A foreign trademark application may list forty products in one class. When preparing the corresponding China filing, the owner asks: should we keep everything, or reduce the list to ten items to avoid extra fees?
To look up candidate terms and similar groups, use the Chinese-English classification reference.
Neither answer is reliable without examining the products and their treatment in China. A long list can contain necessary distinctions, substantial overlap, or both. A shorter list can be carefully selected or leave the business's main product unregistered.
For foreign brand owners, the useful question is: which Chinese goods and services descriptions match our business, and what similarity relationships matter to our protection?
Why overseas specifications can be so long
Different fee systems create different drafting incentives. In the United States and the European Union, ordinary application fees are principally calculated by class. Adding another item within an existing class does not normally trigger a separate per-item government fee. That makes a detailed specification less expensive than a Chinese applicant might expect.
The following comparison concerns ordinary individual trademark applications and official filing fees, as checked on 6 November 2026:
| Filing route | Charging basis | Effect of additional items in the same class |
|---|---|---|
| China: online application accepting electronic communications | Per class, including up to ten items | An additional charge for each item beyond ten |
| United States: Section 1 or Section 44 application meeting base requirements | Per class | No ordinary per-item charge; free-form and excess-character surcharges can apply |
| European Union: online EU trade mark application | Based on the number of classes | No ordinary per-item charge |
Sources: CNIPA's official fee explanation, USPTO trademark fees, and EUIPO fees and payments. These charging structures concern government fees; professional fees and later procedural costs are separate. Madrid System applications and designations require a separate fee calculation.
The US qualification matters: using the free-form identification field can attract an additional fee per affected class, with further surcharges for descriptions exceeding the applicable character allowance. A long specification can therefore increase US fees even though the mechanism is not a charge for each product.
Fee structure alone does not explain every long list. A specification may reflect several product lines, commercially meaningful differences or a genuine expansion plan. Nor does a class-based fee allow unrestricted selection. For a US intent-to-use application, the applicant must have a bona fide intention to use the mark for all listed goods and services. See the USPTO's goods and services guidance.
The Chinese layer: class, similarity group and specific item
China uses the Nice Classification and a domestic Similar Goods and Services Table. Its structure can be read as:
Nice class → similarity group → specific goods or services
A similarity group is commonly identified by a four-digit code. English advisers sometimes call these groups “subclasses”; that shorthand should not suggest that the applicant registers a group instead of named items.
The Chinese table also contains subdivisions and notes. These can distinguish items within a group or identify similarity across groups. The applicable table and its notes therefore need to be read together. See CNIPA's classification guidance.
The practical consequence is that counting class numbers or individual entries does not measure the protection obtained. A group code helps the analysis; it does not replace it.
Does one item protect the whole similarity group?
Selecting one item does not turn every other item in its group into a registered item.
CNIPA's published explanation of group treatment distinguishes the approved goods from similarity analysis. Items in a group are generally treated as similar, but a group may contain separate parts that are generally dissimilar; notes address exceptions and cross-searching.
For a filing decision, keep two questions separate:
- What goods or services will be expressly recorded in the registration? This concerns the approved specification.
- Could the registration support action against a conflicting mark on other goods or services? This requires the relevant similarity and legal analysis, including the marks and circumstances.
Our recommendation is to include a suitable description for the business's core product expressly where available, rather than rely entirely on an argument about another item in its group. A hypothetical future enforcement argument should not substitute for deliberate drafting today.
Twenty overlapping items or ten carefully chosen items?
Consider an illustrative comparison, not a classification opinion about any particular product:
| Proposed list | What to investigate |
|---|---|
| Twenty descriptions concentrated in one similarity relationship | Do they identify distinct products, clarify essential features, or repeat substantially the same coverage? |
| Ten descriptions distributed across several relevant relationships | Are all core products accurately represented, or were useful descriptions removed merely to meet the fee threshold? |
Neither list wins by its length. We would first ask what the business sells, what it genuinely plans to introduce, and why each proposed entry is present.
For example, if deleting an eleventh item removes the only suitable description of a principal product, retaining that item and accepting the additional charge may be the sensible choice. If several entries repeat descriptions with no material benefit for the filing objective, simplification may be appropriate. The conclusion follows from the item review, not from a rule that ten is always enough.
The fee counts items within each class. It is not a fee for the number of similarity groups selected.
How to adapt an overseas list for China
We recommend working from a product and service inventory alongside the overseas specification. The foreign wording is useful context, but it should not be the only description of the business available to the person preparing the Chinese filing.
Start with the products and activities. Provide catalogues, product pages, technical descriptions and a short explanation of any services offered to customers. Distinguish what the business provides to others from activities it performs internally to sell its own products.
Review the proposed Chinese wording. Ask whether each term accurately identifies the intended product or service and is acceptable for filing. Where an unusual product needs specific wording, resolve that issue deliberately instead of forcing it into a convenient but inaccurate standard term. Our specification drafting guide discusses wording in more detail.
Map the similarity relationships. Request a working schedule showing the Chinese term, its English explanation, class, group and any relevant subdivision or cross-reference. Flag the entries that represent core products so they remain visible when cost reductions are discussed.
Search the resulting scope. Use the proposed specification and relevant cross-references to inform clearance work. A search brief should explain which products matter commercially, rather than simply request a search in a numbered class.
Approve the final list and price together. Require a clear explanation of important additions, deletions and substitutions. Check official extra-item charges separately from the agent's pricing. A bundled professional quotation is not the same thing as the government tariff.
This review can produce a longer list, a shorter list or a list of roughly the same length. Its value is that every retained item has a reason to be there.
Questions foreign applicants often ask
Should we always limit a China application to ten items per class?
No. Ten is an official fee threshold for the online filing route described above. Choose the items needed for the filing objective, then assess the additional cost. Avoid removing a core product solely to remain within ten.
Can we simply translate our US or EU specification into Chinese?
Use it as a starting point. Before filing, review the proposed Chinese terms against the actual business, acceptable wording and relevant Chinese similarity relationships. Ask for explanations of material changes before approving the specification.
Should we select one item in every similarity group in a class?
We do not recommend that as an automatic strategy. Identify the groups and distinctions relevant to the business first. A checklist aimed at occupying every group can add unrelated items while still failing to describe a core product accurately.
Will an extra-item payment give us broader rights automatically?
The payment permits additional items to be included in the application; it does not guarantee acceptance, registration or a particular enforcement result. Evaluate the additional item itself and the purpose it serves.
Before approving your China filing
Ask your adviser to show you a Chinese specification with an English explanation, the relevant similarity-group mapping, identified core products and a transparent fee calculation. That gives you something meaningful to review before submission.
If you have an existing overseas specification, contact MY CNTM with the list and a description of your products or services. We can help assess the proposed China filing scope and explain which changes deserve your attention.
Related reading: China Trademark Classification: How Similar Groups Work · Which Trademark Class Should You File in China?.
Published 6 November 2026. This article explains filing strategy and selected official rules; recommendations are MY CNTM's practical guidance. Classification and fees should be checked for the filing route and date concerned.