fix: Invoice created via duplicate workspace shows error

[lorretheboy]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #92166
PROPOSAL: #92166 (comment)

Tests

1. Launch app
2. Login gmail account - onboarding via track business expense
3. Go to workspace - more features -Enable Invoice
4. Tap invoice
5. Scroll down and enter company name & website
6. Tap 3 dots and duplicate workspace
7. Create an invoice selecting duplicated workspace ( from workspace settings page)
8. Open the invoice ( from spend page)
9. Verify that Invoice created via duplicate workspace must not show error.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. Launch app
2. Login gmail account - onboarding via track business expense
3. Go to workspace - more features -Enable Invoice
4. Tap invoice
5. Scroll down and enter company name & website
6. Tap 3 dots and duplicate workspace
7. Create an invoice selecting duplicated workspace ( from workspace settings page)
8. Open the invoice ( from spend page)
9. Verify that Invoice created via duplicate workspace must not show error.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover 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 tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (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 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)
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• 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.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.16.51.21.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.16.47.58.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.16.40.54.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.16.37.30.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.16.33.44.mov

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts	70.35% <ø> (ø)
...duplicate/WorkspaceDuplicateSelectFeaturesForm.tsx	59.06% <33.33%> (-1.35%)	⬇️
... and 13 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@aimane-chnaif 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]

[flaviadefaria]

From a product standpoint, the fix looks good to me.

[lorretheboy]

@aimane-chnaif kindly bump

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

Reviewed commit: d928f2ab65

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".

[MelvinBot]

Review: The core fix is correct and well-scoped. There's one consistency gap worth addressing, and the end-to-end test was inconclusive in this sandbox (see below).

The fix is correct ✅

The bug: buildOptimisticDuplicatePolicy spreads ...sourcePolicy, which carried the source workspace's per-workspace invoice object — company name/website and bankAccount.stripeConnectAccountID — into the duplicate. Creating an invoice on the new workspace then referenced a Stripe account that doesn't belong to it → error.

Setting invoice: undefined cleanly resets it, and since every invoice/Stripe field nests under the single invoice object (PolicyInvoicingDetails), the one line is comprehensive. It's also safe — every consumer reads policy?.invoice?.… with optional chaining, so undefined can't crash the optimistic flow, and "no invoicing provisioning" is the correct optimistic state for a brand-new duplicate anyway. The form change (stop advertising per-workspace company details, show the Invoices row whenever the feature is enabled) and the added test assertion are both good.

Suggestion: achAccount has the same leak (please address or confirm)

In the same function, ...sourcePolicy also carries over achAccount (the verified reimbursement bank account: bankAccountID, accountNumber, routingNumber, …), and it's never reset — the same class of per-workspace provisioned identifier this PR is fixing for invoice. The sibling copyPolicySettings flow deliberately excludes it:

// achAccount is intentionally excluded — the backend remaps bankAccountID per-caller

Consider resetting achAccount: undefined alongside invoice: undefined for consistency, or confirm the backend push corrects it on the duplicate.

(Out of scope, for a follow-up: copyPolicySettings copies the full invoice object — including bankAccount — into existing targets, which is the same category of leak in that flow.)

Testing — inconclusive, needs a real backend

I ran the repro on web. The "select features to copy" screen renders the Invoices row correctly and it's selectable, and duplication completes with invoices enabled and no crash. But I could not confirm the end-to-end fix: this sandbox has no real Stripe/invoicing backend, so sending an invoice errored on both the original and the duplicate workspace. One thing to verify on staging: on the duplicate, company info entered inline during the send flow appeared not to persist ("Company website is invalid", and the company settings were empty afterward) — that may be a separate inline-company-info issue, but please confirm the full flow works against a real backend before QA sign-off.

Evidence (screenshots)

Duplicate workspace: 'select features to copy' screen — Invoices row renders correctly and is selectable

Duplicated workspace created with Invoices enabled

Invoice sent from the duplicated workspace showing an error in this sandbox

Control: invoice from the original workspace also errors in this sandbox (no real Stripe backend)

[MelvinBot]

Regression check: No functional regressions found. The duplicate-workspace flow works across scenarios (tested on web), and the code change's blast radius is contained. There is one behavioral change worth confirming with QA, plus a stale comment to tidy up.

Behavioral change to confirm (not a bug — verify it's intended)

The Invoices row isn't display-only — its presence drives what gets duplicated. Every rendered row is auto-selected on mount (WorkspaceDuplicateSelectFeaturesForm.tsx:366-372), and selecting invoices sets both the invoices and reimbursements duplicated parts (lines 254 & 257).

Since the visibility condition was relaxed from areInvoicesEnabled && !!invoiceConfigurationText to just areInvoicesEnabled, a workspace with invoices enabled but unconfigured (no business bank account / no company details) now shows the row, auto-selects it, and duplicates invoices + reimbursements by default — previously it did not. This is a strict superset (the row can only appear more, never less), and it matches how the travel row already behaves, so it looks intended. Just worth an explicit QA confirmation that duplicating-invoices-by-default in the empty-config case is desired.

Test results (web) — all pass

• Source without Invoices: no Invoices row; duplication completes. ✅
• Invoices enabled but unconfigured: Invoices row appears (no subtitle), toggles independently, duplication completes, new workspace has invoices enabled, and company details/bank accounts are not copied to the duplicate. ✅
• Other rows (members, categories, tags, workflows) render and toggle normally; no visible errors. ✅

Minor: stale cross-flow comment

CopyPolicySettingsUtils.ts:258 says its invoice gate "Matches WorkspaceDuplicateSelectFeaturesForm visibility rules", but line 291 still uses the old rule (areInvoicesEnabled && hasInvoiceConfiguration). After this PR the two flows diverge — no functional break, but consider updating the copy-settings flow to match or removing the "matches" claim.

Blast radius & optimistic-data safety

• WorkspaceDuplicateSelectFeaturesForm.tsx is used only by the duplicate flow; buildOptimisticDuplicatePolicy has a single caller (the duplicate action). Contained.
• createInvoiceConfigurationTextSelector's other caller (CopyPolicySettingsSelectFeaturesPage) was not changed, so that flow is unaffected.
• invoice: undefined is safe on the optimistic duplicate: the one live consumer, WorkspaceInitialPage.tsx:487, is ?? 0-guarded (now shows $0.00 instead of the source's Stripe balance — arguably more correct); the confirm handler closes the RHP rather than navigating into the duplicate's invoice settings.

Evidence (screenshots)

Scenario 1: source workspace without Invoices — no Invoices row; duplication succeeds

Scenario 2: Invoices enabled but unconfigured — Invoices row now appears (no subtitle) and is selectable

Duplicate's Invoicing details — company name/website and bank accounts correctly NOT copied

Final state: all workspaces (original + both duplicates) intact

[aimane-chnaif]

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
• 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 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #97209.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-747133f3f39-7e8bfd0-a5a8bda8bb2b72f67f33fe548ed16d975f9cf223/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-747133f-7e8bfd0-3077419cfa767886df1d63bcc1ff29089b823598/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://97209.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 9.4.52-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

Help site review — docs update required ✅

I reviewed the changes in this PR and yes, a help site update is warranted.

What this PR changes (behavior): When duplicating a workspace, the source workspace's Invoicing details (Company name, Company website, and connected bank account) are no longer copied to the duplicate — only the invoicing feature toggle carries over. Copying those details is what caused the error in Expensify/App#92166.

Why docs need updating: The Duplicate Workspace article lists Invoices among the settings carried over, but doesn't clarify that the invoicing details themselves are not copied and must be re-entered in the new workspace. That could set the wrong expectation.

Draft PR created: #98212 — adds a short FAQ entry to Duplicate-Workspace.md clarifying that invoicing details are not copied.

Notes

• Applied HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and TEMPLATE.md. UI labels (Invoices, Invoicing details, Company name, Company website) verified against current app copy in src/languages/en.ts.
• I applied the HelpDot label but couldn't assign the draft PR to lorretheboy — GitHub reports the account isn't assignable in this repo (it lacks the required access). You're @-mentioned on the PR instead.

@lorretheboy, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.52-11 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android