Companies in the government and enterprise market often hear two opposite claims: one is "having a trademark earns bonus points," the other is "mentioning a brand is a violation." The accurate answer lies in between: trademarks and brands themselves can be neither qualification conditions nor scoring factors; but on the premise of not pointing to a specific supplier and being substantively related to the procurement subject matter, IP achievements such as patents and software copyrights can serve as evaluation factors. Understanding this boundary avoids both bid rejection and being complained about.
1. Conclusion First: Trademarks Are Not Bonus Points
- Article 20 of the Implementation Regulation of the Government Procurement Law makes clear: purchasers may not impose differential or discriminatory treatment on suppliers under unreasonable conditions, and the enumerated circumstances include "limiting or designating specific patents, trademarks, brands, or suppliers."
- Article 17 of the Measures for the Tendering and Bidding of Government Procurement Goods and Services (Ministry of Finance Order No. 87, effective October 1, 2017) provides: purchasers and procurement agencies may not use scale conditions such as registered capital, total assets, operating revenue, employees, profit, or tax paid as qualification requirements or evaluation factors.
- Article 55 of the same Measures provides: evaluation factors shall be refined and quantified and correspond to the commercial conditions and procurement requirements; evaluation factors shall relate to the quality of the goods and services offered by bidders, including bid price, technical or service level, performance capability, and after-sales service; qualification conditions may not serve as evaluation factors; evaluation factors shall be clearly stated in the tender documents.
Negative lists for government procurement published by local finance departments state this more bluntly (such as Wuhan's 2018 negative list and negative-list documents of finance bureaus in various regions), expressly prohibiting:
- Using limited or designated patents, trademarks, brands, or suppliers as bonus conditions;
- Using distribution agency agreements, after-sales letters, or authorization letters issued by manufacturers or agents as scoring conditions;
- Limiting performance records or awards to specific administrative regions or industries;
- Using qualifications, credentials, certifications, or catalogs cancelled by the State Council or not mandatory under state administrative organs as qualification conditions.
Therefore, whenever you see wording in tender documents such as "owns a well-known brand," "first-tier brand earns X points," "same grade," or "market share ranking," it is a red line open to challenge and complaint.
2. What IP Can Earn Points
A defensible evaluation factor must satisfy three conditions simultaneously:
- Related to the procurement needs: it directly demonstrates the quality, technical level, or performance capability of the goods or services offered by the bidder;
- Refined and quantified: clear point values and quantifiable tiers — no subjective "overall impression" points at the evaluators' discretion;
- Not pointing to a specific supplier: no designated brand, trademark, model, or place of origin, and no requirement for a specific certification.
Accordingly, common compliant formulations include: invention patents, utility model patents, software copyrights, inspection and test reports, technical solutions, project team configuration, and similar project performance experience (not limited by region) directly related to the project's technical route. Conversely, an "enterprise honor wall" unrelated to the project, scoring under the name of brand awareness, or requiring manufacturer authorization letters or after-sales commitment letters as scoring conditions are usually found non-compliant.
3. Acceptable vs Unacceptable Wording
| Wording in tender documents | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Software copyright related to this project, 1 point each, up to 3 points | Generally acceptable (must be need-related and quantifiable) |
| Owning independent IP (patent certificate required) earns 2 points | Must be limited to "patents related to the procurement subject matter," otherwise easily challenged |
| Owning a China Well-Known Trademark or famous brand earns 3 points | Violation |
| Bidding products must be well-known brands at home or abroad | Violation (limits brands, points to specific suppliers) |
| Providing manufacturer authorization letters or after-sales commitment letters earns 2 points | Violation (expressly listed in negative lists) |
| Bidder has similar performance in the locality in the past three years earns 5 points | Violation (limits a specific administrative region) |
4. Common Pitfalls
- Submitting a trademark as "independent IP": most evaluation methods recognize only patents and software copyrights; trademark certificates usually earn no points — a wasted effort.
- Believing "having a trademark gives priority": neither the qualification nor the evaluation stage looks at trademarks; winning bids on trademarks does not work under the rules.
- Falsified materials: forging certificates to pad IP points, once verified, leads not only to bid rejection but possibly to a record of misconduct.
- Ignoring the "one-vote veto" of qualification items: business license scope, industry permits, social insurance contributions, and credit records are the real thresholds for entering evaluation — trademarks play no role here.
- Not challenging non-compliant documents: for clauses obviously pointing at brands, filing a challenge or complaint within the statutory time limit is a lawful remedy; giving up merely condones unfairness.
5. Practical Recommendations for Bidders
- Invest resources in qualifications and track record: industry permits, quality systems, performance records, and credit records are the real keys to government and enterprise projects.
- Tie IP to "relevance to the project": in application materials, explain how each patent or software copyright corresponds to the project's technical requirements — more effective than stacking quantities.
- Still register trademarks, but not for points: use them for brand protection, platform onboarding, franchise recruitment, and customer trust — do not force them into bid materials.
- Use SME support policies: the price-evaluation preference and reserved shares for small and micro enterprises in government procurement are express positive policies, more substantive than any "brand points."
- Build a bid materials library: archive business licenses, permits, patent and software copyright certificates, and financial and social insurance materials by category to reduce last-minute supplementation mistakes.
6. Summary
The rule logic of government procurement is "define evaluation by needs," not "rank by brand." Trademarks and brands are expressly excluded from qualification conditions and scoring factors; what earns points are IP achievements substantively related to the procurement subject matter, quantifiable, and not pointing to a specific supplier. The rules cited in this guide are current as of 2026; defer to the latest requirements of finance authorities and tender documents.
7. Where to Get It Done
To handle the above matters, you can submit a trademark registrability assessment application through MyTMBee, with a registered trademark agent following up.