Last updated: 23 October 2026 · Version 1.0 · Next review: January 2027
This guide sets out a nine-point procurement checklist for buying hair dye shampoo from an overseas manufacturer in 2026. It covers the four manufacturing models, the certificates that are actually required for the EU, US and GCC markets, how to verify those certificates independently, realistic MOQ and lead-time windows, PPD and ammonia regulatory limits, landed-cost modelling, pre-shipment test criteria, and factory-audit checkpoints. Every regulatory threshold below is cited to the governing instrument, and every operational figure is drawn from a 6,300 m² plant running six automated production lines.
The single most important check is not the price list. It is whether the factory holds a valid production licence with hair-dye (special cosmetics) scope in its home jurisdiction, holds ISO 22716 certification you can verify on the issuing body's own register, and can support your brand being named as the Responsible Person in the destination market. A factory that cannot evidence all three cannot supply you lawfully at any unit price.
Who this guide is for: brand owners launching a private-label hair colour line, importers and distributors adding a hair dye SKU, and Amazon or TikTok Shop sellers moving from trading-company sourcing to direct factory sourcing. It assumes you are buying at commercial volume, not sampling for personal use.
How to cite this guide: Mingli Factory technical team. (2026). How to Choose a Hair Dye Shampoo Manufacturer in 2026: A 9-Point B2B Procurement Checklist. https://www.minglifactory.com/
OEM means the factory manufactures to your formula and specification. ODM means the factory supplies a finished formulation that you brand. Private label is ODM using your artwork on the factory's existing formula. Contract manufacturing is the broadest term and can cover any of the three. The distinction matters because it decides who owns the formula, who carries the safety file, and who pays for development.
The four models carry materially different cost and risk profiles, and sellers routinely discover the difference only after they have paid a deposit. The table below is the one to bring to the first call.
| Model | Who owns the formula | Who holds the safety file | Typical development cost | Time to first shipment | Best fit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEM (to your formula) | You | You, jointly with factory data | Highest — you fund R&D and stability testing | Longest; add 6–10 weeks for development and testing | Brands with a proprietary claim or an existing formula |
| ODM (factory formula, your brand) | Factory | Factory, licensed to you | Low to moderate | Shortest | First-time launches, market testing |
| Private label (ODM + your artwork) | Factory | Factory | Lowest | Shortest; packaging lead time dominates | Retailers and distributors needing fast SKUs |
| Contract manufacturing | Depends on the contract | Depends on the contract | Varies | Varies | Buyers with existing artwork and a defined spec |
Two contract clauses decide most disputes later. First, formula exclusivity: an ODM formula may legally be sold to your competitors unless the contract grants you territorial or channel exclusivity. Second, formula ownership on termination: if you do not own the formula, switching suppliers means reformulating from scratch, which typically costs more than the original development.
Ask for both clauses in writing before the sample stage, not after. A factory that will not discuss exclusivity before you have paid for a sample is telling you something.
For buyers in the EU, the model also determines who can be the Responsible Person. Under Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, a cosmetic product placed on the EU market must have a Responsible Person established in the EU, and that person holds the product information file including the Cosmetic Product Safety Report. A Chinese factory cannot be the EU Responsible Person for your brand; you or your EU importer must be.
No single certificate makes a hair dye factory export-ready. Each destination market imposes its own instrument, and they are not interchangeable: the EU requires a Responsible Person, a safety report and CPNP notification; the US requires MoCRA facility registration and product listing; China requires a production licence plus special-cosmetics registration for hair dye.
The table below maps each market to the instrument that actually governs it, so you can ask for the right document instead of a folder of PDFs.
| Market | Governing instrument | Who holds it | What to ask the factory for |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU | Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 | Responsible Person established in the EU | CPSR (safety report) access; CPNP notification number; GMP evidence to ISO 22716 |
| EU (online/distance sales) | Regulation (EU) 2023/988 (GPSR), applicable since 13 Dec 2024 | Economic operator / Responsible Person | Confirmation that Art. 19 listing disclosures — manufacturer details, EU operator details, identifiers, warnings — can be supplied |
| US | MoCRA (Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act 2022) | Facility (registration) and Responsible Person (listing) | FEI facility registration number; product listing confirmation; US Agent details for the foreign facility |
| US (labelling) | 21 CFR 740.2 for coal-tar hair dyes | Brand / Responsible Person | Caution statement and patch-test directions on the label |
| China (domestic sale) | Cosmetics Supervision and Administration Regulation (effective 1 Jan 2021) | Manufacturer | 化妆品生产许可证 (Cosmetics Production Licence) with matching scope; 特殊化妆品注册证 (special cosmetics registration) — hair dye is a regulated special cosmetic |
| GCC | National cosmetic registration (e.g. Saudi SFDA) | In-market agent / brand | Product notification or registration status — confirm the current requirement for your specific country with your local agent |
The US FDA does not approve cosmetics. There is no FDA certificate for a hair dye factory and no FDA-approved hair dye formula. What FDA operates under MoCRA is a facility registration and product listing system, and what the statute calls for on a coal-tar hair dye label is a caution statement and patch-test directions. A supplier that presents an "FDA approval certificate" is either mislabelling a facility registration or presenting a document FDA did not issue.
This matters commercially, not just pedantically. If your supplier's compliance story rests on an invented certificate, the same gap will exist in your own product file, and it will surface at the border or in a marketplace compliance review rather than in a supplier meeting.
| Document | Proves | Does not prove |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 22716 certificate | The manufacturing site's process controls were audited against the cosmetics GMP guideline | That any specific product is safe |
| GMPC certificate | A GMP conformity assessment was completed for the site | Export eligibility to any particular market |
| Cosmetics Production Licence | The site is licensed to manufacture cosmetics in that jurisdiction, within a defined scope | Product-specific registration |
| Special cosmetics registration (China) | The specific hair dye formula is registered | Compliance with EU or US requirements |
| MSDS / SDS | Hazard communication for transport and handling | Cosmetic product safety |
| CPSR | A qualified safety assessor reviewed this product's formula | GMP compliance of the site |
Buyers routinely treat any one of these as a proxy for all the others. They are not substitutable, and a supplier that lets you believe they are is a supplier to audit more carefully.
Verify certificates in seven steps: match the legal entity name to your contract, confirm the licence scope covers the product form, check the ISO 22716 certificate on the issuing body's own online register, confirm validity and surveillance-audit history, match the certified address to the plant that will run your batch, query the public regulator database, and ask for a real registration number you can check yourself.
Most certificate fraud in this category is not forgery. It is entity substitution — a genuine certificate belonging to a sister company, a trading arm, or a former address. The seven steps below are ordered to catch that first.
Match the legal entity name exactly. The name on the certificate must equal the name on your proforma invoice, your contract and your bill of lading. A certificate issued to a differently named affiliate is not evidence about your supplier.
Confirm the licence scope covers your product form. A cosmetics production licence is issued for defined production units. A licence covering cream and lotion units does not automatically cover a liquid shampoo line, and hair dye requires special-cosmetics scope in China. Ask for the scope page, not the cover page.
Check the ISO 22716 certificate on the issuing certification body's register, not on the PDF the supplier emailed you. Certification bodies publish searchable registers of valid certificates. A PDF is a claim; a register entry is evidence.
Check validity dates and surveillance history. ISO certificates run on three-year cycles with annual surveillance audits. A certificate suspended for a missed surveillance audit can still look perfectly valid as a PDF.
Match the certified address to the production address. Confirm the site that will actually run your batch is the site named on the certificate. Multi-site groups routinely present the best-certified site and produce elsewhere.
Query the public regulator database in the factory's jurisdiction for the production licence or registration number. In China, cosmetic production licences and special cosmetics registrations are publicly queryable via the national regulator's database.
Ask for the CPNP or product-listing number of a product the factory has already exported to your market — a number you can attempt to verify with your own Responsible Person. A factory that has genuinely exported into the EU or US will have this on hand.
A supplier who answers all seven without hesitation is not necessarily good; a supplier who becomes evasive at step 3 is disqualified.
Expect MOQ to be quoted per pack format rather than per product, because a sachet line and a bottle line have different minimums. Expect roughly 22 working days of production scheduling after deposit and artwork approval at a six-line factory, excluding sampling, tooling and freight — which means a realistic first shipment lands 8 to 12 weeks after you approve the sample.
MOQ is not a single number. It is a set of numbers driven by pack format, shade and decoration:
| MOQ driver | Why it moves the number | What to ask |
|---|---|---|
| Pack format | Sachet filling runs at far higher throughput than bottle filling, so sachet MOQs are usually lower per unit but higher per run | MOQ per format, separately |
| Shade / colour | Each shade is a separate bulk batch with its own cleaning and changeover | MOQ per shade; changeover cost between shades |
| Decoration | Bottle printing, silk screen or label application each carry a setup | Setup fee per SKU, and whether it is one-off |
| Carton and shipper | Custom carton printing carries a print run minimum | Carton MOQ and whether stock cartons are acceptable |
For Mingli Factory specifically, in-stock items carry no minimum order quantity; for customised products the MOQ is 5,000 bottles per SKU for bottled formats and 6,000 boxes per SKU for sachet formats. Ask for the breakdown by format rather than accepting a single headline figure from any supplier.
The production calendar is not one number either. At a plant running six automated lines with 30 containers of monthly output, the scheduling window after deposit and artwork approval breaks down as follows.
| Stage | Typical duration | What starts the clock | What commonly delays it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Raw material preparation | ~3 days | Deposit received | A shade requiring an out-of-stock pigment |
| Packaging printing | ~15 days | Artwork approval — a new design needs new tooling | Colour proof rounds; Pantone mismatch |
| Semi-finished production | 1–2 days | Materials in house | Bulk line queued behind another order |
| Semi-finished QC and release | ~2 days | Bulk produced | A result outside spec, forcing rework |
| Filling, labelling, sealing | 2–4 days | Bulk released | Label reprint after an artwork error |
| Sampling and pre-shipment inspection | 2–3 days | Production complete | Failed AQL, requiring a second inspection |
| Total scheduling window | ~22 working days (≈4.5 weeks) | — | — |
Add sampling before the clock starts (typically 7–15 days including courier), and add ocean freight of 25–40 days to Europe or the US Gulf. The number that matters commercially is not the production lead time — it is the 8 to 12 weeks from sample approval to stock in your warehouse, and that is the number to put in your launch plan.
PPD and ammonia are not alternatives to each other. PPD (p-phenylenediamine) is a dye intermediate that reacts with a developer to form colour; ammonia is an alkalising agent that swells the hair cuticle. In the EU, PPD is capped at 2% calculated as free base after mixing, and ammonia at 6% calculated as NH3; both carry mandatory label warnings. Two different limits on two different functions — and neither is a safety guarantee.
That difference in what each limit measures is why "PPD-free" and "ammonia-free" are not comparable claims, and the reason a formulation brief that asks for both without stating the market is unusable.
| PPD (p-phenylenediamine) | Ammonia | |
|---|---|---|
| Function | Primary dye intermediate in oxidative (permanent) colour | Alkalising agent; lifts cuticle pH so dye penetrates |
| EU status | Restricted, not banned. Annex III entry 8a to Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009: max 2% calculated as free base after mixing, for oxidative hair dye | Restricted. Annex III entry 4: max 6% calculated as NH3 in the ready-to-use preparation |
| EU labelling | Mandatory: mixing ratio; "Hair colourants can cause severe allergic reactions…"; not intended for persons under 16; black henna allergy warning; "Contains phenylenediamines"; "Do not use to dye eyelashes or eyebrows" | Above 2% the label must state "Contains Ammonia"; plus general irritant labelling under the safety assessment |
| US status | Permitted in coal-tar hair dye under the statutory exemption, provided the prescribed caution statement and patch-test directions appear on the label (21 CFR 740.2) | Permitted; no numeric cap |
| What "free from" actually means | The formulation does not use PPD as the dye intermediate — typically substituted with other dye intermediates, which have their own restrictions | The formulation uses an alternative alkaliser such as MEA — which is also an irritant, just a less volatile one |
Two practical consequences follow. First, "ammonia-free" is not a synonym for "gentler" or "odour-free": alternative amines are also alkaline irritants, and the odour reduction comes from lower volatility, not lower reactivity. Second, "PPD-free" does not mean "allergy-free": the substitute intermediates are themselves sensitisers, and a product that is PPD-free can still produce an allergic reaction.
| You may say | You must not say | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "Formulated without PPD" — if true and documented in the formula | "PPD-free, therefore safe for sensitive skin" | Absence of one sensitiser is not absence of sensitisation risk |
| "Contains no added ammonia" — if the alkaliser is non-ammonia | "Ammonia-free, odour-free, chemical-free" | "Chemical-free" is meaningless for a cosmetic and is treated as a red flag |
| "Patch test recommended 48 hours before use" | "Hypoallergenic" or "100% natural" without test data and a defined standard | Both require substantiation and are restricted in several markets |
| "Dermatologically tested" with the test report available | "FDA approved" | FDA does not approve cosmetics |
For any PPD-containing product, the safety assessment and the label warnings are not optional extras — they are the condition of lawful sale in the EU. Budget the CPSR and the label artwork round as part of the project, not as an afterthought.
For the full substance-by-substance limit table — PPD, toluene-2,5-diamine, the other phenylenediamine-family intermediates, ammonia and hydrogen peroxide, each with its Annex III entry number — see PPD-Free vs Ammonia-Free Hair Dye: What the Regulations Actually Allow.
Landed cost per unit is FOB unit price plus freight per unit, insurance, duty, customs clearance, per-unit compliance cost, defect and return allowance, and the cost of holding inventory. Comparing FOB prices between factories measures roughly 60–75% of the real cost difference, which is why the cheapest quote frequently is not the cheapest product.
Use this formula, and make each supplier fill it in rather than filling it in yourself:
Landed cost per unit =
FOB unit price
+ (freight + insurance) ÷ units per shipment
+ (duty rate × customs value) ÷ units per shipment
+ customs clearance and port charges ÷ units per shipment
+ (compliance cost per SKU) ÷ units per SKU run
+ (defect and return allowance %) × FOB
+ (holding cost % × landed cost × average days in stock ÷ 365)
| Cost component | Where to get the number | Where buyers get it wrong |
|---|---|---|
| FOB unit price | Factory quotation at a stated volume and pack format | Comparing quotes at different volumes |
| Freight per unit | Forwarder rate ÷ cartons per container ÷ units per carton | Quoting ocean freight for a part-container shipment |
| Duty | Your broker's rate for the actual HS classification | Assuming 3305.10 (shampoos) for a product classified 3305.90 (other hair preparations) |
| Clearance and port | Broker quote, fixed per shipment | Treating it as per-unit when it is per-shipment |
| Compliance | CPSR, CPNP or product listing, label review, testing | Ignoring it because the factory "handles certificates" |
| Defect allowance | Historical defect rate × cost of replacement plus freight | Assuming zero |
| Holding cost | Cost of capital × average days of stock | Ignoring the 60-day ocean pipeline |
The figures below are assumptions for illustration, not a quotation. Substitute your own.
| Line | Assumption | Per unit |
|---|---|---|
| FOB price, 400 ml bottle | Published list price for the Olive Black Hair Shampoo | $1.21 |
| Freight and insurance | $4,200 for 24,000 units | $0.175 |
| Duty | Broker's rate applied to customs value | $0.079 |
| Clearance and port | $900 per shipment ÷ 24,000 | $0.038 |
| Compliance | $1,800 per SKU ÷ 24,000 | $0.075 |
| Defect allowance | 1.5% of FOB | $0.018 |
| Holding cost | 8% on landed cost, 90 days average | $0.031 |
| Landed cost per unit | ≈ $1.63 |
The lesson in the arithmetic is that a 10-cent difference in FOB price is roughly a 6% difference in landed cost, while a compliance omission can be a 5-cent-per-unit surprise that arrives after the goods ship. Negotiate on landed cost, and ask each supplier to complete the same grid.
A hair dye shampoo sits uncomfortably between two tariff lines: 3305.10 (shampoos) and 3305.90 (other hair preparations). The correct classification depends on the product's principal function as presented — a product marketed and formulated primarily to colour hair is generally not a shampoo for tariff purposes, even though the consumer uses it as one. Different lines carry different duty rates.
Ask your customs broker for a written classification view, and in the EU or UK consider applying for a binding tariff information ruling before your first large shipment. Getting this wrong is not a paperwork problem; it is a per-unit margin problem multiplied by your annual volume.
Test at least ten parameters before the first commercial shipment: appearance, odour, pH, viscosity, colour payoff measured instrumentally, grey coverage, wash fastness, accelerated stability, microbiological limits and preservative efficacy — plus a PPD assay if the product is PPD-free or PPD-restricted, and a packaging compatibility test. Write the acceptance criteria into the brief before sampling, not after the batch is made.
A criterion agreed after production is not a criterion; it is a negotiation you have already lost. The table below gives the test set and a starting acceptance window for each. These are examples to adapt, not universal standards.
| Test | Method | Example acceptance criterion | Risk if skipped |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appearance and odour | Visual and olfactory panel vs approved standard | Matches approved sample; no phase separation after 24 h at 45 °C | Batch-to-batch complaints on arrival |
| pH | Calibrated meter, 25 °C | Within ±0.3 of the approved standard | Scalp irritation; dye performance drift |
| Viscosity | Brookfield, spindle and speed stated | Within ±10% of the approved standard at 25 °C | Sachet leakage; poor dispensing |
| Colour payoff | Spectrophotometer on standardised hair swatches, ΔE vs standard | ΔE ≤ 2.0 vs approved standard | Shade inconsistency across batches |
| Grey coverage | 100% grey tress, stated contact time | ≥95% coverage at the labelled time | The single most common consumer complaint |
| Wash fastness | Colour retention after a stated number of washes | ΔE within agreed limit after N washes | "Fades in a week" reviews |
| Accelerated stability | 3 months at 40 °C, plus freeze–thaw cycles | No separation, no pH drift beyond spec, no viscosity loss | Shelf-life failure in market |
| Microbiological limits | ISO 17516 | Within the limits of the standard for the product category | Recall and regulatory action |
| Preservative efficacy | ISO 11930 | Pass criteria of the standard | Microbial growth in warm-climate markets |
| PPD assay | HPLC | 0% for PPD-free claims; ≤2% free base for oxidative products in the EU | A "PPD-free" claim that is not true is a legal exposure, not a marketing one |
| Sensitisation | HRIPT on the finished formula | No sensitisation at the tested induction | Allergenic reaction at scale |
| Packaging compatibility | 3-month contact test; drop and leak test | No interaction, no leakage, label intact | Returns, and a marketplace suspension |
Two process points matter as much as the tests. First, agree the AQL sampling plan and who signs the Certificate of Analysis before production, because an in-house CoA signed by the party being paid is weak evidence. Second, retain sealed reference samples from every batch for the full shelf life plus six months — they are the only way to settle a dispute 14 months later.
Hair dye shampoo is the lower-cost, lower-risk entry point: one pack, no developer, short contact time, and strong fit with mass and online channels. Hair colour cream delivers permanent colour and a full shade range, but requires a developer, carries heavier labelling obligations, and is harder to sell without salon support or an established brand.
| Dimension | Hair dye shampoo | Hair colour cream |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | Dye deposited during washing; typically semi-permanent to demi-permanent | Oxidative; permanent colour formed inside the hair shaft |
| Consumer steps | One step, 5–15 minutes | Two components mixed, 20–40 minutes |
| Grey coverage | Moderate | High |
| Shade range | Narrow — mostly black, dark brown, and a few fashion shades | Wide, including full blonde and red series |
| Unit economics | Low cost per unit; sachet format supports trial sizes | Higher cost; developer is a second SKU |
| Channel fit | Mass retail, sachet trade, e-commerce, TikTok Shop | Salon, pharmacy, established retail brands |
| Regulatory burden | Lower — single component, simpler label | Higher — PPD restrictions, mixing ratio and warning set |
| Best first move for | New brands, distributors testing a market, men's grooming lines | Brands with salon distribution or an existing colour range |
A pragmatic sequencing for a first-time entrant is to launch two to three shampoo shades — black, dark brown, and one fashion shade — to establish listings and reviews, then add a cream line once you have sell-through data and a distribution base. Launching a full cream shade range on a new brand is the most common way first-time buyers convert working capital into dead stock.
The same logic applies to men's beard colour: a beard colour shampoo and a beard dye cream are separate SKUs with separate MOQs and separate regulatory labelling, and the shampoo is normally the faster first SKU.
Check nine things on site: production capacity against your forecast, licence and certification scope for the exact lines that will run your batch, raw-material segregation and quarantine, water treatment, in-process QC hold points, batch traceability to raw-material lot, retained samples, equipment calibration records, and who physically signs the Certificate of Analysis.
Capacity first, because it is the claim most often overstated. A plant quoting 30 containers a month is quoting total capacity, not capacity available to you; ask what share of that is currently committed and what happens to your slot in a peak season.
| Audit point | What good looks like | Red flag |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity | Available capacity stated as a share of total; committed order book shown | Only total capacity quoted; no order book |
| Licence scope | Scope page shown, matching the product form and the claim | Cover page only; scope not produced |
| Raw material control | Quarantine area with physical segregation; released materials labelled | Open sacks in the production area |
| Water treatment | Purified water system with monitoring records | Municipal water used directly in bulk |
| In-process QC | Documented hold points before filling and before packing | QC only on finished goods |
| Traceability | A finished batch traceable to raw-material lot numbers in under an hour | Traceability "being implemented" |
| Retained samples | Sealed retention per batch, stored for shelf life plus six months | No retention room |
| Calibration | Balances, pH meters, viscometers on a calibration schedule with certificates | Expired calibration stickers |
| CoA signatory | Named QC manager, identifiable and contactable | CoA signed by the salesperson |
Mingli Factory's own plant is a 6,300 m² site in Sanshui District, Foshan, Guangdong, operating two independent workshops and six automated production lines, with a filling capacity of 10,000 pieces per machine per day and monthly output of up to 30 containers. The factory holds GMPC and ISO 22716 certification and completed its current site's certification in October 2024. Buyers are welcome to arrange a site visit or a third-party inspection before placing a first order — and if a supplier discourages either, that is itself an audit result.
There is no single figure, because the cost is the sum of five separate buckets: formula development or licence fee, packaging tooling and print setup, minimum order quantity at your chosen pack format, compliance (safety report, notification, label review), and freight. The two buckets buyers underestimate are compliance and packaging tooling — both are largely fixed, so they fall hardest on small first orders.
Yes, in effect. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 requires a Responsible Person established in the EU for each product placed on the market. Many brands appoint an authorised representative or use their importer as the Responsible Person. This is a legal role with document-keeping duties, not a mail-forwarding service, and it should be contracted in writing before your first EU shipment.
In the US, a hair dye whose only function is colouring hair is regulated as a cosmetic, and coal-tar hair dyes operate under a specific statutory exemption that requires a prescribed caution statement and patch-test directions on the label. A product that claims to treat hair loss, restore hair growth, or alter body structure would be regulated as a drug instead. The claim, not the formula, usually decides the category.
Both are notification or listing processes rather than approval processes, so the timeline is dominated by preparing the file, not by waiting for a regulator. The practical constraint is the Cosmetic Product Safety Report, which must be prepared by a qualified safety assessor before notification. Build two to four weeks into the plan for the safety report and label review, and remember that MoCRA product listings need updating when a formulation, label or manufacturing site changes.
Often yes, but not automatically. A formula compliant in the EU is usually acceptable in the US, while the reverse is not always true — the EU restricts more dye intermediates and requires a specific mandatory warning set that US labelling does not. Ask the factory to confirm, in writing, that the proposed formula and label satisfy both instruments before you print packaging for two markets.
A realistic first order is the smallest run that lets you test two to three shades in your primary channel without over-committing working capital, which in practice means one pallet-scale order per shade rather than a container. Ask for the MOQ broken down by pack format, because a sachet run and a bottle run will not carry the same minimum.
The usual causes are a missing or mismatched Responsible Person or importer of record, an incomplete ingredient declaration, a label language that does not match the market, or an HS classification the broker cannot support. Most of these are preventable before production by having your broker and your safety assessor review the artwork alongside the factory — a label review costs a fraction of a held container.
Technically yes, and many do. Practically, FBA delivery requirements — carton labelling, pallet configuration, appointment booking and a compliant product label for the destination marketplace — are stricter than standard B2B shipping, and responsibility for them usually sits with you rather than the factory. Confirm in writing who applies FNSKU labels and who owns the cost of a failed appointment.
This guide was compiled by the technical team at Mingli Factory, the trading name of Guangdong Mingli Biomedical Technology Co., Ltd., a hair dye and hair care OEM/ODM manufacturer whose production plant is located in Sanshui District, Foshan, Guangdong, China. The company operates a 6,300 m² plant with two independent workshops and six automated production lines, has developed and customised more than 200 product formulas for customers, holds GMPC and ISO 22716 certification, and has manufactured hair dye shampoo, hair colour cream, beard colour and hair care products since 2011.
Author: Elena, Sales Manager, Guangdong Mingli Biomedical Technology Co., Ltd. Last updated: 23 October 2026 · Next review: January 2027 · Version 1.0
This guide is published for general procurement information. It summarises regulatory instruments as at October 2026 and is not legal advice. Cosmetic regulation changes, and requirements differ by product form, claim and destination market. Confirm the applicable requirements for your specific product with a qualified regulatory professional or your Responsible Person before placing a product on any market. Figures marked as illustrative are assumptions, not quotations.