Fix duplicate expense report including rejected expenses by nabi-ebrahimi · Pull Request #89657 · Expensify/App

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-05T21:05:22Z

Explanation of Change

These changes fix an issue where rejecting multiple expenses from the same report could create duplicate rejected-expense reports.

When several expenses are rejected in one flow, the app now keeps track of the newly created rejected report in memory and reuses it for the next rejected expense. This avoids depending on the app state store to update between each rejection, which could lag during the same batch action.

As a result, all rejected expenses from the same source report are moved into one shared rejected report instead of accidentally creating multiple duplicate reports.

Fixed Issues

$ #88236
PROPOSAL: #88236 (comment)

Tests

Preconditions

Create two accounts:
- Admin
- Submitter

Log in to the Admin account and navigate to the workspace.
Invite the Submitter account as a member of the workspace.
Go to Workflows and enable Approvals and Payment.
Log in to the Submitter account.
In the invited workspace chat, create three expenses and submit them.
Log back in to the Admin account.
Go to Inbox → Workspace Chat.
Open the report and reject two expenses using the checkboxes.
Verify that only one report containing the rejected expenses is created.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests.

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-05-06.at.11.46.50.AM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-05-06.at.11.50.37.AM.mov

iOS: Native

ios.native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.web.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

macos.mp4

codecov · 2026-05-05T21:16:20Z

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/IOU/RejectMoneyRequest.ts	`77.83% <100.00%> (+7.49%)`	⬆️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts	`32.87% <0.00%> (-0.13%)`	⬇️
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-05-06T07:39:23Z

@mananjadhav 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 05a3e4a740

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-05-06T07:42:15Z

+            movedToReport = {
+                ...existingOpenReport,
+                total: (existingOpenReport?.total ?? 0) - transactionAmount,
+            };


Preserve original total for rollback in reused report path

prepareRejectMoneyRequestData() now rewrites movedToReport.total to the post-move value before building failureData, but the rollback later still uses movedToReport.total as the "original" value. In the existingOpenReport path, if REJECT_MONEY_REQUEST fails, the rejected report total is no longer restored and remains decremented/incremented, which leaves Onyx totals inconsistent with the actual transaction assignment. This regression is introduced by mutating movedToReport here without retaining the pre-update total for failure handling.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Addressed, I preserved the original rejected report total before building movedToReport and now use that saved value in failureData, so rollback restores the correct total if REJECT_MONEY_REQUEST fails.

flaviadefaria

The fix makes sense to me from a product standpoint.

mananjadhav · 2026-05-06T23:08:56Z

@nabi-ebrahimi Can you please fix the lint errors?

…d-expenses

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-07T06:05:07Z

@mananjadhav, addressed, thanks

…d-expenses

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-11T06:02:43Z

@mananjadhav, kindly bump. thanks.

mananjadhav · 2026-05-11T13:56:27Z

I am in between a priority PR. I'll be able to review the new changes tomorrow.

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-13T02:01:28Z

@mananjadhav, gentle bump. thanks.

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-15T07:50:39Z

@mananjadhav, quick bump. thanks.

mananjadhav · 2026-05-17T19:06:12Z

Apologies for the delay. I just want to check if there'll be any stale reports. Still figuring out the final checks, should have it by Monday.

mananjadhav

Code LGTM. On testing.

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-22T07:31:48Z

@mananjadhav, gentle bump. thanks.

…d-expenses

nabi-ebrahimi · 2026-05-25T04:48:48Z

@mananjadhav, friendly bump. thanks.

tylerkaraszewski · 2026-05-25T17:34:22Z

@nabi-ebrahimi can you resolve the conflicts?

@mananjadhav - can you leave a review?

Thanks.

…d-expenses

mananjadhav · 2026-05-25T19:46:39Z

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 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-duplicate-expense.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

mweb-chrome-duplicate-expense.mov

iOS: HybridApp

ios-duplicate-expense.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

mweb-safari-duplicate-expense.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web-duplicate-expense.mov

mananjadhav · 2026-05-25T19:50:16Z

@nabi-ebrahimi I just saw we've got some tests for RejectMoneyRequest. Hence I strongly feel we should add tests for our scenario. The rest I've tested and completed the checklist.

@tylerkaraszewski wdyt?

mananjadhav

Raised a question on tests.

mananjadhav · 2026-05-25T20:19:34Z

Thanks for the quick action @nabi-ebrahimi. @tylerkaraszewski All yours.

github-actions · 2026-05-26T17:20:17Z

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

OSBotify · 2026-05-26T17:28:31Z

✋ 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 · 2026-05-26T17:29:22Z

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

github-actions · 2026-05-26T17:37:20Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #89657.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-8fd5c3f8b2b-73f6a85-be5531bed2d9a7a3ff072281cd4c27aaaca3d752/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-8fd5c3f-73f6a85-535a466a6dfa2a8923e03e2a32a62bf0676dc7a7/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://89657.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-05-26T20:37:42Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/tylerkaraszewski in version: 9.3.83-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-05-26T20:39:36Z

I've reviewed the changes in this PR and the help site articles under App/docs/articles.

No help site changes are required.

This PR is a purely internal bug fix that prevents duplicate rejected-expense reports when rejecting multiple expenses from the same report in a batch. The changes are limited to internal action logic (RejectMoneyRequest.ts, Search.ts) and a test file — no user-facing UI, workflows, feature names, or settings were changed.

The existing help site article (Approve-Expenses.md) already correctly describes the rejection workflow, and this PR simply fixes the implementation to match that documented behavior.

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

fix(expense): exclude rejected expenses from duplicate report

05a3e4a

melvin-bot Bot assigned nabi-ebrahimi May 5, 2026

nabi-ebrahimi marked this pull request as ready for review May 6, 2026 07:39

nabi-ebrahimi requested review from a team as code owners May 6, 2026 07:39

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mananjadhav May 6, 2026 07:39

melvin-bot Bot requested review from flaviadefaria and removed request for a team May 6, 2026 07:39

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix reject report rollback

1c81927

flaviadefaria previously approved these changes May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

mananjadhav reviewed May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/actions/Search.ts Outdated

nabi-ebrahimi added 2 commits May 7, 2026 09:24

Merge branch 'main' into fix/expense-duplicate-report-exclude-rejecte…

aa7fd58

…d-expenses

refactor shared reject report state

605c811

nabi-ebrahimi dismissed flaviadefaria’s stale review via 605c811 May 7, 2026 05:27

Merge branch 'main' into fix/expense-duplicate-report-exclude-rejecte…

058a081

…d-expenses

mananjadhav reviewed May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into fix/expense-duplicate-report-exclude-rejecte…

275e0c6

…d-expenses

Merge branch 'main' into fix/expense-duplicate-report-exclude-rejecte…

646c903

…d-expenses

mananjadhav approved these changes May 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from tylerkaraszewski May 25, 2026 19:47

mananjadhav reviewed May 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

add bulk reject regression test

2b53357

mananjadhav approved these changes May 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

tylerkaraszewski approved these changes May 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

tylerkaraszewski merged commit 8fd5c3f into Expensify:main May 26, 2026
40 checks passed

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

OSBotify mentioned this pull request May 26, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-05-26 #91756

Open

35 tasks

Conversation

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 5, 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 May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi May 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

flaviadefaria left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 7, 2026

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 11, 2026

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 11, 2026

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 17, 2026

Uh oh!

mananjadhav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 22, 2026

Uh oh!

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

tylerkaraszewski commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mananjadhav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mananjadhav commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

github-actions Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented May 26, 2026

nabi-ebrahimi commented May 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented May 5, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

mananjadhav commented May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

mananjadhav commented May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading