Do You Report Purchases From a Non-VAT Supplier in Your RELIEF SLSP?

Yes — purchases from a non-VAT-registered supplier belong in your RELIEF Summary List of Purchases (SLP). The SLP reports a VAT-registered taxpayer’s total quarterly purchases, not just the subset that carries creditable input VAT. The line is entered with the purchase amount shown and the input VAT column at zero, because a non-VAT seller never charges output VAT for the buyer to claim as a credit — the purchase isn’t omitted, it’s just non-creditable.

This is one of the most common points of confusion in RELIEF SLSP preparation: some taxpayers assume that because there’s “no VAT” on the purchase, it shouldn’t appear in the VAT-focused SLP at all. That assumption is wrong, and it can create a mismatch between the SLP and the purchases figure reported on BIR Form 2550Q. For the broader eligibility question of who must file SLP in the first place, see Who Must File RELIEF SLSP?.

Does a non-VAT-registered supplier’s purchase belong on the SLP at all? #

Yes — the Summary List of Purchases is a listing of the buyer’s total purchases for the quarter, and the supplier’s own VAT-registration status doesn’t remove a transaction from that total. Under Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 8-2002, the original SLP filing threshold was tied to the buyer’s quarterly purchase volume (over P1,000,000), not to whether individual suppliers happened to be VAT-registered. RMO No. 4-2003 — the BIR’s own implementing order — describes its purpose on its face:

“GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES ON THE PROCESSING OF QUARTERLY SUMMARY LISTS OF SALES AND PURCHASES AND OF THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTIES THEREFOR AS PROVIDED UNDER REVENUE REGULATIONS NO. 8-2002”

That title frames the SLP as a processing and cross-matching mechanism for a VAT-registered taxpayer’s purchase activity as a whole — not a curated list limited to input-VAT-bearing transactions. RR No. 1-2012 later removed the P1,000,000 threshold entirely, requiring the SLP from every VAT-registered taxpayer regardless of amount (covered in full in Who Must File RELIEF SLSP?), which reinforces the same point: the obligation runs off the buyer’s VAT-registration status and purchase activity, not off each individual supplier’s registration status.

Standard SLP layouts classify each purchase row by nature — taxable (net of VAT), zero-rated, or exempt — precisely so a purchase that carries no creditable input VAT still has somewhere to go. A purchase from a non-VAT-registered supplier fits that exempt/non-creditable classification; it doesn’t fall outside the form.

How do you complete the input VAT columns for a non-VAT-supplier purchase? #

Enter the actual peso amount paid as the purchase, and enter the input VAT column as zero — never blank, and never a computed 12% figure. A supplier who isn’t VAT-registered has no authority to charge output VAT under NIRC Section 110 and RR No. 16-2005; if an invoice or receipt from such a supplier shows a VAT line anyway, that amount was improperly passed on and still isn’t creditable to the buyer.

• Purchase amount column: the actual amount paid, net of any (improperly charged) VAT.
• Nature-of-purchase classification: exempt / non-VAT, not “taxable.”
• Input VAT column: zero.
• TIN field: the supplier’s TIN if it has one for other BIR purposes (registration doesn’t require VAT status), or left blank/placeholder if genuinely unidentifiable — but the row itself is still listed.

This mirrors the general substantiation rule covered in Input VAT Substantiation Requirements: input VAT is only creditable when it was properly charged by a VAT-registered supplier on a BIR-registered VAT invoice in the first place. No VAT-registered seller, no input VAT to substantiate — the SLP entry should reflect that reality rather than either omitting the purchase or inventing a credit that doesn’t exist.

Why does this matter for RELIEF-to-VAT-return reconciliation? #

Getting this wrong in either direction creates a mismatch the BIR’s cross-matching program is specifically designed to catch. RELIEF SLSP vs BIR Form 2550Q walks through how the BIR reconciles SLSP totals against the quarterly VAT return; the purchases side of that reconciliation is exactly where non-VAT-supplier entries cause trouble if mishandled.

• Omit the purchase from the SLP entirely and the taxpayer’s total reported purchases understate actual purchase activity — a discrepancy visible against books, expense records, or an audit trail, even though it doesn’t affect the VAT liability itself.
• Enter a non-zero input VAT for a non-VAT supplier’s line and the taxpayer overstates creditable input tax on BIR Form 2550Q, claiming a credit that was never legally chargeable — this is the costlier error, since it understates VAT actually due.
• List the purchase amount correctly with zero input VAT and both filings stay aligned: the purchases total on the SLP matches the taxpayer’s real purchase activity, and the input VAT claimed on the return matches only what a VAT-registered supplier actually charged.

The safest pattern is the third one: always list the purchase, never manufacture the credit.

A worked example: retailer buying from a sari-sari-store-type supplier #

A VAT-registered retailer buys P50,000 of supplies over a quarter from a small, non-VAT-registered sari-sari-store-type supplier — the purchase is real and documented, so it goes on the SLP, just with zero input VAT.

Consider a fictional VAT-registered hardware retailer that buys assorted packaging materials from a neighborhood sari-sari-store-type supplier across Q2 2026 (April–June), totaling P50,000 for the quarter, paid against informal receipts rather than BIR-registered VAT invoices, because the supplier isn’t VAT-registered.

The retailer’s total purchases for the quarter — including this ₱50,000 — still belongs in the SLP’s purchase total, keeping the SLP consistent with the retailer’s actual books. The ₱0.00 input VAT line means this purchase contributes nothing to the creditable input tax claimed on that quarter’s BIR Form 2550Q, which is the correct outcome: no VAT was legally chargeable on the sale, so none is creditable on the purchase. For the mechanics of turning a spreadsheet like this into a validated DAT file — including how mixed VAT and non-VAT supplier rows are handled together — see Common RELIEF SLSP Upload Errors and What Is RELIEF SLSP?.

Frequently asked questions #

Do I list a purchase from a non-VAT supplier in my RELIEF SLSP at all? #

Yes. The Summary List of Purchases is meant to reflect a VAT-registered taxpayer’s total quarterly purchases, not only the purchases that carry creditable input VAT. A purchase from a non-VAT-registered supplier is entered on the Summary List of Purchases with the taxable amount shown and the input VAT field at zero, because a non-VAT seller doesn’t charge output VAT for the buyer to credit.

What input VAT amount do I put for a non-VAT supplier’s line? #

Zero. A supplier who isn’t VAT-registered cannot legally charge output VAT under NIRC Section 110 and RR No. 16-2005, so there is no input VAT for the buyer to claim on that purchase. The purchase amount is still entered, but the input VAT column is zero or marked non-creditable, not left blank.

Does the non-VAT supplier’s threshold status (regular vs. casual) matter for SLP purposes? #

Under RMO No. 4-2003, the regular-supplier / casual-supplier distinction was about transaction frequency and per-transaction value, not the supplier’s VAT registration status, and it mattered for triggering individual disclosure once the old peso thresholds in RR No. 8-2002 applied. Since RR No. 1-2012 made SLP filing mandatory for all VAT-registered taxpayers regardless of amount, the distinction has less practical bite today — purchases get listed on the current amount-driven basis regardless of frequency.

Will listing a non-VAT supplier’s purchase with zero input VAT create a mismatch with my BIR Form 2550Q? #

It shouldn’t, if done consistently. BIR Form 2550Q’s creditable input tax line should already exclude input VAT from non-VAT suppliers, since that VAT was never charged in the first place. Listing the same purchase in the SLP at zero input VAT keeps the two filings aligned; the mismatch risk comes from overstating input VAT on that line in either filing, not from listing the purchase itself.

What if the non-VAT supplier is a small, unregistered stall with no TIN? #

The purchase still belongs in the Summary List of Purchases if it’s a legitimate, documented business expense; enter the supplier’s name as best identified and leave the TIN field blank or use the BIR-recognized placeholder for an unidentified counterparty rather than fabricating a TIN. The absence of a TIN doesn’t change the input VAT treatment — it’s still zero, because the supplier isn’t VAT-registered.

Summary #

A purchase from a non-VAT-registered supplier is not exempt from RELIEF SLSP reporting — it belongs in the Summary List of Purchases like any other purchase, classified as exempt/non-VAT with the input VAT column entered as zero, never left off the list and never assigned a fabricated credit. That treatment keeps the SLP consistent with the taxpayer’s actual purchase activity and keeps the input VAT claimed on BIR Form 2550Q limited to what a VAT-registered supplier actually charged, which is exactly what the BIR’s cross-matching program checks for. For the underlying filing obligation, see Who Must File RELIEF SLSP?; for how SLP totals reconcile against the VAT return more broadly, see RELIEF SLSP vs BIR Form 2550Q; for the invoice-level substantiation rule behind why non-VAT suppliers carry no input VAT in the first place, see Input VAT Substantiation Requirements.