When dealing with Chinese companies, resolving disputes through US litigation is typically not the best way to go. This is because China generally does not enforce US court decisions. This makes litigating in the US ineffective in most cases involving Chinese entities. See China Enforces United States Judgment: This Changes Pretty Much Nothing. This article is from 2017, but little has changed since then.
It’s a common practice among US lawyers to prefer disputes be resolved in their home jurisdiction. For example, if our client is based in Los Angeles and the other party is in New York, we’d favor Los Angeles for resolution. However, this approach doesn’t usually apply to Chinese disputes because of the enforcement issue mentioned.
Your current contract stipulates English as the official language and specifies arbitration in Shenzhen, also in English. This setup is acceptable. However, we usually prefer using Chinese as the official language, and litigation in China, which is usually faster, cheaper, and better than arbitration, though this depends on many factors.
But if you choose to have us re-do your contract to be exactly how we like it, we will need to revise it quite a bit and then you would essentially have to renegotiate it with your existing supplier, and we do not think it worth it to you for just this one relatively small contract. However, for future contracts with new Chinese suppliers, it will likely make sense to have those be China-centric contracts, with Chinese as their official language and calling for disputes to be resolved in a Chinese court.
Though your current contract isn’t perfect in our view, it doesn’t contain glaring flaws that warrant an immediate overhaul. If there were serious concerns, we’d explicitly advise a revision. The choice on what to do with your existing contract is yours.