[Due for payment 2025-08-13] [Due for payment 2025-08-11] [$250] Expense - Admin has no option to remove hold in expense report when there is only one expense

[vincdargento]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.1.47-2
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: #62003
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): applausetester+sdsdom3jo@applause.expensifail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Mac 15.4 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Log in with Expensifail account.
• Admin invites member to the workspace.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. [Member] Submit an expense to the workspace chat.
3. [Member] Click on the expense preview.
4. [Member] Click More > Hold.
5. [Member] Enter reason and save it.
6. [Admin] Go to workspace chat with member.
7. [Admin] Right click on the expense preview.
8. [Admin] There is an option to remove hold in the context menu.
9. [Admin] Click on the expense preview.
10. [Admin] Click More.
11. [Admin] Click on the report header.

Expected Result:

There should be an option to remove hold in the expense report when there is only one expense.

Actual Result:

There is no option to remove hold in the expense report when there is only one expense.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: App
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: App
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• iOS: mWeb Chrome
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

bug.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021925044052011969294
• Upwork Job ID: 1925044052011969294
• Last Price Increase: 2025-05-28
• Automatic offers:
• dominictb | Reviewer | 107529678
• nkdengineer | Contributor | 107529680
• Tony-MK | Contributor | 107974298

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @kadiealexander (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[twilight2294]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Admin has no option to remove hold in expense report when there is only one expense

What is the root cause of that problem?

The condition to show the unapprove option is wrong:

App/src/libs/ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts

Line 145 in 55a87d8

return isExpenseReport && isReportApprover && isReportApproved;

This causes the unhold option to not show up correctly as isReportApproved is false here

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We need to use the correct conditions from canHoldUnholdReportAction to display the unhold button:

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 3932 to 3939 in 55a87d8

	function canHoldUnholdReportAction(reportAction: OnyxInputOrEntry<ReportAction>): {canHoldRequest: boolean; canUnholdRequest: boolean} {
	if (!isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction)) {
	return {canHoldRequest: false, canUnholdRequest: false};
	}
	const moneyRequestReportID = getOriginalMessage(reportAction)?.IOUReportID;
	const moneyRequestReport = getReportOrDraftReport(String(moneyRequestReportID));

We need to use this one to display the button correctly

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

N/A UI issue, but if we want, we can render the options and check for the button to be present

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[nkdengineer]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-05-21 00:03:31 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

There is no option to remove hold in the expense report when there is only one expense.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We only show remove hold button for holder in this condition

App/src/libs/ReportPrimaryActionUtils.ts

Lines 212 to 215 in 55a87d8

	// Transaction is attached to expense report but hold action is attached to transaction thread report
	const isHolder = reportTransactions.some((transaction) => isHoldCreator(transaction, transactionThreadReportID));
	return isHolder;

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

1. We should pass policy for isRemoveHoldAction function

    function isRemoveHoldAction(report: Report, reportTransactions: Transaction[], policy?: Policy)

2. We'll show remove hold button for admin and approver

    const isReportApprover = isApproverUtils(policy, getCurrentUserAccountID());
    const isAdmin = policy?.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN;

    .... 
    return isHolder || isReportApprover || isAdmin;

App/src/libs/ReportPrimaryActionUtils.ts

Lines 212 to 215 in 55a87d8

	// Transaction is attached to expense report but hold action is attached to transaction thread report
	const isHolder = reportTransactions.some((transaction) => isHoldCreator(transaction, transactionThreadReportID));
	return isHolder;

OR update function isRemoveHoldAction like we did here to show remove hold button if canModifyUnholdStatus is true

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 3974 to 3975 in 55a87d8

	const canModifyStatus = !isTrackExpenseMoneyReport && (isAdmin || isActionOwner || isApprover);
	const canModifyUnholdStatus = !isTrackExpenseMoneyReport && (isAdmin || (isActionOwner && isHoldActionCreator) || isApprover);

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Line 3980 in 55a87d8

const canUnholdRequest = !!(canHoldOrUnholdRequest && isOnHold && (isRequestIOU ? isHoldActionCreator : canModifyUnholdStatus));

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

We should add test for the function isRemoveHoldAction to cover this scenario

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021925044052011969294

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @dominictb (External)

[Tony-MK]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-05-21 21:27:42 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Expense - Admin has no option to remove the hold in the expense report when there is only one expense

What is the root cause of that problem?

In ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts, we didn't create CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD and a function, like isRemoveHoldAction, for getSecondaryReportActions to check if it can push CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD into the option when their is a single expense or multiple expenses.

We only created isHoldActionForTransaction to check if an expense can be held.

App/src/libs/ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts

Lines 458 to 463 in 3c43978

	function getSecondaryTransactionThreadActions(parentReport: Report, reportTransaction: Transaction): Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> {
	const options: Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> = [];
	if (isHoldActionForTransaction(parentReport, reportTransaction)) {
	options.push(CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS.HOLD);
	}

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

Create a function similar to isRemoveHoldAction and the CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD in CONSTS.ts.

Since other functions reuse the same original name in ReportPrimaryActionUtils.ts and ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts, we can keep the same name, isRemoveHoldAction.

function isRemoveHoldAction(report: Report, reportTransactions: Transaction[], reportActions?: ReportAction[], policy?: Policy): boolean {
    const isReportOnHold = reportTransactions.some(isOnHoldTransactionUtils);

    if (!isReportOnHold) {
        return false;
    }

    const transactionThreadReportID = getOneTransactionThreadReportID(report.reportID, reportActions);

    if (!transactionThreadReportID) {
        return false;
    }

    const isHolder = reportTransactions.some((transaction) => isHoldCreator(transaction, transactionThreadReportID))

    if (isHolder){
        return false;
    }

    return policy?.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN || isApproverUtils(policy, getCurrentUserAccountID())
}

Use isRemoveHoldAction in getSecondaryReportActions to push CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD among the secondary options just like getReportPrimaryAction.

function getSecondaryReportActions(parentReport: Report, reportTransaction: Transaction, policy:? Policy): Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> {
    const options: Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> = [];

    if (isRemoveHoldAction(report, reportTransactions, reportActions, policy)) {
        options.push(CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD);
    }
    ...

Finally, in MoneyReportHeader, add a DropdownOption for CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD in secondaryActionsImplementation.

    ...
},
[CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD]: {
    text: translate('iou.unhold'),
    icon: Expensicons.Stopwatch,
    value: CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD,
    onSelected: () => {
        const parentReportAction = getReportAction(moneyRequestReport?.parentReportID, moneyRequestReport?.parentReportActionID);

        const moneyRequestAction = transactionThreadReportID ? requestParentReportAction : parentReportAction;
        if (!moneyRequestAction) {
            return;
        }

        changeMoneyRequestHoldStatus(moneyRequestAction);
    },
},
[CONST.REPORT.SECONDARY_ACTIONS.CHANGE_WORKSPACE]: {
    ...

Note

Since CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD doesn't exist, we should create it in its Dropdown, and a new function called isRemoveHoldActionForTransaction.

function isRemoveHoldActionForTransaction(report: Report, reportTransaction: Transaction, policy?: Policy): boolean {
  return isOnHoldTransactionUtils(reportTransaction) &&
      (
           isHoldCreator(reportTransaction, report.reportID) || 
           isReportManagerUtils(report) ||
           policy?.role === CONST.POLICY.ROLE.ADMIN ||
           isApproverUtils(policy, getCurrentUserAccountID())
       )
}

Then, getSecondaryTransactionThreadActions will use isRemoveHoldActionForTransaction to check if CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD should be push as an option.

function getSecondaryTransactionThreadActions(parentReport: Report, reportTransaction: Transaction, policy?: Policy): Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> {
   const options: Array<ValueOf<typeof CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS>> = [];

   if (isHoldActionForTransaction(parentReport, reportTransaction)) {
       options.push(CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS.HOLD);
   }

   if (isRemoveHoldActionForTransaction(parentReport, reportTransaction, policy)) {
       options.push(CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_SECONDARY_ACTIONS.REMOVE_HOLD);
   }
   ...

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

ReportSecondaryActionUtilsTest.ts already has some test cases except for the unhold option for getSecondaryTransactionThreadActions. So let's add one of the hold option and another for this scenioro for getSecondaryReportActions.

Furthermore, in case not all hold actions were created by the employee, let's make sure we add another test case for isRemoveHoldAction.