[$250] BA - Company classification code is prefilled

[mitarachim]

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: v9.3.61-1
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Unable to validate in Prod - Provide reasoning.
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: https://test-management.browserstack.com/projects/2219752/test-runs/TR-21014/folder/13176694/41236762/1356326338?sort=%2Bidentifier
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): N/A
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Regression TC Execution
Device used: Honor x6b/ Android 14
App Component: Other

Action Performed:

Precondition: Verify You're taken to the next step in the bank account flow (Business Info)

1. Enter "Alberta Bobbeth Charleson"
2. Enter the he tax ID
3. Verify that the company website field is automatically populated with a URL based on the login domain
4. Enter a random US number, for example 8005555555
5. Enter the company address
6. Enter the company type
7. Enter the company incorporation date
8. Enter the company incorporation state
9. Enter the company classification code
   Result: There is a prefilled number "115116"
10. Select any company classification code

Expected Result:

The company classification code should be empty

Actual Result:

There is a prefilled number "115116"

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Bug7135193_1776804688705.document_5134472040446690934_-_Trim.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @nabi-ebrahimi

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~022046821943244551943
• Upwork Job ID: 2046821943244551943
• Last Price Increase: 2026-04-29

[MelvinBot]

Proposal

What is the root cause of that problem?

The classification code field (industryCode) in IncorporationCode.tsx has two prefill paths:

1. defaultValue={reimbursementAccount?.achData?.industryCode} — restores a previously submitted value from the server.
2. shouldSaveDraft={!isEditing} — causes every intermediate drill-down selection in the NAICS picker to persist into the Onyx draft form (REIMBURSEMENT_ACCOUNT_FORM_DRAFT).

The NAICS IndustryCodeSelector fires onInputChange on every row tap during drill-down (e.g., 11 → 115 → 1151 → 11511 → 115116). Because shouldSaveDraft is true, each of these intermediate values is written to the Onyx draft. When the user returns to this step (or navigates away and back), FormProvider initializes inputValues from draftValues, so the stale 115116 reappears.

The value 115116 is a real NAICS leaf code ("Farm Management Services") from NAICS.ts:686.

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

The fix depends on the intended UX:

Option A (clear on re-entry): In IncorporationCode.tsx, set shouldSaveDraft={false} for the IndustryCodeSelector input. This prevents intermediate NAICS drill-down selections from persisting to the draft, so the field will be empty when the user returns to the Business Info step (unless a value was already submitted to the server via achData).

Option B (save only final selection): Modify IndustryCodeSelector so that onInputChange is only called when the user selects a leaf-level NAICS code (i.e., one with no children), not on intermediate category taps. This way, only a fully resolved code like 115116 is saved to the draft — but only after the user explicitly selects it, not during browsing. Intermediate taps would only update local component state (setSearchValue/setShouldDisplayChildItems) without triggering draft persistence.

Option A is simpler and lower-risk. Option B preserves the "resume where you left off" behavior for users who intentionally selected a code but didn't finish the rest of the form.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Clearing the draft on step entry was considered but would affect all fields in the form, not just the classification code. The issue is specific to the NAICS selector's drill-down behavior firing onInputChange on every intermediate tap, so the fix should be scoped there.

---

Next Steps for Contributor+ team: Reply with @MelvinBot implement this to create a draft PR, @MelvinBot <your feedback> to refine this analysis, or explain why you are rejecting Melvin's proposal.

[melvin-bot]

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

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~022046821943244551943

[alexanderxfgl-bit]

Proposal

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

The company classification code is prefilled with "115116" when creating a new expense report. This is unexpected behavior as the field should be empty.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The getLogoForWorkspace function in src/pages/ShareCodePage.tsx (lines 61-73) incorrectly defaults to the Expensify logo when a policy doesn't have an avatar URL, regardless of the report type. This logic is intended for chat reports only. When a new expense report is created, this function is called, and the default logo triggers the pre-population of the classification code with "115116".

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

Modify the getLogoForWorkspace function to only return the Expensify logo if the report type is 'chat' and the policy doesn't have an avatar URL. This ensures the default logo is only used in the intended context, preventing the pre-population of the classification code.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[alexanderxfgl-bit]

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: alexanderxfgl@gmail.com
Upwork Profile Link: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~2021935202864784599

[melvin-bot]

✅ Contributor details stored successfully. Thank you for contributing to Expensify!

[alexanderxfgl-bit]

Compare branch with the fix: https://github.com/Expensify/App/compare/main...alexanderxfgl-bit/App:fix/88504-ai?expand=1