Most packaging sourcing decisions are made on price, lead time, and how good the sample looks. Those three things matter. They’re also the three things that tell you the least about whether a CR packaging supplier will hold up when it actually counts — during a compliance inspection, mid-run when something goes wrong, or at reorder when you need the new production to match the original exactly.

The questions below are the ones that reveal the difference between a supplier with genuine CR packaging capability and one who’s selling you compliance-adjacent packaging with a confident pitch. Run through them before you commit to any bulk order. A supplier worth working with answers every one of them specifically. A supplier who can’t is showing you exactly the information you need.

Question 1: Can you provide the third-party laboratory test report for this specific format?

Not a Certificate of Compliance. Not a product specification sheet. The actual test report from an accredited independent laboratory, documenting the child panel results, the adult panel results, the applicable standard, and the specific format and closure mechanism that was tested.

What a good answer looks like: The report arrives within 24 hours, names an accredited testing laboratory, documents pass rates for both panels (at least 85% child panel, at least 90% adult panel), and specifically identifies the format you’re ordering.

What a bad answer looks like: A CoC without the underlying report. A verbal assurance. A spec sheet with a CR checkbox. A report that references a similar but different format. Delays of more than a day or two without a clear reason.

The test report is the foundational document for CR compliance. If a supplier cannot produce it, the certification claim is unverifiable.

Question 2: Which certification standard does this format carry — ASTM, 16 CFR §1700.20, or both?

These are not interchangeable. ASTM covers reclosable packaging and is widely accepted for cannabis tins and jars. 16 CFR §1700.20 is the CPSC standard referenced in most state cannabis regulations for retail products. Some states require 16 CFR §1700.20 specifically. Some accept ASTM for reclosable formats. Knowing which standard your format carries tells you whether it’s eligible in your specific market.

What a good answer looks like: A specific, immediate answer identifying which standard the format is certified to, with the test report confirming it. Ideally, the supplier knows your state’s requirement and can confirm eligibility without you having to ask.

What a bad answer looks like: “It’s fully compliant.” “It meets all CR standards.” Vague answers that don’t identify the specific standard. A supplier who doesn’t know the difference between the two standards is not equipped to support your compliance program.

Question 3: Has anything changed about this format since the original test was conducted?

CR certification applies to the specific package as tested — not to a format category, not to a product line. If the closure mechanism, material, dimensions, or manufacturing source has changed since the test, the existing certification may not cover what you’re actually receiving.

What a good answer looks like: A direct “no, the format is unchanged” with the ability to confirm in writing. Or a transparent “yes, we changed X, and here is the updated test report covering the current format.”

What a bad answer looks like: Uncertainty about when the test was conducted. Inability to confirm whether the current production matches the tested format. Redirection to the CoC without addressing the question.

This question catches the most common documentation gap in CR packaging sourcing: historical certification that no longer covers current product because something changed and nobody told the brand.

Question 4: Can you provide a written confirmation at each reorder that the new production run matches the certified format?

A one-time test report is not a compliance system. It’s a snapshot. At every reorder, the brand needs to confirm that what’s being produced matches what was tested. A supplier with real CR packaging capability has a process for this. A broker who doesn’t control production often doesn’t.

What a good answer looks like: Yes, and here’s how the process works — a Declaration of Conformity specific to the production lot, referencing the relevant test report, provided before shipment.

What a bad answer looks like: “The packaging is always the same.” Assurance without a documented process. Uncertainty about what changes between runs and whether those changes affect certification.

Question 5: Who manufactures this packaging, and where?

The answer to this question tells you how much the supplier actually knows about the production process — and how much visibility they have when something goes wrong.

What a good answer looks like: A specific answer identifying the manufacturing location, the quality management system in place at the production level, and who is responsible for quality oversight during production runs.

What a bad answer looks like: Vague references to “our overseas partners” or “factories in Asia.” Inability to name the production location. Redirecting to the supplier’s domestic location as if that’s where manufacturing happens.

A supplier who can’t tell you specifically where your packaging is made cannot tell you specifically what’s happening when it’s made.

Question 6: What is your process when a production run doesn’t meet spec?

Every packaging program eventually has a production issue. The question is not whether problems occur — it’s what happens when they do and how quickly they get resolved.

What a good answer looks like: A defined escalation process, a clear description of who has the authority to stop a run, rework it, or require a replacement, and examples of how similar issues have been resolved in practice.

What a bad answer looks like: “That doesn’t happen.” Vague reassurances about quality. No defined process. An answer that makes clear the supplier would be relaying your problem to someone else rather than resolving it directly.

A supplier with on-the-ground production oversight resolves problems mid-run before they become your problem at delivery. A broker finds out when you do.

Question 7: Can I get pre-production samples before committing to the bulk order?

This should not even be a question — it should be standard. But some suppliers push back on sampling, charge high sample fees that don’t apply to the production order, or provide samples that aren’t representative of actual production.

What a good answer looks like: Yes, samples are standard. They’re produced to the same specification as the production run. They’re provided before any production commitment, and any issues identified in sample review are resolved before production begins.

What a bad answer looks like: Sample fees that seem designed to discourage sampling. Samples described as “representative” without confirmation that they’re produced under the same conditions as the production run. Pressure to skip sampling and proceed to production.

Pre-production sampling is how you find out that your product doesn’t fit the format, the closure degrades after 20 uses, or the color proof doesn’t match what arrives in production. It is not optional for CR packaging in regulated markets.

Question 8: What decoration capability do you offer, and is it handled in-house or through a third party?

Custom decoration on CR packaging — particularly lithographic printing on tins — involves registration, color accuracy, and consistency across a production run that are difficult to guarantee when decoration is handled by a third party outside the supplier’s direct control.

What a good answer looks like: Specific description of available decoration methods (lithography, screen print, label application, embossing), clarity about whether these are handled in-house or through directly managed partners, and a clear process for color proof approval before production.

What a bad answer looks like: Vague references to “full custom printing available.” Inability to describe the decoration process specifically. No physical color proof step in the approval process.

A supplier who can’t describe how your decoration gets applied to your packaging cannot guarantee what it’s going to look like when it arrives.

Question 9: What is your realistic lead time — not your best-case lead time?

Lead time in packaging quotes is frequently optimistic. The number a supplier quotes often reflects best-case conditions: no sample revision, production-ready artwork on day one, no queue at the factory, no logistics delays.

What a good answer looks like: A lead time range that accounts for sample preparation (2–4 weeks), sample evaluation (1–2 weeks), decoration approval (2–4 weeks), production (4–8 weeks depending on format), and transit. An honest acknowledgment of where delays typically occur and what causes them.

What a bad answer looks like: An aggressive lead time with no acknowledgment of the variables that affect it. Pressure to commit to production before sampling is complete to hit a stated lead time. A single number rather than a range.

A supplier who gives you the honest range is protecting your launch timeline. A supplier who gives you the best-case number is protecting their sale.

Question 10: What happens to my account if I have a compliance problem related to your packaging?

This question is uncomfortable to ask. It’s also the most important one on the list.

In a licensed cannabis market, a packaging compliance failure is not a customer service issue. It’s a regulatory event with real consequences — pulled product, operational holds, potential license review. When that happens, the question of what your supplier will do matters enormously.

What a good answer looks like: A clear description of how documentation is maintained and how quickly it can be produced. An honest acknowledgment of what the supplier’s responsibility is versus the brand’s. A description of how they’ve supported customers through compliance events in the past.

What a bad answer looks like: Deflection. “That’s never happened.” An answer that makes clear the brand is on its own if documentation doesn’t hold up. Inability to describe any prior experience with compliance-related packaging questions.

A supplier who has been in regulated markets long enough has been through compliance events with their customers. The ones worth working with have protocols for it.

How TPC Answers These Questions

We built our CR packaging process around exactly these standards. Third-party test documentation for every format, available on request. Written reorder confirmations as a standard step in our process. China-side oversight that means our team is present when production runs — not reading about it afterward. Pre-production samples before any bulk commitment. Physical color proofs before decoration approval. Honest lead time ranges built on 30 years of actual production cycles.

If you’re evaluating CR packaging suppliers and want to run through these questions with our team, contact us. We’ll answer all ten.

For more on what CR documentation should include and how to maintain it across reorders, see our audit-readiness guide. For more on what separates a capable CR packaging partner from a broker, see our guide to choosing a CR packaging supplier.

Browse TPC’s full child-resistant packaging line — tins, tubes, jars, bags, and topical formats.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why can’t I just rely on a Certificate of Compliance from my supplier? A CoC is a supplier-generated summary document. It derives from a third-party test report — and without the underlying report, you cannot verify the certification claim independently. State cannabis compliance inspectors are increasingly asking for the test report, not just the CoC. A CoC without a test report is an assertion; a test report is evidence.

How do I find out which CR standard my state requires? Your state’s cannabis regulatory agency publishes packaging requirements, typically within the adult-use or medical cannabis regulations. For California, this is the DCC. For other states, equivalent regulatory bodies publish the requirements. When in doubt, consult a cannabis compliance attorney in your market before finalizing packaging.

What should I do if a supplier can’t answer these questions? Take it as the information it is: that supplier does not have the documentation infrastructure, production visibility, or compliance depth to reliably support a regulated-market packaging program. Either request that they provide the missing documentation before proceeding, or find a supplier who can answer the questions without hesitation.

Is it reasonable to ask a supplier to confirm production match at every reorder? Yes, and any supplier with real CR packaging capability will do this without pushback. It’s a simple written confirmation that the current production run matches the tested specification. Suppliers who resist this request either don’t track production closely enough to confirm it, or they know the answer might not be what you want to hear.