Purchase Requisition and Approval (PR-to-PO) Pages on Changzhou Manufacturer Websites: How Should They Be Accepted?

Direct answer: A purchase requisition and approval (PR-to-PO) page is not a line saying "fill in a form and wait for a manager". The website page should state: who may raise a request, which fields a requisition contains, how the budget is checked, how approval authority is tiered, which roles cannot be combined, how an approved PR becomes a PO/contract, how emergency purchases are completed retrospectively, how exceptions/changes/cancellations are handled, what evidence is kept and what may be public. On the law: Article 27 of the Accounting Law requires every entity to establish an internal accounting supervision system in which the duties and authorities of recording personnel and the personnel who approve, handle and custody economic and accounting matters are clear and separated from and constrain each other; the Ministry of Finance's 2025 Opinion on Further Implementing Accounting Responsibilities and Strengthening the Implementation of Accounting Laws, Regulations and the Unified National Accounting System (Caihui [2025] No. 25) further requires incompatible positions to be separated, prohibits cashiers from concurrently handling audit, archive custody, revenue/expense/claims/debt bookkeeping and accounting software management, and requires job rotation or special audits/internal reviews. Civil Code Article 170 provides that an employee acting within the scope of their duties in the legal person's name binds the legal person, and a restriction on that scope cannot be asserted against a good-faith counterparty; Articles 171, 172 and 504 address unauthorised agency, apparent authority and ultra vires contracts by a legal representative. In other words, internal approval limits are internal; externally, the company must still control authority, POs, contracts and seals. Information is current to 2026-11-07. This is a review of public rules and page practice, not legal, finance, audit or procurement advice; the law, contract and company policy control.

This guide is for procurement, finance, internal control, audit, legal, IT and website teams at equipment, electronics/electrical, automotive, medical device, hardware, chemical, packaging and export manufacturers in Changzhou and nearby areas. This page most often misses budget, authority, segregation of duties, emergency purchases and exception records, ending up as "follow the approval process".

How does this page relate to SOW, supplier cooperation, order change, three-way match and archive pages?

The purchase requisition and approval page answers "why buy, who approves, is the budget available and how it becomes a PO"; the procurement SOW/technical specification page answers "what to buy, technical/commercial requirements and acceptance methods"; the procurement notice and supplier cooperation page answers "categories, onboarding, RFQ, payment and integrity"; the order change/cancellation/expedite page answers "how to change after the PO"; the three-way match/reconciliation page answers "how PO, receipt and invoice match"; the procurement archive/retention page answers "what to keep and for how long". Requisition approval is the gate through which demand enters procurement; a SOW or order-change page cannot replace it.

Common breakpoints: no budget check; anyone can request and anyone can approve; the buyer raises and approves the same request; orders are split to avoid thresholds; buy first and raise a PR later; emergency purchases become normal; sole source has no justification; approvals live in WeChat; there is no external authorised-contact list; PR, PO, receipt and invoice do not match. Separate "request—budget—approval—roles—PO—exceptions—records"; then procurement, finance, internal control and audit share one playbook.

This page map is editorial; the law, contract and company policy control.

Which fields should a requisition contain?

At least: requisition number/version/date; requester/department/cost centre/location; purpose/use; item or service name, specification/drawing number/version, quantity and unit; required date/delivery location; budget item/year/available balance; estimated unit price/currency/tax basis/total; recommended supplier and reason (sole source requires a separate justification); attachments (SOW, drawing, quote, comparison, technical agreement); conflict-of-interest declaration; approval route/approvers; related PR/project/contract. More fields are not always better, but "why buy, what to buy, which budget, when needed, who approves" cannot be missing.

Acceptance checks: number; requester/department; purpose; specification/quantity; required date; budget; price/currency/tax; supplier/reason; attachments; conflict of interest; approval route; related documents. Common gaps: product name only; verbal specification; no budget; unclear price basis; sole source without reason; missing attachments; approver not in the system; PR not linked to project/contract.

This field list is editorial; adapt it to company policy, systems and company size.

How should the budget be checked?

Before requisition approval, check: whether the budget item/cost centre exists; whether the annual/project balance is sufficient; capital expenditure (CAPEX) or operating expense (OPEX); whether it spans years/instalments/leases; currency and tax basis; whether the budget owner approves; whether any budget adjustment has a basis. If the budget is insufficient, do not default to "buy first"; require reallocation, supplementary budget, cancellation/delay or an alternative, approved by authority. The budget check must leave a record, not just a green light in the system.

Acceptance checks: item/cost centre; balance; CAPEX/OPEX; multi-period; currency/tax; budget owner; adjustment basis; insufficient-budget handling. Common gaps: no check; wrong item; inaccurate balance; CAPEX treated as OPEX; cross-year not approved; off-budget without approval; adjustment without basis; purchase outside the system.

This budget check is editorial; items, authority and capitalisation follow finance policy.

How should approval authority be set?

Tier by amount, category/risk, CAPEX/OPEX, sole source, emergency, related-party/conflict and off-budget; define each approver, delegation/authority, final approver and board/GM authority. Thresholds should balance speed and risk; the same requisition must not be split to avoid approval. Approvers need the full pack (specification, budget, comparison, sole-source reason, conflict declaration), not just an "agree" button. Delegation must be written, time-bound and scoped; authority must be withdrawn or reassigned on departure/role change/leave.

Acceptance checks: amount; category/risk; CAPEX/OPEX; sole source; emergency; related/conflict; off-budget; delegation; splitting; final approval. Common gaps: amount only; splitting; approver cannot see attachments; open-ended delegation; not withdrawn on departure; related party not disclosed; off-budget unapproved; ultra vires approval.

This authority design is editorial; thresholds and approvers follow corporate governance and authority policy and are not disclosed publicly.

How should incompatible duties be separated?

The core is that one person cannot control a purchase end to end. At least separate: requester and approver; buyer/sourcing and approver; buyer and receiver/inspector; receiver and warehouse custodian/bookkeeper; payment requester and payment approver/executor; supplier master-data maintenance and payment; system administrator and business user. The Ministry of Finance's 2025 Opinion requires incompatible accounting positions to be separated, with clear and mutually constraining duties for recording, approval, handling and custody, and prohibits cashiers from concurrently handling audit, archive custody, revenue/expense/claims/debt bookkeeping and accounting software management. In a small team, use compensating controls: owner review, dual payment approval, special audits/internal reviews, rotation and system restrictions, and document why separation is not possible.

Acceptance checks: requester/approver; buyer/approver; buyer/receiver; receiver/custodian; payment request/approval; master data/payment; system admin/user; small-team compensating controls. Common gaps: buyer raises and approves; receiver also buys; one person handles payment end to end; anyone can change supplier bank details; system admin also buys; no compensating controls; job descriptions unclear.

This separation is editorial; accounting-position requirements follow Accounting Law Article 27 and Caihui [2025] No. 25, while procurement roles follow company policy.

How should the PR-to-PO process run?

Suggested: PR submitted → budget check → approval → RFQ/comparison or sole-source justification → supplier selected → contract/PO approved and signed → supplier acknowledgement → receipt/inspection → three-way match → payment → close. Key controls: no approved PR, no procurement; no PO/contract, no external commitment; the PO must reference the PR; PO changes follow the change process; receipt must be independent; payment must match PO/receipt/invoice; differences need handling and approval. A system can link PR, PO, GR and invoice to reduce manual reconciliation.

Acceptance checks: PR approved; budget; RFQ/sole source; supplier selection; contract/PO; supplier acknowledgement; receipt/inspection; three-way match; payment; close. Common gaps: PO without PR; PO does not reference PR; ship first and raise PO later; receipt not independent; payment without match; PR/PO quantity or price mismatch; unclear closure.

This flow is editorial; systems, documents and approval nodes follow company policy.

How should emergency purchases be fast but controlled?

First define "emergency": production stoppage, safety, environment, customer line-down, force majeure—not "forgot to raise it earlier". Set a pre-authorised framework: who may act, up to what amount, whether verbal/email/WeChat approval is temporarily valid, how soon a written PR/PO and supporting documents (reason, comparison/sole source, budget, acceptance) must follow. Set amount caps, frequency monitoring and post-review; repeated "emergencies" should be escalated and investigated. Emergency does not remove receipt, inspection, payment matching or conflict disclosure; retrospective documents must include an explanation and approval, not be backdated as normal.

Acceptance checks: definition; pre-authority; temporary approval; completion deadline; documents; cap; frequency; post-review; no exemption. Common gaps: no definition; anyone can declare emergency; no written follow-up; no cap; repeated emergencies; backdating; skipping acceptance/comparison; undisclosed conflict.

This emergency design is editorial; authority and completion deadlines follow company policy and risk.

How should exceptions, changes and cancellations be handled?

Exceptions include off-budget, sole source, designated supplier, over-authority, buy-before-PR, related-party transaction and emergency; each needs a definition, approval level, documents and disclosure. PR changes (specification/quantity/delivery/budget/supplier) need versioning and impact assessment; PR cancellation needs a reason, budget release and notification to procurement; PO changes/cancellations follow the contract and order-change page—do not use a PR change instead of a PO change. Exceptions must not be "approved by default"; they need expiry, review and corrective action; repeated exceptions should trigger a policy/process change.

Acceptance checks: exception type; definition; approval; documents; disclosure; PR change; PR cancellation; PO change; expiry/review. Common gaps: no definition; automatic approval; no disclosure; PR changed but PO not; cancellation does not release budget; no review; repeated exceptions.

This exception/change handling is editorial; follow the contract, authority and company policy.

What evidence should be kept, and how is it audited?

Each purchase should keep at least: PR and versions; budget-check record; approval trail (person/time/comment); RFQ/comparison/sole-source justification; supplier-selection record; contract/PO; supplier acknowledgement; receipt/acceptance; invoice/three-way match; payment record; exception/emergency/change/cancellation approval; conflict-of-interest declaration. Audit sampling should check: PR present, budget, authority, segregation, comparison, PO reference, independent receipt, three-way match and exception basis. Records must reproduce "who approved what, when and on what basis", not just the outcome.

Acceptance checks: PR; budget; approval; comparison; award; PO; receipt; invoice/payment; exceptions; conflict; reproducibility. Common gaps: no PR; approval screenshot; missing comparison; PO no reference; receipt signed by buyer; payment without match; exception without basis; records scattered.

This record list is editorial; retention and audit methods follow company policy and the archive page.

How should the website page be written, and what must not be public?

Suggested content: (1) scope and procurement process overview; (2) how suppliers register/quote/invoice (external); (3) the external position that "only an authorised PO/contract/seal constitutes a commitment"; (4) authorised contacts and fraud-prevention notice; (5) internal PR-to-PO nodes (principles public, thresholds not); (6) emergency/exception/change principles; (7) complaint/integrity/conflict channel; (8) contact/version/update date. The public page explains "how to cooperate, who to contact and what counts as a valid order"; it should not publish approval thresholds, approver lists, supplier quotes, internal system screenshots, bank accounts or pending purchases.

Use consistent English terms (purchase requisition, PR, purchase order, PO, budget check, approval authority, segregation of duties, emergency purchase, exception, three-way match, authorised signatory) and state the review date. Link to SOW, supplier cooperation, order change and three-way match pages, but do not turn the requisition page into a supplier registration page.

This structure is editorial; external statements must be truthful and verifiable, per the law, contract and company policy.

What must not be written?

High-risk claims: "submitting a requisition means the company has agreed to buy" (budget/approval/PO still needed); "WeChat/verbal orders count" (externally only an authorised PO/contract/seal); "if the budget is short, buy first" (off-budget needs approval); "small amounts need no approval" (simplified but documented); "splitting speeds things up" (avoids authority); "emergency purchases need no retrospective documents" (they do); "approval authority is statutory" (internal authority; externally agency/apparent authority still matters); "publish approval amounts and approvers" (sensitive); "the buyer's word is enough" (authority/ultra vires risk). These are inaccurate or misstate approval, authority or the public boundary.

Safer wording: "This page applies to [purchase type/amount band]; process [PR→budget→approval→PO]; budget [item/balance]; authority [principles/tiers]; roles [separation/compensation]; emergency [pre-authority/retrospective]; exceptions [approval/disclosure]; external [authorised PO/contract/seal]; public [no thresholds/lists]. The law, contract and company policy control."

Go-live acceptance checklist

Ten checks: PR fields; budget check; approval authority; segregation of duties; PR-to-PO flow; emergency purchases; exceptions/changes/cancellations; evidence/audit; external authority position; page wording and version. Each needs an owner, evidence and review date. The pass condition is not "the page says follow the process", but that procurement, finance, internal control and audit can raise, check budget, approve, separate roles, convert to PO, complete emergencies, keep evidence and explain what counts as a valid order from the page.

Before go-live, run one real (anonymised) purchase through: requisition → budget → approval → comparison/sole source → PO → receipt → three-way match → payment. Then simulate an emergency purchase and an off-budget purchase to see whether retrospective completion, exceptions and audit work. Any step that fails is a gap in the page or the process.

This checklist is editorial; the law, contract and company policy control.

Who should read this, who should not, and what decisions does it support?

It suits procurement, finance, internal control, audit, legal, IT and website teams at equipment, electronics/electrical, automotive, medical device, hardware, chemical, packaging and export manufacturers in Changzhou and nearby areas; also companies building a PR/PO process or facing "order splitting, buy-first-PR-later, uncontrolled emergency purchases, approvals in WeChat, one buyer does everything". It does not suit teams that do not manage procurement, have no budget/payment, or want one page to replace legal/finance/audit advice.

Read it if you are building a requisition page; there is no budget check; authority is amount-only; the buyer raises and approves; receipt/payment are not separated; emergency purchases have no retrospective; exceptions are not disclosed; the external position is unclear. Skip it if you treat "requisition submitted" as "company committed", "WeChat" as a PO, "splitting" as efficiency, or want to publish approval thresholds and approvers. It supports self-review of PR fields, budget, authority, roles, PR-to-PO, emergency, exceptions, evidence and page wording.

FAQ

What is the difference between a requisition and a purchase order? Can we buy first and raise a PR later?

A purchase requisition (PR) is an internal request and approval; a purchase order (PO) is an external commitment to the supplier. Normally an approved PR comes first, then RFQ/award/PO. Buying first and raising a PR later is an exception: it needs a reason, budget, approval and a retrospective record; it must not be backdated as normal, and "the supplier has already shipped" must not be used to force approval.

Can we make an off-budget purchase?

Yes, but not "spend first and fix later". It needs a budget reallocation/supplement basis, budget owner and management approval, funding source and priority; alternatives include cancellation, delay, substitution or instalments. Keep a complete record for audit and review.

For small or urgent purchases, can we skip approval or split the order?

You may simplify approval, but not remove records; splitting to avoid authority is not acceptable. Small amounts can use a simplified process with post-audit; urgent cases use emergency pre-authority and retrospective completion. Multiple small orders for the same need, supplier and short period should be aggregated for amount and risk, and the system should detect splitting.

How can emergency purchases be fast but controlled?

Define emergency scenarios and pre-authorise who can act, up to what amount and under what conditions; allow verbal/email/WeChat temporary approval but require a written PR/PO, reason, comparison/sole source, budget and acceptance within a set deadline; set caps, frequency monitoring and post-review. Repeated "emergencies" should be escalated and investigated. Emergency does not remove receipt, acceptance, payment matching or conflict disclosure.

In a small company with few people, how can incompatible duties be separated?

Separate what you can; where separation is impossible, use compensating controls: owner review, dual payment/online-banking approval, special audit or internal review, job rotation, system restrictions and external accounting/audit. Document why separation is not possible, what compensates and who reviews—do not default to "we are small, so it does not matter".

Should the website publish approval authority and amount thresholds?

Usually not the specific thresholds, approver list or internal system screenshots. The public page can explain process principles, supplier entry points, authorised contacts and that "only an authorised PO/contract/seal constitutes a commitment"; keep the internal authority table on the intranet/policy file and explain it to suppliers as needed, not on the public web page.

One-sentence takeaway

A Changzhou manufacturer's purchase requisition and approval (PR-to-PO) page is not about "filling a form and waiting". It should turn requisition fields, budget check, approval authority, segregation of duties, PR-to-PO, emergency purchases, exceptions/changes, evidence/audit and the external authority position into a reviewable checklist—so procurement, finance, internal control and audit can raise, check, approve, separate roles, convert to PO, complete emergencies and keep evidence.

Method and limitations

This is a review of public rules and page practice, not legal, finance, audit or procurement advice. No undisclosed requisitions, approval records, budgets, supplier quotes or payment data were used; fields, tables and acceptance items are editorial, not legal or audit conclusions. Accounting Law Article 27 requires the internal accounting supervision system to define and separate the duties of recording personnel and approval/handling/custody personnel; Caihui [2025] No. 25 further requires incompatible positions to be separated, restricts cashier duties and requires rotation or special audit/internal review; Civil Code Articles 170, 171, 172 and 504 govern statutory agency, unauthorised agency, apparent authority and ultra vires representation; the law, contract and company policy control. This article does not determine whether a specific company or purchase is compliant; companies should review item by item.

Sources and scope

Information is current to 2026-11-07. The following are official pages; their text controls.

1. Accounting Law of the People's Republic of China (amended 28 June 2024, effective 1 July 2024): National Database of Laws and Regulations. Article 27: internal accounting supervision system; clear and mutually separated/constrained duties of recording, approval, handling and custody personnel.
2. Ministry of Finance, Opinion on Further Implementing Accounting Responsibilities and Strengthening the Implementation of Accounting Laws, Regulations and the Unified National Accounting System (Caihui [2025] No. 25): The State Council of China. Separation of incompatible positions; cashier restrictions; job rotation or special audit/internal review.
3. Ministry of Finance, Notice on Implementing the Amended Accounting Law (Caihui [2024] No. 10): The State Council of China. Effective date and implementation requirements of the amended Accounting Law.
4. Civil Code of the People's Republic of China: Supreme People's Court. Statutory agency (Article 170), unauthorised agency (Article 171), apparent authority (Article 172), ultra vires contracts by legal representatives (Article 504).