Consumers searching online for "Beijing Tong Ren Tang" products often find themselves uncertain whether they’ve purchased genuine items or white-labeled versions—a common dilemma echoed across social media platforms.
Why is it so difficult to identify authentic Beijing Tong Ren Tong products? A recent investigation revealed a market flooded with diverse offerings under the Beijing Tong Ren Tang name, even for identical products with different manufacturers and distributors. Some distributors, claiming to represent authorized entities like Beijing Tong Ren Tang Xing'an Healthcare Technology Co., Ltd., present authorization documents and assert that "most online products are white-labeled."
Interviews with multiple manufacturers of "Beijing Tong Ren Tang" products indicate that their production contracts primarily originate from two companies: Beijing Tong Ren Tang Xing'an Healthcare Technology Co., Ltd. (Xing'an Healthcare) and Beijing Tong Ren Tang (Sichuan) Health Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Sichuan Pharma). Both are ultimately controlled by China Beijing Tong Ren Tang (Group) Co., Ltd. (the Group). However, the Group has repeatedly denied authorizing third-party distributors or licensing agreements.
Notably, these subsidiaries do not license the well-known "Tong Ren Tang Double Dragon" trademark but instead use their own registered brands, such as Xing'an Healthcare’s "Nei Ting Shang Yong" and Sichuan Pharma’s "Zhen Huang."
**Diverse Offerings, Consumer Confusion** E-commerce platforms display a dizzying array of "Beijing Tong Ren Tang" products, even within the same category, with varying packaging and specifications. For example, searching for "Beijing Tong Ren Tang American Ginseng Slices" on Taobao yields over 10 sellers, each offering different versions—some from Xing'an Healthcare, others from Sichuan Pharma—with distinct manufacturers like Yunnan Jingmi Food Co., Ltd. or Anhui Chengxintang Health Industry Development Co., Ltd.
Similarly, Pinduoduo’s top-selling American ginseng slices, marketed under Xing'an Healthcare’s "Nei Ting Shang Yong" brand, differ in packaging (red or blue bottles) and pricing (¥51.75 to ¥73.40). Despite being labeled as "flagship stores," these shops are not officially listed by the Group.
**Subsidiaries’ Role: Outsourced Production, Licensed Sales** Xing'an Healthcare and Sichuan Pharma, both under the Group’s umbrella, outsource production to third-party manufacturers while overseeing quality control. Xing'an Healthcare clarified that its products are not "white-labeled" but produced under strict supervision. Sichuan Pharma described itself as a distributor, purchasing goods from manufacturers for resale.
Manufacturers confirmed receiving orders from these subsidiaries, emphasizing rigorous quality checks. One producer stated, "We only handle production; sales and partnerships are managed by Tong Ren Tang."
**Licensing Controversy: "White-Label" Claims** Some distributors openly advertise "Beijing Tong Ren Tang OEM services," offering customized health supplements, medical devices, and daily products—excluding pharmaceuticals, which require the Group’s "Double Dragon" trademark. Costs range from tens to hundreds of thousands of yuan, depending on order volume.
Authorizations shown by distributors cite trademarks like "Nei Ting Shang Yong" or "Zhen Huang," not the Group’s primary branding. One distributor claimed, "Most online products are white-labeled by subsidiaries."
**Group’s Denials vs. Legal Perspectives** The Group has repeatedly disavowed unauthorized use of its branding, stating that subsidiaries are not permitted to license the "Tong Ren Tang" name. Legal experts argue that the Group’s public disclaimers may not absolve it of responsibility, as consumers reasonably associate subsidiaries’ products with the parent brand.
Intellectual property lawyers note that if subsidiaries’ trademarks (e.g., "Nei Ting Shang Yong") resemble the Group’s branding or imply affiliation, the Group could face liability for inadequate oversight. Unchecked licensing practices risk diluting brand value and sparking consumer distrust.
Despite inquiries, the Group has not responded to requests for comment.
Comments