fix: New expense is not added to the retracted report by nkdengineer · Pull Request #81237 · Expensify/App

nkdengineer · 2026-02-03T03:41:55Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #79744
PROPOSAL: #79744 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:

Submission frequency is Instantly.
Disable Add approvals and Make or track payments.

Go to workspace chat.
Create an expense.
Open expense report.
Click More > Retract.
Close the report RHP.
Click + > Create expense > Manual.
Create a manual expense.
Verify that the new expense is added to the retracted report

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same

QA Steps

Same as test

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-02-03.at.10.41.22.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-02-03.at.10.05.51.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-02-03.at.10.34.27.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-03.at.10.37.22.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-03.at.10.03.48.mov

codecov · 2026-02-03T03:52:09Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts	`72.18% <66.66%> (+0.03%)`	⬆️
... and 19 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-02-03T04:43:52Z

@mkhutornyi Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

melvin-bot · 2026-02-03T04:43:57Z

@stitesExpensify Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

github-actions · 2026-02-03T04:48:19Z

        });
    }

+    if (chatReport) {


❌ CONSISTENCY-3 (docs)

This logic for determining which report should be the iouReportID based on created timestamps is duplicated in the retractReport function (lines 10346-10359). The same logic appears in multiple places with slight variations.

Suggested fix:
Extract this into a reusable helper function to eliminate duplication:

function determineIouReportID( chatReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report>, expenseReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report>, ): string | undefined { if (\!chatReport?.iouReportID || \!expenseReport?.reportID) { return undefined; } const iouReportActions = getAllReportActions(chatReport.iouReportID); const expenseReportActions = getAllReportActions(expenseReport.reportID); const iouCreatedAction = Object.values(iouReportActions).find((action) => isCreatedAction(action)); const expenseCreatedAction = Object.values(expenseReportActions).find((action) => isCreatedAction(action)); // The report created later will become the iouReportID of the chat report return (iouCreatedAction?.created ?? ) > (expenseCreatedAction?.created ?? ) ? chatReport.iouReportID : expenseReport.reportID; }

Then use: iouReportID: determineIouReportID(chatReport, expenseReport)

Please rate this suggestion with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve! Reactions are used to monitor reviewer efficiency.

Let's do this!

mkhutornyi

Please merge main and fix lint

mkhutornyi · 2026-02-04T17:57:55Z

        });
    }

+    if (chatReport) {


Let's do this!

nkdengineer · 2026-02-05T03:57:54Z

@mkhutornyi I updated.

mkhutornyi · 2026-02-05T17:59:48Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-02-05T18:10:21Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Can't wait for the next one!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

OSBotify · 2026-02-06T18:07:54Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2026-02-06T18:23:04Z

🚧 @stitesExpensify has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-02-06T18:26:59Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #81237.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-5156fc4-b6c4e035c830c7cae51db42428dca6eff4f1458a/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-5156fc4-23cb359e80517cef47d4c30ab29d1e11251fb25f/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://81237.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-02-10T07:24:10Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stitesExpensify in version: 9.3.16-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

OSBotify · 2026-02-11T06:28:39Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.16-9 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

fix: New expense is not added to the retracted report

144d1bf

melvin-bot Bot assigned nkdengineer Feb 3, 2026

nkdengineer marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2026 04:43

nkdengineer requested review from a team as code owners February 3, 2026 04:43

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mkhutornyi February 3, 2026 04:43

melvin-bot Bot requested review from a team, JmillsExpensify and stitesExpensify and removed request for a team February 3, 2026 04:43

github-actions Bot reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

mkhutornyi reviewed Feb 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

});

}

if (chatReport) {

mkhutornyi Feb 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's do this!

nkdengineer added 4 commits February 5, 2026 09:57

Merge branch 'main' into fix/79744

85825e2

refactor code

9e1c6f6

fix test

2937c8b

fix lint

f7694ae

mkhutornyi approved these changes Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

stitesExpensify approved these changes Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

stitesExpensify merged commit 5156fc4 into Expensify:main Feb 6, 2026
30 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-02-10 #81937

Closed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-03-02] Expense - "You rejected this report" appears in report after admin reopens report #82744

Closed

7 tasks

Conversation

nkdengineer commented Feb 3, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Feb 3, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

❌ CONSISTENCY-3 (docs)

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi commented Feb 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 10, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

codecov Bot commented Feb 3, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

mkhutornyi commented Feb 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading