In the world of OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) partnerships for outdoor furniture, the question of who owns the custom molds and tooling is not just a detail—it's a fundamental business and financial consideration. The short answer is: it depends entirely on the negotiated agreement. There is no universal default rule.

Typically, ownership is determined by who pays for the tooling. If the brand (the client) invests capital to create the custom molds, they should rightfully own the tooling. This is often stipulated in a formal tooling ownership agreement. This arrangement gives the client control over their production assets, allowing them to move manufacturing to another facility if needed, provided they retrieve or replicate the molds.

However, scenarios exist where the OEM factory might own the tooling. This can happen if the factory absorbs the upfront cost, often with the understanding of securing long-term production orders. In such cases, the tooling cost might be amortized into the per-unit price of the furniture. This can be advantageous for a client with limited initial capital, but it carries risk. The client becomes tied to that specific factory, and the factory could potentially use the same tooling for other clients unless explicitly prohibited.

The most critical step is to explicitly address tooling ownership in the manufacturing contract. Key points to clarify include: the exact cost of the tooling, payment terms, physical storage location, maintenance responsibilities, and provisions for ownership transfer or mold destruction at the partnership's end. Intellectual property rights for the furniture design should also be separately secured.

Ultimately, clear, written agreements prevent future disputes. For brands, owning your outdoor furniture molds is often the preferred strategy as it protects your design investment and ensures supply chain flexibility. It transforms the tooling from a sunk cost into a tangible, controlled asset.