Supplier paperwork uses a different product name

Start with two identifiers, not a preferred name

Open the actual catalog entry and the supplier document the provider requested. Copy the public product name, store SKU and selected variant from the catalog. Separately copy the supplier's product name, supplier SKU, document reference and date. Where the records state a package size, lot or batch, retain those details as separate fields. A shared word in two product names cannot resolve a difference in the other identifiers.

Keep the original files unchanged. Your comparison is a separate explanatory record, not a corrected invoice. A store SKU can be an internal identifier, while the supplier uses its own code; neither becomes the other simply because your team recognizes the product. If a record lacks a code, write that it lacks one and use the identifiers it actually contains.

Find the document that explains the naming relationship

Look for an existing record that names the store item and the supplier item together. Depending on what you actually have, that could be a private-label schedule, a supplier's written confirmation of the two identifiers, or a receiving record that connects an invoice line to the SKU entered into inventory. Record who created the connection and when. A merchant-created stock mapping documents the merchant's own association; do not describe it as supplier confirmation.

Read the extent of the connection. A document covering one package or a dated purchase does not explain every variant or every later delivery. If a supplier changed its code, preserve the old code, the replacement code and the effective date from the change record. Where several supplier items map to one store SKU, keep separate entries so the purchasing period or lot can still be traced.

If no document connects both sides, ask the party that issued the record to clarify the exact identifiers and the scope of the relationship. Save the resulting clarification alongside the original. A new explanation can close a naming gap only to the extent it actually identifies the records; it does not establish composition, authenticity or chemical identity.

Explain the difference without changing what the business sells

Stripe says it verifies what a business sells and whether it can support that category. Its account-activation website guidance also requires product descriptions to align with the information given in the application. These are reasons to give a reviewer a traceable explanation of the naming difference, including any unresolved parts. They do not create a universal document checklist for another provider.

Stripe's restricted-business policy prohibits false or misleading descriptions of the business and processing for undisclosed products. It also lists incorrectly labeled research chemicals among prohibited examples. A private label is not a way to present a different product or to avoid disclosing the actual catalog. The policy does not establish that your item is eligible, and a completed name comparison is not an approval.

If the application, public listing or internal mapping contains an actual error, identify that error and preserve a record of the correction. Do not alter a supplier-issued file to make it appear that the supplier used your preferred name. If the item itself remains uncertain, retain that uncertainty instead of submitting the bridge as proof of a confirmed match.

Give the reviewer a bounded conclusion

Finish with one of three findings: the naming relationship is documented for the identified item and period; it is documented only for part of the requested scope; or the connection remains unsupported. Name the particular record or missing fact behind that finding. A missing batch link and a missing supplier-to-store SKU link are different gaps and may need different clarifications.

Send requested supporting files only through the provider's authorized channel and only with authority to disclose them. For a Prism processing consultation, summarize the public item, the naming difference and the question you need to organize. Scope, responsibilities, fees and terms are agreed before work. The provider decides whether the evidence answers its request; neither the worksheet nor the consultation certifies product identity or provider eligibility.

Supplier-to-catalog identity bridge

Complete one copy per store item and supplier relationship using your real documents. Keep the original names intact. Read the completed rows together: a connection is limited to the identifiers, variants and dates the supporting record actually covers. Leave absent facts unresolved.

Worksheet entries are not submitted by Prism’s worksheet and are not saved by the site. Use record types, availability, anonymized observations, or match/mismatch results. Do not enter government identifiers, customer names or addresses, customer messages, receipt-access links, card or bank details, passwords, or keys. Send sensitive documents only through the provider’s verified secure channel.

These are temporary notes. Leaving or reloading this page may clear them. Worksheet entries are not sent automatically. If you copy notes into the consultation message and submit the form, Prism receives them as part of your request.