"This field is required" error shows up on confirm page when submitting Scan expense

[applause-bot]

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: 9.3.74-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: N/A - new feature, doesn't exist in prod
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: #87920
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): sdsdjoijdoisnjodis@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Exploratory - Significant User Experience Deterioration
Device used: Mac 26.2 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Run Onyx.merge('betas', ['newManualExpenseFlow']); in console.

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat.
3. Click + > Create expense > Scan.
4. Upload a receipt.
5. Click Create expense.

Expected Result:

Scan expense will be created.

Actual Result:

"This field is required" error shows up on confirm page when there is no required field.

This issue also happens when creating per diem expense.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Bug7153937_1778757500958.9.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Applause Internal Information
Exported by: Nathan Lemma
Bug ID: 7153937

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @ShridharGoel

[applause-bot]

While Applause doesn't embed attachments for this bug, here are the links for quick view:
https://platform.applause.com/services/links/v1/external/b0b713db10d3075cf460e06a29fea7aaad0e0ca6a43ebe7659dfee7f71e610e2

[melvin-bot]

You have been assigned to this deploy blocker because you recently merged this PR: #87920

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[MelvinBot]

Proposal

What is the root cause of that problem?

PR #87920 added a new validation check at useConfirmationValidation.ts:166-168 that blocks expense creation when transaction.isAmountSet is falsy:

if (isNewManualExpenseFlowEnabled && !transaction?.isAmountSet) {
    return {errorKey: 'common.error.fieldRequired'};
}

This check runs for all transaction types, but isAmountSet is only set to true when a user manually enters an amount via setMoneyRequestAmount. Scan/receipt expenses skip manual amount entry because SmartScan fills the amount after creation — so isAmountSet is never set, and validation always fails.

The same issue affects per diem expenses (as noted in the bug report) because per diem amounts are set through a different path that also doesn't set isAmountSet.

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

Add exemptions for scan, distance, and per diem requests to the isAmountSet check at useConfirmationValidation.ts:166, mirroring the pattern already used on line 163:

if (isNewManualExpenseFlowEnabled && !transaction?.isAmountSet && !isScanRequestUtil(transaction) && !isDistanceRequest && !isPerDiemRequest) {
    return {errorKey: 'common.error.fieldRequired'};
}

isScanRequestUtil is already imported at line 10, and isDistanceRequest/isPerDiemRequest are already available as parameters of the hook.

Possibly related issue

#90651 appears to be a duplicate of this issue.

---

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]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.