts goods at the point of export -- at container terminals, airport cargo facilities, cross-border e-commerce sorting centers, and land border crossings. For brand owners based outside China, customs recordation is often the most practical first line of defense. You cannot easily shut down a counterfeit manufacturer in Yiwu from an office in Los Angeles or Berlin. You can absolutely stop their shipment at Shanghai port if your trademark is recorded with GACC.

Case study: The brand that found its own factory's output on a blacklist A European toy company discovered that a contract manufacturer in Fujian was producing an extra shift after hours -- same molds, same materials, different packaging. The overruns shipped to Eastern Europe through market procurement channels. The brand had no Chinese enforcement presence. But its customs recordation flagged the shipments. Three containers stopped in six months. The manufacturer never resumed the extra shift.

The enforcement architecture has three layers: customs border control, SAMR domestic market regulation, and criminal prosecution through the public security bureau. Customs recordation plugs your trademark into the first layer. Without it, GACC officers scanning export declarations have no way to match your brand against suspect goods. The trademark simply does not exist in the system they use for targeting decisions.

The Two Protection Modes: What They Mean in Practice

China's customs IP enforcement system operates under two distinct modes. Understanding the difference determines whether your enforcement strategy works proactively or only after you spot a problem yourself.

Ex Officio Protection

This is the mode that matters. Under ex officio protection, customs officers actively monitor shipments and flag goods suspected of infringing recorded trademarks. No complaint from you is needed. The system triggers automatically when an officer identifies a potential match against the recordation database -- either through manual inspection or the automated risk-scoring system.

Ex officio protection requires that your trademark is recorded with GACC. This is the entire reason recordation exists. Over 90% of all customs IP seizure cases proceed under this mode. The financial barrier is low: the bond requirement caps at 100,000 RMB (roughly $14,000) for goods valued above 200,000 RMB, and rights holders can post a general bond covering all seizures across a calendar year rather than individual bonds per case.

Passive Protection

Under passive protection, you identify a specific suspected shipment and file a detention request with customs on a case-by-case basis. This mode does not require prior recordation with GACC, but it demands that you already know where the infringing goods are, when they ship, and through which port. You must also post a bond equal to the full value of the goods and file a court case within 20 working days of the detention.

The practical difference is stark. Ex officio protection puts customs officers to work on your behalf across every port in China -- over 40 major sea ports, dozens of airports, and land crossings. Passive protection requires you to build your own intelligence network and act as your own border patrol. For 95% of brand owners, ex officio protection through recordation is the correct choice.

Case study: The border caught it first A US-based electronics brand recorded its trademark with GACC in March 2025. By August, customs in Ningbo flagged a shipment of USB cables bearing a confusingly similar mark, destined for West Africa. The brand had zero knowledge of the shipment before the notification arrived. The goods -- 45,000 units -- were detained. Investigation confirmed they came from a factory that had briefly been a subcontractor and continued production after the contract ended. The brand's only investment was the recordation filing. No lawyers in China, no monitoring service, no private investigators.

Step-by-Step: Filing a Trademark Recordation with GACC

The recordation process is administrative, not adversarial. There is no opposition period, no substantive examination of the trademark's validity, and no government fee. The bottleneck is preparation: assembling the correct documents and formatting them for the CIPPS system.

Step 1: Confirm Your Chinese Trademark Registration

Customs recordation requires a registered trademark in China -- one that has passed examination and received a registration certificate from CNIPA. A pending application does not qualify. This is non-negotiable and is the single most common reason recordation filings get rejected or delayed.

If the trademark is registered in your home country but not in China, recordation with GACC is not available. The solution is to file a Chinese trademark application through CNIPA first. The standard examination timeline runs 6 to 9 months. Recordation with customs can follow immediately after registration is granted.

Step 2: Access the CIPPS System

The Intellectual Property Customs Protection System (CIPPS) is the filing platform. Access it through online.customs.gov.cn → "Internet + Customs" → "Intellectual Property". The interface is in Chinese. All submissions must be in Chinese or accompanied by certified Chinese translations. Foreign rights holders without a Chinese-language team should plan for translation support before beginning the filing.

Step 3: Prepare Required Documents

The following documents must be submitted through CIPPS:

Mandatory documents:

• Trademark Registration Certificate issued by CNIPA. A scanned copy of the original certificate. The certificate must be current -- not expired, not under cancellation proceedings.
• Rights holder information: Full legal name, registered address, nationality or country of incorporation. Must match the trademark registration certificate exactly. Any discrepancy between the rights holder name on the certificate and the application triggers a rejection.
• IP information: The trademark name, registration number, Nice class(es) of goods/services, and validity period. Enter these exactly as they appear on the certificate.
• Authentic vs. counterfeit comparison photos: Side-by-side images showing distinguishing features of genuine products versus known counterfeits. This is not optional -- customs officers use these images for field identification at the port. Quality matters significantly. Include close-ups of security features, printing details, packaging differences, holographic elements, and labeling variations. Blurry or generic images reduce the system's ability to flag fakes during inspection.
• Authorized manufacturers and exporters whitelist (if applicable): A list of factories and trading companies authorized to produce or export goods bearing the trademark. This helps customs distinguish legitimate production runs from unauthorized overruns -- a critical function in manufacturing-heavy provinces like Guangdong and Zhejiang.
• Power of Attorney for local agent (if the rights holder is based outside China): Foreign rights holders must designate a Chinese-based agent or representative. A signed and notarized power of attorney is required. The agent serves as the contact point for customs notifications and enforcement actions.

Step 4: Submit and Wait for Approval

Once the complete application is submitted, GACC reviews it within 30 working days. The review is administrative -- customs verifies that the documents are complete, the trademark is valid and registered with CNIPA, and the information is internally consistent. There is no substantive examination of the trademark's registrability or prior third-party rights.

Step 5: Recordation Takes Effect

Upon approval, the trademark is entered into the GACC enforcement database. Every customs office across China -- from the major ports of Shanghai, Ningbo, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou to smaller inland checkpoints -- now has the trademark in their targeting system. The recordation is active immediately upon approval.

Step 6: Maintain and Renew

The recordation is valid for 10 years, aligned with the trademark registration validity period (or shorter if the trademark expires sooner). Renewal is free of charge and follows the same administrative process. A lapsed recordation means enforcement stops immediately -- the trademark drops out of the targeting database. Set calendar reminders at least 90 days before expiration to avoid gaps in coverage.

Costs, Bonds, and the Financial Structure

Customs recordation itself is free. GACC confirmed this in a public enforcement briefing on January 23, 2026, explicitly stating that "no fees are charged for recordation filing". There is no government filing fee, no examination fee, and no renewal fee. This has been the consistent policy position.

The costs arise when enforcement actually triggers -- specifically, the bond system that applies when customs detains suspected goods under the ex officio procedure.

Bond Structure for Ex Officio Cases

The bond protects the cargo owner against wrongful detention. If customs seizes goods that later turn out to be legitimate, the bond covers the cargo owner's losses. The structure is tiered:

General Bond

For rights holders who face frequent enforcement actions -- common for brands with significant counterfeiting exposure -- a general bond covers all ex officio detentions within a calendar year. The general bond amount is calculated based on the prior year's storage and disposal costs and must be at least 200,000 RMB. This eliminates the need to post individual bonds for each seizure, a significant operational simplification for brands facing regular counterfeiting across multiple ports.

Storage and Disposal Costs

When customs detains goods, the rights holder may bear storage costs during the investigation period. Disposal of confirmed counterfeit goods -- typically physical destruction under customs supervision -- also incurs costs. These are separate from the bond and vary by port and cargo volume. Budget accordingly in your enforcement planning.

The Detention Process: What Happens When Customs Catches Something

Understanding the post-detention workflow helps rights holders prepare for the operational demands of ex officio enforcement. The timeline is tight and the steps are sequential.

Notification: Customs sends a written notification to the recorded rights holder (or designated agent), including photographs of the detained goods and basic shipment information. The clock starts here.

Confirmation (3 working days): The rights holder must respond within 3 working days to confirm whether the goods are infringing. This is not a suggestion -- failure to respond within the window results in automatic release of the goods. Maintain a responsive local contact or agent who can act on notifications promptly and has the product knowledge to make accurate assessments.

Authentication: If the goods are confirmed as infringing, the rights holder submits a signed authentication affidavit -- a formal written statement confirming that the goods bear a trademark identical to or indistinguishable from the recorded mark, and that no authorization was given for their production or export.

Bond payment: The rights holder pays the required bond according to the tiered structure above. Customs holds this bond until the investigation concludes.

Investigation (30 working days, extendable): Customs conducts an investigation into the shipment -- examining the goods, questioning the declarant, and tracing the supply chain. The rights holder cooperates by providing additional evidence if requested.

Three possible outcomes:

1. Goods confirmed infringing: Confiscated and destroyed. The cargo owner faces administrative fines. If the case meets criminal thresholds (typically involving large quantities or high value), customs refers the case to the public security bureau for criminal prosecution. The 2025 SAMR data shows 1,130 such criminal referrals -- a significant number.
2. Goods found non-infringing: Released to the cargo owner. Bond returned to the rights holder.
3. Customs cannot determine: If no court notification is received within 50 working days, goods are released. This outcome underscores the importance of being prepared to escalate to litigation when customs investigation alone does not resolve the case.

2025 Enforcement Campaigns: Where Customs Is Looking

GACC runs targeted enforcement campaigns annually. Understanding the focus areas helps brand owners anticipate which product categories and trade channels face heightened scrutiny, and plan enforcement timing accordingly.

Operation Dragon

The comprehensive IP protection campaign covers all product categories and all trade channels. Operation Dragon is the umbrella operation -- it sets the enforcement tone for the year and coordinates resources across regional customs offices. In 2025, it expanded coverage to include emerging categories like smart devices, auto parts, agricultural chemicals, and consumer electronics accessories.

Operation Blue Net

Focused on the domestic circulation channel. This campaign targets goods moving through internal trade networks -- wholesale markets, distribution hubs, and logistics centers -- rather than direct exports. Brands dealing with counterfeits that move through domestic supply chains before reaching export points benefit from Blue Net's coverage.

Operation Clean Net

Targets export and transit goods. This is the campaign most directly relevant to foreign brand owners. Clean Net focuses on shipments leaving China through major ports and border crossings, including goods in transit through Chinese logistics hubs destined for third countries.

Provincial Special Operations: The Guangdong Example

Guangdong province handles the highest volume of China's exports and runs additional specialized campaigns that go beyond the national operations:

• Cross-border e-commerce enforcement: Targeting the rapid growth of B2C cross-border shipments, which accounted for 24,600 seizure batches in 2025. This is the fastest-growing enforcement area.
• Toy industry enforcement: Specific to the Guangdong toy manufacturing cluster -- the world's largest production base for consumer toys -- addressing counterfeiting in licensed character merchandise, educational toys, and plush products.
• Foreign-related trade enforcement: Focused on unauthorized production related to foreign brand contracts -- overruns by contract manufacturers, diverted goods, and supply chain leakage.

Guangdong customs has also developed an intelligent infringement identification model that provides automated pre-warning and precision monitoring for high-risk shipments. The system is operational and producing results -- brands with recordation in Guangdong are seeing faster, more accurate enforcement actions than those relying on manual inspection alone.

Case study: 81.6 million reasons to act A mid-size Australian skincare brand noticed its products appearing on Southeast Asian e-commerce platforms -- same branding, different formulations, lower prices. The fakes were manufactured in Guangzhou and shipped through market procurement channels to distributors in Indonesia and the Philippines. The brand filed a customs recordation in early 2025. Within three months, Guangdong customs intercepted two shipments totaling 180,000 units. The market procurement trade channel -- the exact route the counterfeiter used -- saw a 48.4% year-over-year increase in seizures that same year. The enforcement net tightened around the counterfeiters while the brand's own monitoring budget stayed flat.

The AI Turn: How Customs Is Getting Smarter

China Customs is transitioning through three enforcement phases: manual inspection, data-driven targeting, and now AI-powered risk assessment. The shift has direct implications for how effectively recorded trademarks get enforced, and why the quality of your recordation materials matters more than ever.

Predictive Risk Scoring

Customs now deploys risk models that analyze shipment data -- origin, destination, consignee history, product category, shipping route, declared value patterns -- to flag high-risk consignments before physical inspection. A recorded trademark feeds into these models. The system knows which marks are prone to counterfeiting and which trade lanes carry elevated risk. Without recordation, your brand is invisible to the algorithm.

Automated Image Recognition

Computer vision systems at major ports can now compare product images against a database of recorded IP, flagging visual similarities in real time as containers pass through inspection. This makes the quality of the comparison photos in the recordation application directly consequential. Blurry images, generic descriptions, and incomplete product coverage reduce the system's ability to identify counterfeits. Sharp, detailed photographs of genuine products with clearly marked distinguishing features give the AI system more to work with.

Entity Network Analysis

AI-driven analysis maps relationships between shippers, consignees, manufacturers, and logistics providers. The system identifies patterns -- the same manufacturer shipping to rotating consignees, or a single consignee receiving from multiple flagged factories. This is how organized counterfeiting networks get dismantled rather than just having individual shipments stopped. The intelligence layer moves enforcement from reactive interception to proactive network disruption.

"Ghost Warehouse" Detection

One of the more sophisticated enforcement innovations targets temporary facilities that counterfeiters use for three to six months before shutting down and relocating. The AI system identifies patterns in storage leases, utility usage, and shipping volume that characterize these operations. When the pattern matches, customs coordinates with local authorities to conduct targeted inspections before the facility closes and the evidence disappears.

Proxy Shipper Identification

Counterfeiters increasingly use third-party logistics companies and trading companies as declared shippers to avoid detection. The AI system traces beneficial ownership and operational control behind declared entities, identifying the actual manufacturers and brand principals running counterfeit operations. This capability has exposed networks where a single factory operated through dozens of nominally independent trading companies, each declaring shipments under different names.

Case study: The factory next door A German automotive parts manufacturer had its customs recordation in place for two years with minimal enforcement actions. Then customs deployed an updated entity network analysis tool. The system traced a web of seven trading companies -- each appearing unrelated on paper -- back to a single production facility outside Changzhou that was manufacturing counterfeit brake pads bearing the German company's mark. Eight shipments were intercepted in a single quarter. The recordation had been active all along. The AI layer made it finally connect the dots.

The Decision Matrix: Recordation, Litigation, or Both?

Not every enforcement scenario demands the same tool. The matrix below maps common situations to the most effective response.

The most common mistake brand owners make is treating trademark registration and customs recordation as the same step. They are not. Registration creates the legal right. Recordation activates the enforcement mechanism at the border. Both are necessary. Neither is sufficient alone.

Common Mistakes That Undermine a Recordation

The filing itself is straightforward. The mistakes happen in the details -- errors that do not cause outright rejection but weaken enforcement effectiveness once the recordation is live.

Mismatched rights holder names. The name on the CIPPS application must match the CNIPA registration certificate character for character. A minor discrepancy -- an abbreviation, a different transliteration, a subsidiary entity name -- creates problems when customs tries to match the recordation against a detained shipment. The fix is simple but often overlooked: use the exact name string from the registration certificate.

Insufficient comparison photos. Many applications include a single pair of product photos -- genuine on the left, counterfeit on the right. This is the bare minimum and often inadequate. Customs officers at busy ports need clear, annotated images showing multiple distinguishing features: print quality differences, hologram placement, labeling fonts, packaging materials, security thread positions, and any anti-counterfeit markers specific to the brand. The more detailed the reference material, the higher the probability of accurate field identification.

Outdated manufacturer whitelists. The authorized manufacturer whitelist helps customs distinguish legitimate production from unauthorized runs. But supply chains change. Contract manufacturers come and go. If the whitelist in the recordation filing lists factories that are no longer authorized -- or omits factories that currently are -- customs encounters false positives and false negatives that slow enforcement. Update the whitelist whenever the manufacturing roster changes.

Neglecting to renew on time. The 10-year validity period feels distant on the day of approval. It is not. Brands that do not set calendar reminders for renewal discover the gap only after a counterfeit shipment passes through customs unchecked. The renewal process is identical to the original filing -- free, 30 working days, same documents. Start the renewal at least 90 days before expiration.

Myths About Customs Recordation

Several persistent misconceptions keep brand owners from filing or cause them to file incorrectly.

Myth 1: "Customs recordation requires a separate trademark application"

It does not. Recordation uses the existing CNIPA trademark registration. No new application, no new examination, no new fees. The rights holder simply submits the registration certificate to GACC through the CIPPS system. If no Chinese trademark exists yet, that is the prerequisite to resolve -- not a separate customs-specific process. File with CNIPA first, then record with customs once the registration certificate arrives.

Myth 2: "Filing recordation means customs will protect my brand with zero effort"

Recordation activates the ex officio enforcement system, which does the majority of the operational work. But it is not entirely set-and-forget. Rights holders must respond within 3 working days when customs sends a detention notification with photos. Failure to confirm or deny the infringement within the window results in release of the goods. The recordation opens the door; responsive action keeps it open. Maintain a responsive local contact or agent who can act on notifications promptly and accurately.

Myth 3: "Recordation is expensive"

The filing is free. The renewal is free. The only costs come when enforcement triggers a bond requirement, and even then, the tiered structure caps exposure. For a single detention of goods valued over 200,000 RMB, the maximum bond is 100,000 RMB -- less than the legal fees for a single trademark litigation case in most jurisdictions. For brands facing regular counterfeiting, the general annual bond provides predictable cost control.

Myth 4: "My international trademark or Madrid Protocol designation covers customs recordation"

It does not. GACC recordation requires a Chinese national trademark registered through CNIPA. A Madrid Protocol designation extending protection to China does not automatically qualify for customs recordation until CNIPA completes its examination and issues the Chinese registration certificate. The distinction matters for timing -- Madrid designations eventually produce a Chinese registration, but the examination period creates a gap during which customs recordation is unavailable. Plan accordingly.

FAQ

Does customs recordation work for patents and copyrights too? +

Yes. GACC accepts recordation applications for patents (invention, utility model, and design), copyrights, and geographical indications in addition to trademarks. However, trademark recordation accounts for the overwhelming majority of enforcement actions -- 99.5% of all seizure cases in 2024 involved trademark infringement. For most brand owners, trademark recordation delivers the highest return on the filing effort.

What happens after customs detains goods under ex officio protection? +

Customs sends a written notification to the recorded rights holder, including photographs of the detained goods. The rights holder has 3 working days to confirm whether the goods are infringing. If confirmed, the rights holder submits a signed authentication affidavit and pays the required bond. Customs then investigates for 30 working days (extendable). Three outcomes are possible: goods confirmed infringing (confiscated and destroyed, with potential fine and criminal referral); goods found non-infringing (released, bond returned); or customs unable to determine (goods released if no court notification received within 50 working days).

Can I record a trademark that is still pending examination at CNIPA? +

No. GACC requires a valid trademark registration certificate issued by CNIPA. A pending application, even one that has passed preliminary examination and is in the opposition period, does not qualify. The recordation system only accepts trademarks that have completed the full registration process and hold an active registration certificate.

How long does the recordation process take from start to finish? +

GACC processes recordation applications within 30 working days of receiving a complete submission. The most common delay is not the review itself but the preparation of supporting documents -- particularly the authentic vs. counterfeit comparison photos and the authorized manufacturer whitelist. Brands that prepare these materials before filing typically see approval at or before the 30-day mark. Incomplete submissions restart the clock.

Do I need a Chinese agent if my company is based overseas? +

Yes. Foreign rights holders must designate a China-based agent to receive customs notifications and act on enforcement matters. The agent must hold a notarized power of attorney from the rights holder. This is a practical requirement -- customs notifications arrive in Chinese on tight timelines (3 working days for detention confirmations), and a local agent ensures timely responses. Missing the response window means the detained goods get released.

What is the cost difference between ex officio and passive protection? +

Ex officio protection uses a tiered bond system that caps at 100,000 RMB for goods valued above 200,000 RMB. Rights holders can also post a general annual bond to cover all cases throughout the year. Passive protection requires a bond equal to the full value of the detained goods -- no cap, no general bond option. For brands facing regular counterfeiting, ex officio protection with a general bond is substantially more cost-effective and operationally manageable.

How does the 2026 CNIPA legislative update affect customs recordation? +

The updated regulations strengthen coordination between trademark registration, customs enforcement, and criminal prosecution. Key changes include expanded scope for what constitutes trademark infringement in the digital environment, enhanced penalties for repeat offenders, and improved information sharing between CNIPA, GACC, and SAMR. For rights holders, the practical effect is faster enforcement and higher deterrence. The recordation process itself remains unchanged -- same system, same timeline, same free filing.

Can customs recordation block parallel imports or gray market goods? +

Customs recordation targets goods that infringe the recorded trademark. Parallel imports of genuinely manufactured goods present a more complex legal question under Chinese law. In practice, customs focuses its enforcement resources on counterfeit goods rather than gray market goods. Brand owners seeking to control distribution channels should combine customs recordation with contractual controls over authorized distributors and manufacturers, rather than relying on customs enforcement alone to manage parallel import issues.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information about China customs trademark recordation procedures and enforcement practices. It does not constitute legal advice. Trademark enforcement involves fact-specific analysis, and outcomes depend on individual circumstances. Consult a qualified Chinese trademark attorney for advice on your specific situation.

Related Reading

How to Register a Trademark in China: The Complete Guide | China Trademark Squatters: How They Operate and How to Fight Back | Why China Rejects Trademark Applications: The Most Common Reasons | China Trademark Non-Use Cancellation: Protect Your Registration

Sources

1. GACC Intellectual Property Recordation Guide -- China Customs Online{rel="nofollow noopener"}
2. GACC LABUBU Enforcement Briefing -- General Administration of Customs{rel="nofollow noopener"}
3. China Surge in IP Crime Prosecutions -- World Trademark Review (Jun 2026){rel="nofollow noopener"}
4. China's 2025 IPR Crackdown -- GATE (Apr 2026){rel="nofollow noopener"}
5. CNIPA Updated IP Regulations 2026{rel="nofollow noopener"}

Related Reading

• How to Register a Trademark in China: The Complete Guide
• China Trademark Squatters: How They Operate and How to Fight Back
• Why China Rejects Trademark Applications: The Most Common Reasons
• China Trademark Non-Use Cancellation: Protect Your Registration

Sources

1. GACC Intellectual Property Recordation Guide - China Customs Online
2. GACC LABUBU Enforcement Briefing - General Administration of Customs
3. China Surge in IP Crime Prosecutions - World Trademark Review (Jun 2026)
4. China's 2025 IPR Crackdown - GATE (Apr 2026)
5. CNIPA Updated IP Regulations 2026

Disclaimer: This article provides general information about China customs trademark recordation procedures and enforcement practices. It does not constitute legal advice. Trademark enforcement involves fact-specific analysis, and outcomes depend on individual circumstances. Consult a qualified Chinese trademark attorney for advice on your specific situation.

Read common questions from foreign founders →

View all service packages →