Start with product data
Upload a technical sheet and BOM. Surface extracted style, construction, material, composition, supplier, value and process fields in one reviewable view.
Trade intelligence for product teams
Make trade rules part of product creation.
EaseMyTrade helps sourcing and product-development teams understand how materials, suppliers and manufacturing choices can shape origin eligibility and duty—while there is still time to change the plan.
✓ Start with the technical sheet + BOM✓ Evidence-linked, human-reviewed
EASEMYTRADE · PRODUCT ORIGIN REVIEWDemo view
STYLE SCENARIO · EU IMPORTPerformance knit top
Needs reviewProduct inputs mapped
18 fieldsFrom technical sheet + BOMFTA pathway
Knitting + making-up2 steps
Rule and source shown togetherOne production fact needs evidenceConfirm where fabric knitting and garment making-up took place before treating the preference as available.
Made for early decisionsProduct choices, trade evidence, and review in one flow.
Built to connect the people making product decisions with the evidence behind trade decisions.
SOURCINGPRODUCT DEVELOPMENTTRADE COMPLIANCEMERCHANDISINGFINANCE
Product concept · English-first · Browser workspace
The handoff problem
Trade questions arrive after the product is already set.
A technical sheet, a BOM, supplier declarations, agreement text and tariff data often live in different places. Product and sourcing teams need the answer earlier—before material, supplier and process choices are locked.
EaseMyTrade’s product hypothesisBring the trade rule to the product decision, and bring compliance into the review while options are still open.
↗
Show the rule against the BOM
See which product attributes and material lines matter, what the rule says, where it came from and which facts still need evidence.
Compare practical changes
Explore a different material, supplier country, manufacturing step or order volume. Compare the baseline with a reversible what-if scenario.
Review together
Route unresolved items to a trade specialist, retain the rationale, and export a source-linked review pack for the decision record.
Explore the concept
Change the scenario.
See what moves.
Try an illustrative apparel scenario. Adjust order volume or origin to see how the duty comparison changes, and inspect the evidence that would still need review.
Illustrative prototype only. Example rates are placeholders based on a sample tariff line, not live tariff data or an origin ruling.
Scenario sandboxReversible · sample data
Performance knit tee
Cut-and-sewn apparel · working classification, not confirmed
Baseline sourceVietnam
DestinationEuropean Union
Product familyChapter 61 · draft
Move the slider to compare volume sensitivity.
$00.0% · preference assumed
$64,800Only if origin and preference conditions are met
Rule and evidence preview
Current concept · human review requiredCut-and-sewn Chapter 61 apparelProduct-specific rule
The current EVFTA rule for this pathway is knitting and making-up (including cutting). Local yarn spinning is not required for this cut-and-sewn route. Confirm the product’s exact classification and applicable rule before relying on the result.
Vietnam MOIT Circular 14/2026 · Annex II ↗! Production step 1Fabric knitting location
! Production step 2Cutting + making-up
Evidence required to assess the routeSupplier / factory records
Fabric mill process declaration, cutting and sewing / make-up records, material origin evidence and the applicable proof of origin. A BOM country field by itself may not establish where each required process occurred.
European Commission · EVFTA agreement texts ↗Not a customs ruling. Demo calculations use volume × FOB × rate and exclude freight, insurance, VAT, trade remedies and other charges. Rates and qualification are not live-verified here.
Ask the mill where the fabric was knitted.
Attach a process record that connects the named fabric supplier and material code to the Vietnam knitting site.
Evidence action · no yarn-origin change impliedTrace cutting and make-up to the sewing factory.
Compare production records to the style and order, then ask a qualified reviewer to validate the applicable rule and proof.
Review status stays open until validatedWhat the workspace is designed to do
Less hunting for answers.
More clarity on the decision.
EaseMyTrade brings product inputs, structured trade data, source evidence and commercial context into one guided flow. Each capability is designed to make the next question clearer.
Product-led intake
Start with technical sheets and BOMs. Map extracted fields, confidence and source location; alert when required facts are missing or inconsistent.
Rule-to-field explanation
Link the product-specific rule to the material, value, origin or process field that determines the screen—or blocks a conclusion.
Comparable scenarios
Duplicate a baseline, test a material or supplier change, and compare duty assumptions and commercial constraints without overwriting the original.
Source-linked evidence
Expose authority, source title, URL, publication and effective dates, retrieval time and the passage or tariff record behind each result.
Cross-functional review
Give product, sourcing and trade teams a shared place for open questions, reviewer notes, decisions and a dated analysis pack.
Commercial context
Keep MOQ, lead time, capacity, target cost, quality and sustainability constraints beside potential duty impact—not out of sight.
One decision, shared context
Built around the people shaping the product.
Trade compliance remains the expert reviewer. EaseMyTrade makes their rule knowledge easier to bring into sourcing and product development before cost, design and supplier decisions are fixed.
View the team workflow ↗Competitive context
Works alongside the trade stack.
Established trade platforms already offer valuable tariff, origin, classification, sourcing and customs capabilities. EaseMyTrade’s positioning is an accessible product-creation workspace that connects those rule questions to the BOM and commercial choice early.
The comparison is a product-positioning hypothesis, not a claim that existing platforms lack sourcing or scenario features. Validate workflows, coverage and integrations directly with each provider.
Enterprise trade management
Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE · Oracle GTMBroad trade, classification, tariff, origin and customs workflows; benchmark for source coverage and depth.Duty & preference programs
e2open · MICPreference management, origin calculations, supplier collaboration and enterprise integrations.Origin & procurement
PwC Origin Compliance · AEBOrigin analysis and supplier data workflows; benchmark for sourcing and what-if capabilities.Newer AI / digital trade
Trademo · GingerControlAI-oriented trade and monitoring experiences; compare actual corridor coverage and workflow fit.A reviewable workflow
From product files to a decision someone can explain.
The first release is intentionally narrow: one selected corridor, clear inputs, sourced rules, a transparent scenario and a human review checkpoint.
Upload product files
Use the technical sheet and BOM as the starting point. Extracted fields are shown for review; missing details trigger clear alerts.
Confirm scope & lane
Set destination market, planned import date and product classification depth. Unconfirmed codes remain provisional.
Compare rule paths
Screen the selected agreements and compare baseline and sourcing changes against the supported origin-rule logic.
Review & keep evidence
Send unresolved facts for compliance review, retain sources and assumptions, then export a dated analysis pack.
Trust by design
Helpful without pretending to be customs.
Show official sources, version, effective date and retrieval status. Secondary reports explain context; they do not replace the rule.
Classification, ambiguous provisions and high-impact origin conclusions stay reviewable. No unattended filing or supplier action.
Keep modelled duty deltas separate from approved eligibility and realized sourcing impact. Show formulas and excluded charges.
A sourcing workspace, in progress
Make the next product decision with the trade rule in view.
Explore the interactive concept and see the inputs, rule evidence and scenario assumptions together.